020. 제 2회 Post-2015 한국시민사회 정책포럼- 한국 ODA 정책과 부산 파트너십의 역할 (Session II Post-2015 개발의제와 부산파트너십의 연계- 한국정 by KoFID

제 2회 Post-2015 한국시민사회 정책포럼 – 한국 ODA 정책과 부산 파트너십의 역할 -

Session II : Post-2015 개발의제와 부산파트너십의 연계 – 한국정부와 시민사회의 역할

일 시: 2013년 11월 25일(월) 오후 1:30 ~ 5:30 장 소: 명동 유네스코회관 11층 주 최: Beyond2015 KOREA 후 원:

Contents Ⅰ. 프로그램 Program

-3-

Ⅱ. 발제문 Presentations 세션 II : Post-2015 개발의제와 부산 파트너십의 연계 – 한국정부와 시민사회의 역할 발제 1 박영규 (외교부 개발정책과 과장) ............................................................... 7 부산 글로벌파트너십 최근 동향과 한국 정부의 대응 발제 2 임소진 (KOICA ODA 연구원 선임연구위원) ........................................... 15 Post-2015 개발의제와 부산파트너십 연계방안 발제 3 민경일 (KCOC 이사/KoFID 운영위원) ..................................................... 21 UN 총회 Post-2015 특별행사 결과와 OWG-SDG에 대한 한국시민사회 입장

Ⅲ. 참고자료 References Post-2015 개발의제 ........................................................................................................ 33 1. 모두를 위한 품위있는 삶: Post-2015 개발의제를 위한 UN 사무총장 보고서 (KOICA, 2013.9) 2. Secretary General Report : A life of dignity for all: accelerating progress towards the Millennium Development Goals and advancing the United Nations development agenda beyond 2015 3. UN General Assembly Special Event on MDGs and Post-2015 Outcome Document - 25 September 4. Asia Development Alliance (ADA) Statement on the UN Secretary General Report on MDGs and Post-2015 Development Agenda (A/68/202)

효과적인 개발을 위한 글로벌 파트너십(GPEDC) / 개발효과성을 위한 CSO 파트너십(CPDE) ............................................................................................................. 83 5. Guide to the Monitoring Framework of the Global Partnership" 6. Factsheet on Indicators on GPEDC 7. CPDE Statement on Post-2015

8. GPEDC Steering Committee Summary 1-4

-4-

지속가능한발전목표를 위한 공개작업반(OWG-SDGs) ..........................................207 9. Progress report of the session 1-4

지속가능한발전목표에 관한 고위급정치포럼(HLPF) ..............................................223 10. HLPF on Sustainable Development - Introduction 11. HLPF on SD Press Release (24 Sept 2013) 12. HLPF on SD Press Release (26 Sept 2013)

지속가능한개발 재원에 관한 전문가 위원회(IGCE-SDF) ......................................231 13. IGCE on SDF (28-30 Aug. 2013) Co-Chair Summary

-5-

▒ 발제

부산 글로벌파트너십 최근 동향과 한국 정부의 대응 박영규 (외교부 개발정책과 과장)

-7-

부산 글로벌 파트너십 최근 동향과 우리의 대응 박영규(외교부 개발정책과장)

I. 부산 글로벌 파트너십 의의

○

2011년 부산 세계개발원조총회(HLF-4) 결과 12.6월

「효과적 개발협력을

위한

Effective

글로벌

」

파트너십(Global

Partnership

for

Development

Co-operation) 출범

- 다변화된 국제개발 환경 가운데 다양한 개발주체 간의 상호보완성과

차별성을 인정하면서, 공통의 원칙과 목표를 바탕으로 구축된 포용적인 개발협력 플랫폼

※

부산 총회 결과문서 제1항:“shared principles, common goals and differential

commitments for effective international development”

☞ 제11항 (Shared principles to achieve common goals):

a) 주인의식(Ownership of development priorities by developing countries) b) 결과중심(Focus on results) c) 포용적 개발 파트너십(Inclusive development partnerships) d) 투명성 및 상호책무성(Transparency and accountability to each other)

○

‘개발효과성’

논의 도입을 통해 기존 ‘원조’ 중심의 논의를 ‘개발’로 확대

하는 새로운 개발협력 패러다임 구축

○ 전통공여국으로 구성된 OECD/DAC 중심의 개발협력 논의체제에서 남남 협력 도입 및

OECD와 UNDP간

협업 체제(Joint

-9-

Support Team)로의

전환

II. 부산 글로벌 파트너십 최근 동향

○

멕시코 정부는 제68차 유엔총회 계기 부산 글로벌 파트너십 제1차 장관급 회의(‘14.4.15-16, 멕시코시티) 개최 계획을 공식 발표

※ 장관급 회의 개요 ㅇ 참여 대상 : 부산총회 결과문서를 승인한 모든 국가(160여개) 또는 기관(50여개) ㅇ 개최 형식 : 18-24개월 주기, UN 개발협력포럼(DCF) 등 여타 고위급회의와의 연계 개최도 검토

○

부산 파트너십의 실질적인 운영을 위해 설치된 집행위원회(Steering Committee)*에서

멕시코 회의 의제(안) 확정 등 장관급 회의 준비 착수

- 최우선 과제는 부산 공약의 이행 성과 점검을 통한 부산 파트너십의

정치적 모멘텀 지속 및 - 세션별 의제로서,

△

Post-2015

개발의제와의 연계

개발의제와 부산 글로벌 파트너십 (개회식),

△부산 공약 이행 점검과 포용적 개발, △국내재원동원, △중소득국가(MICs) , △남남․삼각협력과 지식공유 및 △개발과 민간분야 등 논의 예정*

- 주최측은 부산 총회의 전례를 감안, 다양한 개발주체의 관심사 및

활동을 부각하기 위해 사전행사 event)

(pre-meeting)

및 부대행사(side

등을 적극 활용할 계획

* 집행위 공동의장(3명)은 각각 공여국 (영국 국제개발장관), 신흥국 (인도네시아 국가개발기획장관) 및 수원국 (나이지리아 재무장관)을 대표하는 고위급으로 구성

- 우리 경우 외교부 개발협력국장이 집행위원(총15명)으로 활동 중

○

신생 개발협력 플랫폼인 부산 파트너십의 저변 확대를 위해 멕시코 장관급회의시까지 효과적 아웃리치 활동 지속 전개*

- 10 -

* 글로벌 모니터링 워크샵(6.24-14, 코펜하겐), 방글라데시-UNDP 공동주최 아태지역 국제회의(8.25-27, 다카), 영국-OPEC 개발협력기금 공동주최 워크샵(10.1, 비엔나), 한국-UNDP 공동주최 부산 글로벌 파트너십 국제회의(11.18-19, 서울)

○

등

한편, UNDP 주도로 부산 글로벌 파트너십 글로벌 모니터링 작업 중 으로, 50여개 개도국이 참여하고, 그중 30여개 국가에서 결과 보고서 제출

III. 우리의 기여 및 대응 방향

○ OECD 및 UNDP와 공동으로 부산 글로벌 파트너십 이행 지원 체계 구축 - 부산 글로벌 파트너십 이행 점검을 위한 국제회의의 한국 개최

정례화 확정 (11.18-19 국제회의시 외교부 다자외교조정관 발표)

○ 부산

파트너십 집행위원회 활동 등을 통해 부산 총회 개최국으로서

부산 글로벌 파트너십 관련 리더십 유지 및 글로벌 파트너십의 성공적 안착에 기여중 - Post-2015 개발의제와 부산 파트너십간 연계이슈도 개발외교차원에서

효과적으로 신중 추진 계획 - 중국, 인도 등 주요 신흥 공여국 대상 아웃리치가 긴요한 상황에서,

집행위 차원에서 이에 대한 우리의 주도적 역할 요청

○ 멕시코 장관급회의 의제 준비 작업반

(Core Team)

참여 등 부산 글로벌

파트너십의 부가가치 창출에 기여 - 제1차 글로벌 모니터링 보고서 보고 행사 유치(14.3월초, 부산)

․

- 멕시코 회의 의제중 부산공약 성과점검(EU, 한국, 미국 및 CPDE) 및 남남

․

삼각 지식공유(인도네시아, 멕시코, 한국 및 세계은행) 의제 준비 작업에 참여중 3

- 11 -

○ 국조실 주도로 부산 공약 이행을 위한 범부처 T/F* 출범 등 국내 이행 과제의 착실한 이행 노력 * 국무조정실, 기획재정부, 외교부, KOICA 및 수출입은행으로 구성되었으며, 국제 개발협력위원회 등에 보고

- 동 T/F를 통해 정기 이행 점검 및 평가 및 시민사회 등 국내

개발주체와의 협력 강화 추진 - 외교부 차원에서는, 부산 공약 지표의 이행 노력을 Post-2015

MDGs

달성 및

개발의제 이행 메커니즘 구축을 위한 우리 정부의 개발효과성

제고 노력과도 연계

※ 글로벌 파트너십의 부산 공약 이행 체제 o ‘Global light, Country focused' 원칙에 입각한 개도국 현장 중심의 이 행 및 국별 모니터링 체제 구축

․

o 부산 공약의 이행 및 모니터링 체제는 수원국 공여국의 자발적 참여 원칙 - 특히, 남남협력국은 자국의 능력 및 선택에 따라 점진적으로 글로벌 모니터링 참여 가능

o 공여국 관련 지표 : 협력국 우선사항에 부합하는 결과에 초점을 둔 협력 (지표 ), 투명성(지표 ), 원조 예측성(지표 ), 협력국 공공재정관리 (PFM) 시스템 및 공공조달시스템 이용(지표 b), 원조 비구속성(지표 )

①

④

⑨

⑤

<< 참고: 부산 선언 주요 내용 >> 내용

정치적 전문

공약

상세내역

새로운 글로벌 환경 조망 및 개발협력의 공통원칙 및 행동 설정

◦ 및공통상호 원칙 : 주인의식, 결과중심, 포괄적 개발 파트너십, 투명성 책임성 ◦ 지속가능한 공통 행동 : 개발 정책과 프로세스에서 민주적 주인의식 심화, 구체적이고, 개발성과를 위한 노력 강화, 남남/삼각협력에 대한 지원 확대, 다양한 개발재원의 촉매적 역할 확보 ◦ 행동 남북협력과 남남협력의 차별성 및 보완성 인정, 공통의 원칙 및 차별화된 ◦ 새로운인정개발협력 파트너십 형성 및 이를 통한 유엔 새천년개발목표(MDG) 4

- 12 -

내용

공약

상세내역 달성 의지 표명

주인의식, 결과 및 책임성 강화

원조 효과성 심화

투명하고 책임있는 협력

◦ 원조의 비구속화 가속화 ◦ 수원국 시스템 활용 강화 ◦ 양성평등과 여성 역량강화 관련 통계 활용 및 책무성 체제에 통합 ◦ 의회/지방정부, 시민사회 지원 ◦ 공적자금 개발활동에 관한 모든 정보의 공개 ◦ 표준화된 정보 공개 표준 활용(12월까지 전면 이행 목표) ◦ 2013년까지 수원국에 3-5년 연동 지원계획 제공

취약, 분쟁 상황에서의 지속 가능한 개발 촉진

◦ ‘평화구축 및 국가건설 목표‘를 취약국가 지원기준으로 활용

재난상황에서의 복원력 강화 및 취약성 감소

◦ 충격을 견디는 인프라 구축 및 사회보호 체제 구축에 투자

효과적 제도 및 정책 남남협력 및 삼각협력 효과적인 개발을 민간분야 위한 협력 (개발효과성) 반부패 및 불법 자금 기후변화 재원 수원국 Post-Busan 중심의 가벼운 이행체제 글로벌 구축

현장 이행과 형태의 거버넌스

◦ 수원국 주도의 제도 및 정책 변화 및 역량 지원 ◦ 지역 및 글로벌 차원의 상호 지식과 경험 공유 심화 ◦ 삼각협력 확대 및 남남/삼각협력 적극 활용 ◦ 지식공유, 동료 학습 및 남남협력 내 조율 권장 ◦ 성장․개발 관련 정책형성 과정에 민간분야 참여 ◦ 무역을 위한 원조 증진 ◦ 부패척결에 관한 기존 공약 이행 ◦ 자금세탁, 조세회피 대처를 위한 장치 마련 등 ◦ 국가 개발계획에 반영된 기후변화 정책과 계획을 지원 ◦ 기후변화활동에 개발효과성에서 얻은 교훈 공유 ◦◦ 2012 년 중반까지 소수의 선택적 평가지표 개발 ‘효과적인 개발협력을 위한 글로벌 파트너십’ 출범 ◦ 방안 2012년 중반까지 각료급 참여대상, 각료급 참여 등을 포함한 실질 운영 ◦ OECD합의및 UNDP가 파트너십의 효과적 기능을 지원해 줄 것을 요청

/끝/

- 13 -

▒ 발제

Post-2015 개발의제와 부산 파트너십의 연계방안 임소진 (KOICA ODA 연구원 선임연구위원)

- 15 -

3RVW 馋ꦋ듇떋뎯 ꫯ긟쁻쀧鹷끜 덟騳ꦘ늷 .2,&$ 2'$ 덟髛쁯 듳껻뜳 둃

魯ꗋꧻ 듇떋 듣싸 ꠗꀷ뺟ꜰ 딛됿쎄꺠듇 髛ꄳ Post-2015

UN MDGs

䕘侴古岜彸䨼浭墉橤樐䡠婅

帨忈y䍴却浩佽䋸廌泡䋸橤樐䡠婅䋸䋸

䕘侴古䋸刀䨠梈儙䋸䋸橤樐䡠婅䋸䋸

䍴却弄帨浭墉橤樐䡠婅

21墐䖈䍴却浩佽彜伍 ̶ OECD-䑍嵄䓅

OECD 21墐䖈䍴却浩佽彜伍

䍴却䋸汜你廜帤柄䋸

(Post-MDGs)

MDGs ̶ UN-䑍嵄䓅

䣑堡䐕彴 ̶ UN-䑍嵄䓅-娸溽䐕彴䓅 -䍴䬜䓅-娴協堄淤-沱淤

䣑堡墉廽 ̶ G20-UN-䑍嵄䓅

World Bank 歄䑜彙䍴却庰樘

䌯䍇䍊䍄䌼䋸䌚䌹䍆䍃䋸䋸 ̶ Global Monitoring Report, World Development Report

Post-MDGs ̶ UN-OECD / 䑍嵄䓅-娸溽䐕彴䓅-䍴䬜䓅 / 娴協堄淤-沱淤

OECD HLFs 哘堈䕘侴古橤樐䡠婅 ̶ 侴儠塸崐, 橤億塸崐, 岜柄仔泡䬱䍭侑, 哘堈䐈䑔劐塴

(UN DCF)

䌭䌦䋸 ̶ DESA: MDG Progress Report, UNDP: MDG Regional Progress Report & MDG National Report

䌧䌝䌛䌜䋸 ̶ Goal 8 恩婄䍴却弄帨浜淁次䍘

UN, MDBs, 䑍嵄䓅, 娸溽䐕彴䓅, 娴協堄淤, 協䍜哘劐

刄梤你廌晀墔塴姼

彜植彙帨忈弄帨, 喜帨忈弄帨(䖈渜弄帨, 協䍜弄帨, FIDs 卧劌嵅)

- 17 -

0'*V 듣싸 ꠗꀷ뺟ꜰ 딛됿 • ꄴꜬ땰 듣싸 ꟃ뱓ꀷ뜇 ꫯ딛 • ꄴꜬ땰 ꠗꀷ뺟ꜰ 쉻ꔚ셫 ꫯ딛 • 2'$ 딛됿 *RDO 馄뗟

3RVW 馋ꦋꠘ쇋듇 듣싸 ꠗꀷ뺟ꜰ 딛됿 • ꄴꜬ땰 듣싸 ꟃ뱓ꀷ뜇 슳됃 馄뗟 • ꄴꜬ땰 ꠗꀷ뺟ꜰ 쉻ꔚ셫 쎄꺠 馄뗟 • 2'$ 딛됿 돧 썰끏땰 딛됿듇 덜싏 듧떄

- 18 -

7KHQ +RZ" ꄴꜬ땰 驯騳 듧떄 ꥾ 뒏뜯 2(&'뎯 81 騬따髛ꄳ 뫋껻쏃

ꫯ긟쁻쀧鹷끜뒳 3RVW 듣싸 ꟃ뱓ꀷ뜇댿 뼤싘 %XVDQ DV D LPSOHPHQWDWLRQ PHDQV

ꫯ긟쁻쀧鹷끜 魯ꗋꧻ ꠗꀷ뺟ꜰ • 馋ꦋ댿 ꁯ싋 ឦ싸ꅈꨯ쏃ឧ 뚀끛 • 5ROOLQJ EDVLV 디驯魸 쏻듇댿꺋 꺠驫ꩣ驏꺋 쏻ꓻ • 馋ꄳ髜 ꜛꃃ끜 鮟뗣 髜饯 ꠗꀷ뺟ꜰ 驫떄댿 鮟ꦇ싋 ꃟ듣뺟 꾇띀 • 髜떋땰 뜯쇋 髜饯릗됿듇 뜯쇋 WZR WUDFN DSSURDFK • 듿ꦋ땰 릧덛 • ꁓ대싋 듣싣驯騳듿 ꥾ 딛됿

- 19 -

3RVW 馋ꦋ 쉳ꕷ듳됻뷛뎯 ꫯ긟쁻쀧鹷끜듇 덟騳 • 떋ꄳ땰 쉻ꔚ셫 쎄꺠 ឡ ꫯ긟쁻쀧鹷끜驫 81'&)뎯듇 덟騳 9 듣싸 ꠘ쇋ꁛ꺠 驫떄듇 쐗뒗꺠뒳 뫋ꁯ쏃 싇ꀃ 듣싸뜯쇋 쏋되 9 ꠗꀷ뺟ꜰ ꫯ긟쁻쀧鹷끜듇 馋ꄳ髜 둳뙫듇 ꃟ듣뺟 꾇띀 ꥾ 鮟뗣 ꃟ듣뺟 끋뀓뻋 쏋되 ꟃ뱓ꀷ뜇뒳 3RVW 듣싸 ꠗꀷ뺟ꜰ 먣떋댿 ꄳ듴 5ROOLQJ EDVHG ꠗꀷ뺟ꜰ ꩣ驏먣떋 디驯魸쏻듇 땰되 81 +/3)댿꺋 3RVW 馋ꦋꠘ쇋 듣싸꺠驫 ꩣ驏 9 딛됿쎄꺠 ꫯ긟쁻쀧鹷끜 띀싸둳됿쏻 먣떋 쏋되 驤덛髜馋ꄳ髜 끏쓔騬떋髜髜떋鮟髛 ꥫ饳鮟댴 ꥾ 끋ꥫ긛쏻

- 20 -

▒ 발제

UN 총회 Post-2015 특별행사 결과와 OWG-SDG에 대한 한국시민사회 입장 민경일 (KCOC 이사/KoFID 운영위원)

- 21 -

UN MDGs/Post-2015 OWG-SDGs

(

/ KoFID / KCOC)! augustine.minn@gmail.com

2013. 11. 25(

)

Post-2015 UN Intergovernmental Negotiation Processes ✤

OWG on Sustainable Development Goals!

✤

High-Level Political Forum!

✤

Intergovernmental Committee of Experts on a Sustainable Development Financing!

✤

UN General Assembly Special Event on the Millennium Development Goals(MDGs) and the Post-2015 Development Agenda - 23 -

2013

✤

High-Level Panel of Eminent Persons on the Post-2015 Development Agenda!

✤

UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network!

✤

UN Global Compact!

✤

UN Development Group

UN SG Report to UN GA: A Life of Dignity for All

✤

MDGs

2015 .!

✤

, 83-104 .!

✤

Monitoring Framework

(goals)

Accountability Mechanism .

- 24 -

UN SG Report to UN GA: A Life of Dignity for All (Contd.) 1. Eradicate Poverty in all its Forms! 2. Tackle Exclusion and Inequality! 3. Empower Women and Girls! 4. Provide Quality Education and Lifelong Learning! 5. Improve Health! 6. Address Climate Change! 7. Address Environmental Challenges! 8. Promote Inclusive and Sustainable Growth and Decent Employment

UN SG Report to UN GA: A Life of Dignity for All (Contd.) 9. End Hunger and Malnutrition! 10. Address Demographic Challenges! 11. Enhance the Positive Contribution of Migration! 12. Meet the Challenges of Urbanization! 13. Build Peace and Effective Governance Based on the Rule of Law and Sound Institutions! 14. Foster a Renewed Global Partnership! 15. Strengthen the International Development Cooperation Framework

- 25 -

✤

불평등, 기후 변화, 이민과 민주화의 도전, 도시화, 국제 개발 협력 Framework 등이 독립적인 goal로 설정된 것을 환영함.!

✤

FTT등 구체적인 조세 혁신이 포함되지 못함에 우려 표명!

✤

군축과 무장해제를 통해 지속가능한 평화와 개발 기금 마련 강조!

✤

ICESCR과 선택 의정서 등의 각종 인권 조약에 대한 보편적 비준 요구!

✤

UPR과 같은 Monitoring and Accountability 인권 메카니즘 사용 촉구!

✤

LDCs, LLDCs, SIDS 등에 우선권을 부여할 것을 촉구

Outcome Document of UNGA Special Event on MDGs/Post-2015 ✤

2013 9 Event. !

✤

MDGs

✤

Special

! Global Partnership for Development , , , , .!

Monterrey

GNI - 26 -

0.7%

Outcome Document GPEDC

✤

! CSOs

✤

.! ,

✤

‘

’

OWG(Open Working Group) on SDGs ✤

Rio + 20 (UN Conference on Sustainable Development) .!

✤

(The Future We Want): ( , , ) SDGs Post-2015 . 245-251 SDGs

✤

2013

1 , UN (2014 9 UN

OWG-SDGs )

- 27 -

. .!

OWG(Open Working Group) on SDGs: ✤

UN DESA UNDP UN System Technical Support Team(40 UN ) Issue Briefs OWG Sustainable Development Knowledge Platform . ! ➡Global

Governance / / / / )/

/ / (

OWG(Open Working Group) on SDGs: Major Groups and other stakeholders

✤

Major Groups: / , 9

/ ⇒ Agenda 21

/ NGOs / section 3

Other Stakeholders(by The Future We Want): , , , ,

- 28 -

OWG(Open Working Group) on SDGs:

Process Input World We Want Outcomes

Major Groups & Other Stakeholders

SDGs e-Inventory Outcomes

Sustainable Development Knowledge Platform Thematic Clusters and Steering Committees

Joint Position Papers

Open Working Group Sustainable Development Goals

- 29 -

OWG(Open Working Group) on SDGs 4

✤

2013. 3. 14-15

2013. 4. 17-19 SDGs

. (1.5

(1.5

, 3

2013. 5. 22-24

, (1.5

)

, (1.5

) ,

, ,

2013. 6. 17-19

, (1.5

(1.5

)

OWG(Open Working Group) on SDGs 4

✤

2013. 11. 25-27

, ,

(1.5

(1.5 )

2013. 12. 9-13

(2 ) / Needs(2 ) /

, (1.5 )! (1.5

2014. 1. 6-10

2014. 2. 3-7

, , (1.5 ) / ,

- 30 -

)

) )!

, (1.5

)

Post-2015

✤

ADA, CPDE Vs.

! !

✤ ✤ ✤

Vs.

Vs. Enabling Environment)!

?(Ex.

✤ ✤

- 31 -

▒ 참고자료

Post-2015 관련 주요 문서

- 33 -

р╝Аргвр╛Т сДЮр░▒р╡Хрип .2,&$рбн сДТрд║сДУриУриЭ

сБ╜e реТр▓╛ сГйткЩ

с▒╜ ткЩ см╡

}сБ╜┼Э спХсЫй тАл ▄┤┘В▌╛тАмриер│б р│АриерйФтАлрвЦ ╫ШтАм 3RVW ╤С▀ЛрйЕркВ▄┤ риер│б 81 рвПтАл▐ЧтАмрнйрйг раВ╥Лрв│

81рйЕ 3RVW ╤С▀ЛрйЕркВ р┤МргА ╓г█▓ 81 рйЩрж╣▀Й раВ╥Лрв│ риМ▄╝╨┐ риШр│ЯтАл ▄┤┘В▌╛ ╫ШтАм риер│б ▐╕тАл █СтАмрдлр┤Жр│Я╙Ю

╤С▀Лри╣ риер│б ▀╣р┤ЫтАл ╪╝тАм ╙ЧтАл ▀ж█╛тАмр▒╢р▒а╓Врдо 3RVW ╤С▀ЛрйЕркВ ▄┤ риер│б р░┐╥Жрзн рлТр▓╡

81 ╥Лрие╙Ър▓В╓Ж раВ╥Лрв│ 81 6'*V рзН▄╛рйЩрж╣▀Й раВ╥Лрв│

тЖ╜╔Э ╟Ос▒╜}сБ╜тй▓р▓Жсо╣ тАл╫ЭтАмсо╣█╡ ╓есое тАл▌НтАмсЦТ╩Стж╜соЭр▓╜ тж╣█╡ .%(Tсо╣ тме сЧотДХс▒╜спЩ 1PTU }сБ╜со╣с▒╜р╖Э с╡▓сЭНсоЭр▓╜ спХр╡ЙсиХс╕б┼Б спй▌Е ржСрпЭсХ╜ ╓е 6/ тЕ╛тлнр╖Э сж┐рв▒┼Б ╔йсГй см╡ сБ╜тв╜рб╜ 6/ сФНр╛ХтЕ╛с░Ж сЕХ┼БсХ╜си▒сХ╜█╡ тиЖтме сЩ╣р╕ЮрвБ 1PTU }сБ╜р╝Ктв╜си▒ тАл тж╜▌бтАмсФНр╛ХтЕ╛с░Жсо╣ со╣─Н┼Э со╣с╕бр╖Э сЕХ сйНс╡Э┼Б спй▌Е спХси▒ ржСрпЭ сЕЩ }сБ╜┼Э спХсЫй█╡ ╓е 1PTU }сБ╜со╣с▒╜ си▒ тАл тж╜▌бтАм6/ сФНр╛ХтЕ╛с░Ж сЕХ┼БсХ╜скб спХр╖Э снетзХ сЧн}рб╜ с╡Эсл╡ 6/ тАл╫ЭтАмсо╣ сЕХ┼БсХ╜ реЕсое сФХтаХсЕХ┼Б тиЖтме }сБ╜┼Эс▒╜си▒ тАл тж╜▌бтАмсЬ╜сФНс▒▒сое с▒╜сЬ╜тж╣┼Бсп▒ тж╣сйб▌Е

3RVW ╤С▀ЛрйЕркВ▄┤ риер│б ╓Ъ 81 рвПтАл▐ЧтАмрнйрйг раВ╥Лрв│ ╤┐тАл▄АтАм

2'$ рзМ╥┤р▒▓ рйСргШрлФ

81рйЕ 3RVW ╓еси▒ сйХр╕С 6/ сФйтГ╜╓е}сБ╜р╝Ктв╜ .JMMFOOJVN %FWFMPQNFOU (PBMT спХтме ╤С▀ЛрйЕркВ р┤МргА ╓г█▓ .%(T с▒╢сФвтлнсо╣ 4VNNJU со╣ ─С┼Эр╛ЩсХ╜р╖Э тШЦтзХ ╟Ос▒╜сФНтлн█╡ 6/ сФНр╛ХтЕ╛с░Жси▒├н ╓е спХтмесо╣ ╔бр▓╜сГн }сБ╜со╣с▒╜си▒ тАл тж╜▌бтАм╟НсФвсое сЬ╜сп▓тзБ ├дсое тЕк╟Нтж╣сйб▌Е спХси▒ ржСрпЭ сБ╣╩Ср╛Щ 6/ сФНр╛ХтЕ╛с░Жсоб ╓е см╡ 6/ сп▓сижсБ╣ 6/ 4ZTUFN 5BTL 5FBN

сое ╟НсЦТтж╣сйН с▒есБ╣с▒вспЩ 1PTU }сБ╜со╣с▒╜со╣ сВКтиЖ сЦЕс▒╢┼Э с╡Эс▒╜сДе тАл╫ЭтАмсо╣р╖Э спХ╥н сиХск╡▌Е ра║сЬ╜си▒ ╓е см╡си▒█╡ тЕ╛ р╗жсоЭр▓╜ ╟НсЦТрб╜ 6/ ┼Бсне╔к тЮЙ╒▒ 6/ )JHI

- 35 -

}сБ╜ ┼Э спХсЫй

р╝Йрв▒р╖Э снетж╜ тгйснеспй█╡ сФЧ 1PTU }сБ╜со╣с▒╜р╖Э снетж╜ 6/ сФНр╛ХтЕ╛с░Ж сЕХ┼БсХ╜

-FWFM 1BOFM PG &NJOFOU 1FSTPOT PO UIF 1PTU %FWFMPQNFOU "HFOEB спХтме )-1 сое ╟НсЦТтж╣сйН см╡ спЭсЗбтЦС тк╜ра║сое сЬ╜сп▓тж╣раер▓╛ тж╣сйб▌Е тЬЪтпй 6/ )-1 тАл╫ЭтАмсо╣ тк╜ра║си▒ спйсиХсХ╜ 6/ сФНр╛ХтЕ╛с░Жсоб с▒╜теер╕Н сФОсЬЕ +FGGSFZ 4BDIT ╞▒сЩ╣a спХ╥е█╡ rс╕бсЧоaтАл} тж╜▄ЖтАмсБ╜ сЧ╡р╡ЙсЦ╣ ╓ЕтЬЩсмнтУН 4VTUBJOBCMF %FWFMPQNFOU 4PMVUJPOT /FUXPSLT спХтме 4%4/ sр╖Э сДераер▓╜ сЦЕр╕Ютж╣сйН )-1 сЕХ┼БсХ╜ сп▓сЦТ┼Эс▒╢си▒ тАл тж╜▌бтАм╩СсЪБ с▒в с╕бсм▒спХ aтАлраетж╣▄ЖтАмр▓╛ тж╣сйб▌Е 6/ F спХскб сДераер▓╜ 6/соб 6/ сп▓сижсБ╣┼Э 6/ )-1 тк╜ра║сое с╕бсм▒тж╣█╡ ┼Эс▒╢сое }сБ╜тж╣сйб█╡ ▀С спХ█╡ ╔бр▓╜сГн тАл╫ЭтАмсо╣р╖Э тбН┼ес▒всоЭр▓╜ спХ╥нсиХa╩С снетж╜ сп▒р╛Щ┼Эс▒╢соЭр▓╜сЯЙ 6/ }сБ╜ ╔Щр╡Ъ 6/ %FWFMPQNFOU (SPVQ спХтме 6/%( сое с╡▓сЭНсоЭр▓╜ тж╜ ╟Оa ╔бр▓╜сГн с╡Эс▒╜ сДе тАл╫ЭтАмсо╣ ╘ХсмКсое тмЙ┼Эс▒всоЭр▓╜ сЩ╣р▓Хтж╣╩С снетж╜ сВКсжйспХрпЭ тзБ сЩ╣ спй▌Е 6/ F с╡Эс▒╜сДе тАл╫ЭтАмсо╣█╡ ╞▒соВ сЗйтакреТ сЕХ├Х ├СсГе╒нсЬЕ сЗес░в┼Э тЙЙсзЮсЦТ сЦТс░Ж┼Э ┼БсмК тк╣─Ю с╕бсЧосЦТ ╩Ссжет░Тсйвсз▓ сБ░ сЬ╛р░ксжйсЕХ спЩ╟НсйОтж║ QPQVMBUJPO EZOBNJDT си▒╒йс╕б р╛Э си▒ тАл} тж╜▌бтАмсо╣ с╡Эс▒╜р╖Э с╡▓сЭНсоЭр▓╜ спХр╡ЙсиХс▓нсоЭр╗С ╟ОaсДе тАл╫ЭтАмсо╣┼Эс▒╢соб тАл▌бтАмсЗбсЗесо╣ } рае╟Оси▒ сФНр╛ХсЧнa сЦЕтК╣рб╣сиХ спй█╡ 6/%1 с╡▓сЭНсо╣ ╟ОaтЭбспХ тЕ╛ } }рае╟Осое тАл▌бтАмсФв соЭр▓╜ спХр╡ЙсиХс▓н▌Е спесЧнс╕е тж╜таЩ ╓еси▒ сйХр╕С 3JP ─С┼Эр╛ЩсХ╜ ╘ХсмКси▒ ржСрпЭ 6/ тЕ╛тлн█╡ ╓е см╡ р╗жсоЭр▓╜ ╟НсЦТрб╜ с╕бсЧоaтАл}тж╜▄ЖтАмсБ╜р╝Ктв╜ 4VTUBJOBCMF %FWFMPQNFOU (PBMT спХтме 4%(T сйХр╕Ссп▓сижсБ╣ 0QFO 8PSLJOH (SPVQ 08( сое ╟НсЦТтж╣сйН ╓е см╡ тЕ╛ тлнси▒ с▒╜тЗ╜тзБ сЕХ┼БсХ╜ сп▓сЦТсое снетж╜ тАл╫ЭтАмсо╣р╖Э с╕бсЧотзХскЕ┼Б спй▌Е 6/ E 4%(T сйХр╕Ссп▓сижсБ╣соб 6/ )-1 тАл╫ЭтАмсо╣ ┼Эс▒╢си▒сХ╜ ╩ХсБбтж╜ ┼б─ер╖Э соБс╕бтж╣сйб▌Е 6/ F ╔Щр▒Н╙╣ ╔Щра║сжйсо╣ 1PTU }сБ╜р╝Ктв╜ тАл╫ЭтАмсо╣скб 4%(T тАл╫ЭтАмсо╣█╡ ▌ЕсЧн сД▓р▓Нс▒всоЭр▓╜ спХ р╡ЙсиХс╕б┼Б спйсий▌Е┼Б тзБ сЩ╣ спй▌Е спХси▒ тАлтЖ╜ тзХ▌бтАм╔Э спЭсЗб ┼ЦсйН╟Осое с╡▓сЭНсоЭр▓╜ 1PTU }сБ╜р╝Ктв╜ тАл╫ЭтАмсо╣скб 4%(T тАл╫ЭтАмсо╣р╖Э тШЦтзКтж╣сп▒█╡ со╣─НспХ с▒╜сЬ╜рб╣сий┼Б }рае╟Осо╣ сБ╣тАл▌бтАмси▒рае сЗй╟Нтж╣┼Б спХ рв▒ ┼Эс▒╢соб ╓е см╡ 4%(T сйХр╕Ссп▓сижсБ╣ тлнсо╣си▒сХ╜сЗбтЦС тШЦтзКс▒всоЭр▓╜ спХр╡ЙсиХс╕й сййс▒╢спХ▌Е

4 %(T реТс░ЖсВС─Ю┼Э ┼бр▓Йрб╜ сп▒сЦЩтж╜ ╘ХсмКсоб спесЧнс╕е ╟Ос▒╜сФНтлнсо╣ 1PTU }сБ╜ теер▒йспесмнтУН сЩ╣р╕Ю ра║тиЖ сБ░ тж╜╟О 0%"со╣ ╩СсйНсВКсжй ,0*$" }сБ╜с▒╢тВж тбНтНЕсЬЕ с▒╜ ткЩ тж╜ ╟О╟Ос▒╜тй▓р▓Ж▌Й QQ си▒сХ╜ тВЯ сжесЕЭ сЩ╣ спй▌Е

╔Щ слЩси▒рае 6/ с╕бсйО─Юс▒╜снесм▒тлн 3FHJPOBM &DPOPNJD $PNNJTTJPOT си▒ со╣тж╜ с╕бсйО сп▒р╛Щ┼Эс▒╢ 3FHJPOBM $POTVMUBUJPOT спХ ╟НсЦТрб╣сиХ 1PTU }сБ╜со╣с▒╜си▒ тАл тж╜▌бтАмс╕б сйОсДе ┼бс▒▒спХ 6/ сФНр╛ХтЕ╛с░Ж сЕХ┼БсХ╜си▒ сБ╣сйврвБ сЩ╣ спйраер▓╛ тж╣сйб▌Е 6/соб спХскб zспХ ▌Есз▓тж╜ 1PTU }сБ╜со╣с▒╜ тАл╫ЭтАмсо╣┼Эс▒╢спХ спЭ┼бсЦТсое aс╕б┼Б смХсйврвБ сЩ╣ спйраер▓╛ тж╣ ╩С снетзХ спЩсо╣ 6/ сФНр╛ХтВЙтВЮсЕХ "TTJTUBOU 4FDSFUBSJFT (FOFSBM "4(T р▓╜ ╟НсЦТ

Happiness for All, with Global KOICA

- 36 -

}сБ╜ ┼Э спХсЫй

р╝Йрв▒р╖Э снетж╜ тгйснеспй█╡ сФЧ 1PTU }сБ╜со╣с▒╜р╖Э снетж╜ 6/ сФНр╛ХтЕ╛с░Ж сЕХ┼БсХ╜

рб╜ сКе┼ЦсЬ╛с▒вспЩ сФвсне с│Сс▒╢╔Щр╡Ъ JOGPSNBM TFOJPS DPPSEJOBUJPO HSPVQ сое с│Сс╕втж╣сйб ▌Е ▌Есз▓тж╜ тАл╫ЭтАмсо╣┼Эс▒╢спХ ражр╕Юс▒всоЭр▓╜ спХр╡ЙсиХс╕б┼Б спй█╡ aсмХ▀С тж╣╙╣со╣ сЕЩсЗб сйОтзБсое тж╣█╡ ╩СтАл▄ЖтАмс│Сс╕вспХ спХр▒Нтж╜ ражр╕Юс▒в тАл╫ЭтАмсо╣┼Эс▒╢сое тШЦтзКс▒всоЭр▓╜ смХсйвтж╣┼Бсп▒ тж╜ ├дспХ▌Е 6/ F сЕЩ сйС╟Н█╡ спХскб zсоб 6/ с╡▓сЭНсо╣ 1PTU }сБ╜со╣с▒╜ тАл╫ЭтАмсо╣ ╘ХсмКсое тУН├н 6/ сп▓ сижсБ╣ сЕХ┼БсХ╜ 6/ )-1 сЕХ┼БсХ╜ ╔Щр╕Н┼Б 6/ 4%(T сйХр╕Ссп▓сижсБ╣ сЕХ┼БсХ╜р▓╜ ╟НсЗетж╣ сйН ▌Есон┼Э zспХ с▒╢р╕НтзХ сЕХсж╣▌Е ▌Ер╕н 6/%( с╡Эс▒╜сДе тАл╫ЭтАмсо╣скб ╟ОaсДе тАл╫ЭтАмсо╣█╡ сЕЩ сйС╟Нсо╣ сЗесХ╛┼Эс▒╢си▒ тбНтзЙтж╣с╕б сжлсж╣соЭр╗С ╔Щ спХсоБ█╡ спХр▒Нтж╜ тАл╫ЭтАмсо╣a тШЦтзКс▒в сЕХ┼БсХ╜ тй╢тФ╜р▓╜ с▒╜сЬ╜рб╣с╕б сжл┼Б b с╡Эс▒╜сДе ╔Щр╕Н┼Б b ╟ОaсДер▓╜ сДераесо╣ ▌Есз▓тж╜ сйС╟Н сБ░ тАл╫ЭтАм со╣a с╕етзкрб╣сиХ с╕бр╗ХсФвсо╣ спХсоБр▓╜ спХ сЗбсЗеси▒ тАл╫Э тж╜▌бтАмсо╣█╡ ▌Ер╡Йс╕б сжлсж╣▌Е

81 рйЩрж╣▀Й раВ╥Лрв│ 6/ сп▓сижсБ╣соб rсмСр╕Нa см▒тж╣█╡ р╝Йрв▒р╖Э снетж╜ сБЩрп╣ сЭЕтйетж╣╩Сs r}сБ╜сое снетж╜ сДбтк╡рб╜ ╔бр▓╜сГн тЭнтЬЩ╒йсЭОs ╔Щр╕Н┼Б r1PTU }сБ╜со╣с▒╜р╖Э снетж╜ тШЦ─ескб с╕бтв╜sсо╣ тАл ▌бтАмсЕХ┼Б сХ╜р╖Э сЧн}тж╣сйб▌Е спХ сЕХ┼БсХ╜реЕсоб bb сЦЩсЗбс▒вспЩ тАл╫ЭтАмсо╣┼Эс▒╢┼Э с╡Эс▒╜сДе сйС╟НсЕХ┼БсХ╜ р╖Э тШЦтзКтж╜ ─С┼Эр╛ЭспХрпЭ тзБ сЩ╣ спй▌Е смСсЦБ rсмСр╕Нa см▒тж╣█╡ р╝Йрв▒р╖Э снетж╜ сБЩрп╣ сЭЕтйетж╣╩Сs сЕХ┼БсХ╜█╡ 1PTU }сБ╜со╣с▒╜ сЩ╣р╕Юсое снетж╜ ╩СсЕЩсм▒тК║┼Э сВКтиЖсЦТсое с▒╜сЬ╜тж╣┼Б спйсоЭр╗С r}сБ╜сое снетж╜ сДбтк╡рб╜ ╔бр▓╜сГн тЭнтЬЩ╒йсЭОs сЕХ┼БсХ╜█╡ 1PTU спХтзктДХс▒╜си▒сХ╜со╣ тЭнтЬЩ╒йсЭОсо╣ сВКтиЖсЦТсое ╔Щр╕Н┼Б r1PTU }сБ╜со╣с▒╜р╖Э снетж╜ тШЦ─ескб с╕бтв╜s сЕХ┼БсХ╜█╡ 1PTU ╔бр▓╜сГн р╝Ктв╜ спХ тзксое снетж╜ р╝ЙтАлтЦС▄йтАмр╕в сБ░ с╕бтв╜си▒ тАл тж╜▌бтАмсВКтиЖсЦТсое с▒╜сЬ╜тж╜▌Е┼Б тзБ сЩ╣ спй▌Е с╖к rсмСр╕Нa см▒тж╣█╡ р╝Йрв▒р╖Э снетж╜ сБЩрп╣ сЭЕтйетж╣╩Сs сЕХ┼БсХ╜█╡ ╔бр▓╜сГн р╝Ктв╜ }сБ╜со╣ сВКтиЖсЦТсое r}сБ╜ сое снетж╜ сДбтк╡рб╜ ╔бр▓╜сГн тЭнтЬЩ╒йсЭОs┼Э r1PTU }сБ╜со╣с▒╜р╖Э снетж╜ тШЦ─ескб с╕бтв╜s сЕХ ┼БсХ╜█╡ ╔бр▓╜сГн р╝Ктв╜ спХтзктДХс▒╜ }сБ╜си▒ тАл тж╜▌бтАмсВКтиЖсЦТсое сЕХсйНс╡б▌Е┼Б тзБ сЩ╣ спй─Б▌Е

тАл┌НтАм╬╜├А тАл┌ЩтАмреа╔Щ ╧┐╦Г╬╡ тАл рев┌жтАм╨╣═Т ╓мржЗреа┼Я 6/ сп▓сижсБ╣соб ▌Есз▓тж╜ 6/ ╩С╟НреЕ┼Э тй▓р▓Жтж╣сйН ╓е см╡ тЕ╛ } с╡Эс▒╜си▒ тАл тж╜▌бтАм сйС╟Н─С┼Эр╖Э сБ╜тв╜тж╣сйб█╡▀С 6/ сп▓сижсБ╣соб спХреЕ сЕХ┼БсХ╜р╖Э тШЦтзХ с╡Эр▓╜ }сБ╜си▒ спйсиХсХ╜

Happiness for All, with Global KOICA

- 37 -

}сБ╜ ┼Э спХсЫй

р╝Йрв▒р╖Э снетж╜ тгйснеспй█╡ сФЧ 1PTU }сБ╜со╣с▒╜р╖Э снетж╜ 6/ сФНр╛ХтЕ╛с░Ж сЕХ┼БсХ╜

с░Н╙╜снети╣┼Э тлнсЕЦр▓Ж с╕бсЧоaтАл} тж╜▄ЖтАмсБ╜сое снетж╜ тк╣─Ю р╛Щтк╡ ╞▒соВ сЕХ├Х ┼БсмК сЬ╛р░к сжйсЕХ ├СсГе╒нсЬЕ спЩ╟н такреТ ┼Этж║╩СсЪБ реТсо╣ р╛Щс▒╜ 1PTU }сБ╜тДХс▒╜си▒сХ╜ сл╡╟Н рб╣█╡ сФйр▓╜смХ раес▒е┼Эс▒╜ спХсБЭ спЩ╟НспХра║ тактк╡скб сжйсЕХ сФНтлнсЕХткЩ раесЬ╜тк╡ реТси▒ тАл▌бтАм тж╜ тАл╫ЭтАмсо╣р╖Э с╕етзктж╣сйб▌Е тДЙсЗб тВЩ┼Б спХр╖Э тШБтАл▌бтАмр▓╜ zсоб тзХ 1PTU }сБ╜со╣с▒╜ сЩ╣р╕Юсое снетж╜ сВКтиЖсое с▒╜сЬ╜тж╣█╡ сЕХ┼БсХ╜a сЧн}рб╣сий█╡▀С rсмСр╕Нa см▒тж╣█╡ р╝Йрв▒р╖Э сне тж╜ сБЩрп╣ сЭЕтйетж╣╩С 3FBMJ[JOH UIF 'VUVSF 8F 8BOU GPS "MM спХрпЭ р╗жр╗жрб╜ спХ сЕХ┼Б сХ╜█╡ ╔Щр╕Э ┼Э zсоб 1PTU }сБ╜со╣с▒╜р╖Э снетж╜ теер▒йспесмнтУНр╖Э с▒╜┼Цтж╣сйб▌Е

╔Щр╕Э 1PTU 6/ }сБ╜со╣с▒╜р╖Э снетж╜ тШЦтзК теер▒йспесмнтУН

р┤Ь╥ГрлСргШ╨╛тАлрв┐╫ЮтАм @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

р▓гр┤Ързм ржЙраБ @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

тЖЯрвдтАл╫о▐ЫтАмржирв┐ раБр┤Р

тЖЯр▓й█▒ раЩрйм р│ЯтАлраЧ█╜╪АтАмр░арйД рйЧрим

тЖЯржЙрй┐тАл ╪╗тАм╙Эр┤▒

тЖЯраЩрймрж╣тАл ╫ЧтАмрнМрзЛрйЧриЧ рйЙриК

тЖЯрйЧрзЛрйдр│зрзА тАл╪АтАмр│а раВриЧ█▒

рйЛ╙В р▓г┘б рлСргШ╨╛тАлрв┐╫ЮтАм р▓и╥Ърй╕ ╥ГркБ╤Р▀К @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ тЖЯрг╗рйСра╝╥М╥Ч ╙ЭржЗр▒ГроЦ тЖЯраЫр▓г┘б ╤ЕргЧ тЖЯрйМтАл╫отАмриН рйМрйЧ▄╗ ▀В рвдрвСрй╕ ╥КриКраБрйв

р▓и╥Ърй╕ рвОр┤е ╤Р▀К @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

тЖЯтАл ▄│┘Б▌╜тАмридр│а рй╕тАл╫╝тАмр│а рзФржи тЖЯтАл ▄│┘Б▌╜тАмридр│а ржирлХрйД ╥орин тЖЯрвОтАл ▀В ▄л▌ОтАмрлХ▀╜тАл ▄лтАм╤ЕргЧ тЖЯржирв┐р▓г┘б тЖЯ╙╡╒Цр│а тАл▐ЫтАм╥Ч ридрвдрджрв╕рйД раБр▓Юрй╕ рйЙриК

тЗ╜тГ╣ спесЧнс╕е ╔Щр╕Э си▒ ╙╣скбспй█╡ ├д┼Э zспХ 6/ сп▓сижсБ╣спХ с▒╜сЬ╜тж╜ 1PTU }сБ╜со╣с▒╜ сЩ╣р╕ЮсВК тиЖсоб спЩ╟н такреТ с╕бсЧоaтАл▄ЖтАмсЦТсо╣ тАл ▌бтАмс╡▓с▒▒ aтК╣р╖Э сБ╡тФ╢соЭр▓╜ ─Юс▒╜}сБ╜т░ТсФНтлн} сБ╜т░Ттк╣─Юс╕бсЧоaтАл▄ЖтАмсЦТт░Ттактк╡скб сжйсЕХсо╣ тАлтзЦ ▌бтАмсЭНтЗ╢си▒сХ╜ тВЯсжесЕЭ сЩ╣ спй▌Е спХ█╡ сж┐си▒ сХ╜ р╕▒тж╜ тЕ╛ } с╡Эс▒╜сДе сйС╟Нсо╣ тЕ╛тДХс▒в ─С┼ЭрпЭ тзБ сЩ╣ спй█╡▀С сййр╖Э реЕсиХ 6/ сп▓ сижсБ╣со╣ с╕бсЧоaтАл} тж╜▄ЖтАмсБ╜си▒ тАл тж╜ тж╜▌бтАмсйС╟НсЕХ┼БсХ╜р╖Э сФХтаХсЕХр╗Х сФНтлнт░Т─Юс▒╜т░Ттк╣─Юсо╣ с╡Эс▒╜р╖Э тШЦтзКтж╜ ╔Бтй╢спй█╡ ╔бр▓╜сГн р╝Ктв╜a сЩ╣р╕Юрб╣сиХсзЭ тж╜▌Е█╡ ├дсое с▒╜сжйтж╣┼Б спйсоЭ

Happiness for All, with Global KOICA

- 38 -

}сБ╜ ┼Э спХсЫй

р╝Йрв▒р╖Э снетж╜ тгйснеспй█╡ сФЧ 1PTU }сБ╜со╣с▒╜р╖Э снетж╜ 6/ сФНр╛ХтЕ╛с░Ж сЕХ┼БсХ╜

р╗С 6/ 4ZTUFN 5BTL 5FBN B спХр▒Нтж╜ ╘ХсмКреЕспХ с│жтзКс▒всоЭр▓╜ rсмСр╕Нa см▒ тж╣█╡ р╝Йрв▒р╖Э снетж╜ сБЩрп╣ сЭЕтйетж╣╩Сs сЕХ┼БсХ╜си▒ сБ╣сйврб╣сий▌Е тзБ сЩ╣ спй▌Е 6/ сп▓сижсБ╣соб спХ с│жтзКсЕХ┼БсХ╜р╖Э тШЦтзХ 1PTU }сБ╜р╝Ктв╜█╡ тйесЭЕсЦТ SFBMJTN ┼Э ┼ЭqтзЙ BNCJUJPO со╣ ╔Бтй╢сое тШБтАл▌бтАмр▓╜ тж╣сйН .%(Tсо╣ спЩe}сБ╜ vс│Ср╖Э соБс╕бтзБ ├дсое с▒╜сжйтж╣сйб▌Е рй▒тж╜ 1PTU }сБ╜р╝Ктв╜█╡ .%(Tсо╣ р╗жтк╢тж╣┼Б тЪНр╗жтж╜ р╝Ктв╜ HPBMT сЦЩсЗбр╝Ктв╜ UBSHFUT ╔Щр╕Н┼Б с╕бтв╜ JOEJDBUPST со╣ тй╢сЬ╛сое соБс╕бтж╣рб╣ ╚╜сГ╡ с▒в сЩ╣▌Й NFBOT спХ сжетАл ▄нтАмс▒╢тВжспЭ┼бсЦТсое снетж╜ см▒тК║спХ рвБ сЩ╣ спй█╡ сВКсГ╢ IPX си▒ тАл▌бтАм тж╜ с╕бтЛЙ HVJEBODF спХ рб╣сиХсзЭ тж╜▌Е┼Б тАл╫ЭтАмсо╣тж╣сйб▌Е ╙╣сжеa 6/ сп▓сижсБ╣соб 1PTU }сБ╜р╝Ктв╜█╡ ╔бр▓╜сГн р╝Ктв╜р▓╜ сЩ╣р╕Ютж╣рб╣ b ╟ОaсДер▓╜ ▌Ер╖Щ р╣ЖрпЮсое спХтзХтж╣сйНсзЭ тзБ тжесл╡сЦТсое vс│Стж╣сйб▌Е 6/ 4ZTUFN 5BTL 5FBN C

├Т╤МтАл рев┌ж ┌║тАм╤║ржЬ╩╜ ┼Ш═┐╤з рг╖ргб╚Г╓п ╓е см╡ 6/ сп▓сижсБ╣соб .%(T (PBM со╣ ╔бр▓╜сГн тЭнтЬЩ╒йсЭО со╣с▒╜р╖Э сЕХскет░Ттк╢ тАлтж╣▌бтАм╩С снетзХ r ╓е спХтмесо╣ }сБ╜сое снетж╜ ╔бр▓╜сГн тЭнтЬЩ╒йсЭОsсое снетж╜ сФйр▓╜смХ сп▓сиж сБ╣ XPSLJOH HSPVQ сое ╟НсЦТтж╣сйб▌Е спХ сФйр▓╜смХ сп▓сижсБ╣соб тЕ╛ }со╣ тЭнтЬЩ╒йсЭОсое рв╣р▒НсЭЭ со╣с▒╜реЕси▒ тАл тж╜▌бтАмсйС╟Нр╖Э с╕етзктж╣сйбсоЭр╗С тДЙсЗб тВЩ┼Б спХр╖Э тШЦтзХ ╓е см╡ r}сБ╜сое снетж╜ сДбтк╡рб╜ ╔бр▓╜сГн тЭнтЬЩ╒йсЭО " 3FOFXFE (MPCBM 1BSUOFSTIJQ GPS %FWFMPQNFOU sспХрпЭ┼Б р╗жр╗жрб╜ с│жтзКсЕХ┼БсХ╜р╖Э сЧн}тж╣сйб▌Е спХ с│жтзКсЕХ┼БсХ╜█╡ .%(Tсо╣ (PBM си▒сХ╜ сЬ╜сп▓рб╜ ╔бр▓╜сГн тЭнтЬЩ╒йсЭО }╓▒спХ р╝НтЦнр▒йспХ тНЙсЦЭсХ╜сЬЕр╖Э ├СтД▒ тйес░Н ╘Й╘Йтй▓р▓Ж сБ░ ▌Есз▓тж╜ тЭнтЬЩ╒йр╖Э тбНтзЙтж╣█╡ }╓▒соЭр▓╜ с╕етк╡тж╜ ├дсое vс│Стж╣┼Б спй▌Е ▌Есз▓тж╜ спХтзХ┼б─есп▒a сБ╜сФ╛тж╣р╗ХсХ╜ спХреЕ спХтзХ┼б─есп▒a тЗ╡a с░Нсм▒сое ра║см▒тж╣├С╙╣ тЬЪс▒╢ спХсЫйси▒ тАл тж╜▌бтАмспЩсЬ╛сое с░Жр▓Етж╣█╡ сйОтзБсое сЩ╣тзктж╣█╡ ├дси▒ тАл▌бтАм тж╜ тАл╫ЭтАмсо╣a спХр╡ЙсиХс▓нсоЭр╗С тЬЪтпй }сБ╜сое снетж╜ сДбтк╡рб╜ ╔бр▓╜сГн тЭнтЬЩ╒йсЭОси▒сХ╜█╡ сФйр▓╜ смХ с░Нсм▒спХ с▒етШЦс▒вспЩ см▒с│Сс░Нсм▒сое тАл▌бтАмтДХ TVCTUJUVUF тж╣█╡ ├дспХ сжетАл▄йтАмрпЭ сЕХске DPNQMFNFOU тж╣█╡ сйОтзБсое тзХсзЭтж╜▌Е█╡ ├дспХ с░НтВЙ vс│Срб╣сий▌Е 6/ 4ZTUFN 5BTL 5FBN B 6/ сп▓сижсБ╣соб ▌Есз▓тж╜ спХтзХ┼б─есп▒a тВЩсйНтж╣├н рб╜ сДбтк╡рб╜ тЭнтЬЩ╒йсЭО сз▓сФвси▒сХ╜█╡ b спХтзХ┼б─есп▒eсо╣ тВжр╛ХсЦТ BDDPVOUBCJMJUZ спХ ▐╡смТ с╡▓сл╡тж╣▌Е┼Б сЕХ┼Б спйсоЭр╗С спХ█╡ .%(T (PBM со╣ тЙЙсзЮс▒▒ с╡▓ тж╣╙╣сйб▌Е┼Б такaтж╣┼Б спй▌Е сКер▓╛ 6/ ─Юс▒╜сФНтлнспХсФН

Happiness for All, with Global KOICA

- 39 -

}сБ╜ ┼Э спХсЫй

р╝Йрв▒р╖Э снетж╜ тгйснеспй█╡ сФЧ 1PTU }сБ╜со╣с▒╜р╖Э снетж╜ 6/ сФНр╛ХтЕ╛с░Ж сЕХ┼БсХ╜

тлн &DPOPNJD BOE 4PDJBM $PVODJM &$040$ со╣ сйСe с░Ж┼б╔к сЕХ┼Бтлн "OOVBM .JOJTUFSJBM 3FWJFX скб ╓еси▒ тж╜сГй сйХр╕Н█╡ ┼Бсне╔к }сБ╜тй▓р▓ЖтбНр▒Э %FWFMPQNFOU $PPQFSBUJPO 'PSVN %$' спХ сЦЕр╕Юрб╣сиХ смХсйврб╜ ├дсое тУС сБ╜с▒еспХрпЭ такaтзБ сЩ╣ спй соЭ╙╣ тиЖтме 1PTU }сБ╜со╣с▒╜ спХтзк┼Эс▒╢си▒сХ╜█╡ сДбтк╡рб╜ ╔бр▓╜сГн тЭнтЬЩ╒йсЭОсое сне тж╜ сФвткЩтВжр╛ХсЦТ vтк╡р╖Э снетж╜ р╝ЙреБ ╟Оaсо╣ с▒╢тК╣с▒в с╕бс╕бa ▐╡смТ vтк╡рвБ тжесл╡a спй▌Е 6/ 4ZTUFN 5BTL 5FBN B .%(T (PBM со╣ тЭнтЬЩ╒йсЭО┼Э ┼бр▓Йтж╣сйН 6/ сп▓сижсБ╣соб рй▒тж╜ тЖ╜сКй}рае╟О -FBTU %FWFMPQJOH $PVOUSJFT спХтме -%$T ┼Э ╘Хр╢║╟О -BOEMPDLFE %FWFMPQJOH $PVOUSJFT спХтме --%$T ╔Щр╕Н┼Б сЧн╚╜р╝Й раесХ╜с╕бсйО 4NBMM *TMBOE %FWFMPQJOH 4UBUFT спХтме 4*%4 ┼Э zсоб тЙЙсзЮтж╜ ╟ОaреЕси▒ тАл тж╜▌бтАмс╕бсм▒сое vтк╡тзБ ├дсое тЕк╟Нтж╣сйб соЭ╙╣ сЭЕс▒╜ спХтзк┼Эс▒╢си▒сХ╜ спХ сЗбсЗеси▒ тАл тж╜▌бтАм┼Бр▓Еa сДер▓╜ спХр╡ЙсиХс╕бс╕б сжлсж╣▌Е┼Б сЕХ┼Б тж╣┼Б спй▌Е ржСрпЭсХ╜ ╟Ос▒╜сФНтлн█╡ тиЖтме 1PTU }сБ╜со╣с▒╜ сЩ╣р╕Ю ┼Эс▒╢си▒сХ╜ .%(T (PBM со╣ тЭнтЬЩ╒йсЭОсое с╡▓сЭНсоЭр▓╜ тж╜ .%(T спХтзксо╣ спХскб zсоб тж╜─ер╖Э ╔ЪсЕЦтзХсзЭ тзБ ├дспХрпЭ┼Б сЬ╜сФНтж╣┼Б спй▌Е 6/ 4ZTUFN 5BTL 5FBN B

1PTU ├Т╤МтАл▄Г█ЖтАм╬╡ тАлргА рев┌жтАм─ЗтАл▌У ┘отАмрд╢ ╓е см╡ 6/ сп▓сижсБ╣соб р╝ЙтАлтЦС▄йтАмр╕в┼Э с╕бтв╜си▒ тАл▌Е рй▒ тж╜▌бтАмр╖Щ сп▓сижсБ╣ XPSLJOH HSPVQ сое сЦЕр╕Ютж╣сйб▌Е спХ сп▓сижсБ╣соб тЕ╛ } спХсФвсо╣ 6/ ╩С┼бспХ тВЩсйНтж╣сйбсоЭр╗С 6/ ─Юс▒╜сФНтлн╟О %FQBSUNFOU PG &DPOPNJD BOE 4PDJBM "GGBJST %&4" ┼Э 6/%1a с╡Эраес▒в сйОтзБсое тж╣сйН 1PTU спХтзктДХс▒╜ р╝ЙтАлтЦС▄йтАмр╕в сБ░ с╕бтв╜си▒ тАл╫Э тж╜▌бтАм со╣┼Эс▒╢си▒ тВЩсйНтж╣сйб▌Е сЕЩ сп▓сижсБ╣со╣ сйС╟Н─С┼Э█╡ r1PTU }сБ╜со╣с▒╜р╖Э снетж╜ тШЦ ─ескб с╕бтв╜ 4UBUJTUJDT BOE *OEJDBUPST GPS UIF 1PTU %FWFMPQNFOU "HFOEB со╣ тй╢тФ╜р▓╜ ╓е см╡си▒ сЧн}рб╣сий▌Е 6/ 4ZTUFN 5BTL 5FBN C сФйр▓╜смХ сп▓сижсБ╣со╣ сйС╟Н█╡ .%(T спХтзк р╝ЙтАлтЦС▄йтАмр╕в сБ░ сЕХ┼БтДХ─есо╣ с│СсоЙ сЭБр┤СсЦТ сБ░ с╕бсЧоaтАл▄ЖтАмсЦТ соБс╕бси▒ тАл тж╜▌бтАмr.%(T с╕бтв╜си▒ тАл тж╜▌бтАм╩С┼б сБ░ с▒ер╛Щa ╔Щр╡Ъ *OUFS "HFODZ BOE &YQFSU (SPVQ PO .%( *OEJDBUPST *"&( sсо╣ сйОтзБспХ с╡▓сл╡тзй▌Е┼Б такaтж╣р╗С спХ ╔Щр╡Ъсо╣ сйОтзБспХ 1PTU спХтзктДХс▒╜си▒сХ╜рае с╕бсЧорб╣сиХсзЭ тзБ тжесл╡сЦТ сое сЬ╜сФНтж╣сйб▌Е рй▒тж╜ сп▓сижсБ╣ сйС╟Н─С┼Эр╖Э тШЦтзХ b ╟Оaсо╣ ╔бр▓╜сГн р╝Ктв╜ спХтзк сЦТ┼Э р╝ЙтАлтЦС▄йтАмр╕всое снетж╜ ▀СспХтЦС сЩ╣с╕▓┼Э ┼бр▓Йрб╜ }рае╟Осо╣ тШЦ─есйОр░кси▒ тАл тж╜▌бтАмс╕бсм▒

Happiness for All, with Global KOICA

- 40 -

}сБ╜ ┼Э спХсЫй

р╝Йрв▒р╖Э снетж╜ тгйснеспй█╡ сФЧ 1PTU }сБ╜со╣с▒╜р╖Э снетж╜ 6/ сФНр╛ХтЕ╛с░Ж сЕХ┼БсХ╜

JOWFTUNFOU спХ с╕бсЧорб╣сиХсзЭ тж╜▌Е█╡ ├дсое сжн сЩ╣ спйсий▌Е ╔Щр▒Н╙╣ р╛ХсиисЕХ▌Ерае спХтзк сЦТ┼Э р╝ЙтАлтЦС▄йтАмр╕всое снетзХ с▒╜тАл▌бтАмр▓╜ с▒╢со╣рб╜ ~┼бс▒всоЭр▓╜ тКВс▒╢aтАл тж╜▄ЖтАмс╕бтв╜со╣ }сБ╜спХ с╡▓ сл╡тж╣▌Е█╡ ├дспХ vс│Срб╣сий▌Е ╙╣сжеa с╕бтв╜со╣ р╝Ктв╜тК╣ сЦЕс▒╢ ┼Эс▒╢си▒сХ╜ р╗жтк╢тпй спХтзХтзБ сЩ╣ спй█╡ ╔Щр╕Н┼Б тКВс▒╢aтАл тж╜▄ЖтАмс▒╢р░кс▒в тКВс▒╢сГ╡снер╖Э с▒╜сЬ╜тзБ ├дсое тАл╫ЭтАмсо╣тж╣сйб▌Е ра║сЬ╜си▒ спХ сп▓сижсБ╣соб 1PTU ╔бр▓╜сГн р╝Ктв╜ }сБ╜┼Эс▒╢си▒сХ╜ тйесЭЕ┼Э спХсФвспХ с▒вс▒йтпй ╔Бтй╢ сое спХр╡Й█╡ р╝Ктв╜тК╣a сЩ╣р╕Юрб╣сиХсзЭ тж╣р╗С тАл▌НтАмсЦТсое снетж╜ сЬ╜eс▒в р╝Ктв╜ сйОсЬ╜ р╗жтк╢тпй с▒╜ сЬ╜рб╣сиХсзЭ тж╜▌Е┼Б vс│Стж╣сйб▌Е спХтзкси▒ тАл тж╜▌бтАмспХ сп▓сижсБ╣со╣ сйС╟Н█╡ 1PTU }сБ╜ р╝Ктв╜со╣ с╕бтв╜a с░Ж╩Сс▒в ─С┼Эси▒ тЕйс▒▒сое рв╡ сЦТ┼Э PVUDPNF с╕бтв╜р▓╜сЯЙ }сБ╜рб╣сиХсзЭ тзБ ├дсое тзЙ╠╣ тАл╫ЭтАмсо╣тж╣сйб▌Е 6/ 4ZTUFN 5BTL 5FBN C ╔Щр▒Н╙╣ р╛ХсиисЕХ▌Ерае 1PTU }сБ╜со╣с▒╜р╖Э снетж╜ тШЦ─ескб с╕бтв╜си▒ тАл╫Э тж╜▌бтАмсо╣█╡ .%(T теер▒йспесмнтУНр╖Э сГ╕сиХ╙╜ }сБ╜с╕бтв╜со╣ сЩ╣р╕Юсое тЕк╟Нскб тзЙ╠╣ ▀СспХтЦС сЩ╣р╕Юсое сне тж╜ ╩СсЪБтйвсЭБ┼Э ╟Оa▌Й─есо╣ тШЦ─есйОр░к vтк╡ сЦТ┼Э р╝ЙтАлтЦС▄йтАмр╕всое снетж╜ ╟Ос▒╜ ▌Й─еси▒сХ╜ со╣ с│СсоЙ ╔Щр╕Н┼Б ▀СспХтЦС тгйс╕й┼бр╕Нр╖Э сФйр│О├н с▒╜сжйтж╣сйб▌Е тЬЪтпй .%(T теер▒йспесмнтУН р╖Э сГ╕сиХ╙╜ }сБ╜с╕бтв╜си▒ тАлтзХ▌бтАмсХ╜ сЗйтакреТ с▒╢раер╖Э тКВс▒╢тзБ сЩ╣ спй█╡ с╕бтАл▄йтАм─есЩ╣ (JOJ DPFGGJDJFOU рй▒█╡ сЩ╣спж┼Э сЧнсКе сКе╞▒сГ╢со╣ спХсмКсое ┼Бр▓Етж╣█╡ ├дси▒ тАл╫Э тж╜▌бтАмсо╣рае спХр╡Й сиХс▓н▌Е ╔Щр▒Н╙╣ спХр▒Нтж╜ сЗбсЗеси▒ тАлтзХ▌бтАмсХ╜█╡ сжес╕в╩нс╕б сиХриБтж╜ ╟Ос▒╜с▒в тзКсо╣╙╣ спХр▒и▌Е тзБ рл╜р▓Штж╜ тАл╫ЭтАмсо╣ра║тиЖспХ сиз▌Е█╡ тж╜─еa спй▌Е ╙╣сжеa 1PTU }сБ╜со╣с▒╜ сЩ╣р╕Ю┼Э с▒╢си▒сХ╜█╡ .%(T теер▒йспесмнтУНси▒сХ╜█╡ ┼Бр▓Ерб╣с╕б сжлсж╣▐╣ сЦТсДет░Тсжера║т░ТспХсБЭсп▒т░Тс░ЖсзБ спЩт░ТспЩс│ж реТсо╣ спЩ╟НсДе ╟НсЗерб╜ EJTBHHSFHBUFE ▀СспХтЦСр╖Э тШЦтж╜ сЦТ┼Э тКВс▒╢ сп▒сйС с░Нсм▒ спХсмКси▒ тАлтмЙ тж╜▌бтАмсоЙсЦТ тКВс▒╢ снСсК║ XFMM CFJOH ┼Э zсоб с╡Э┼бс▒в с╕бтв╜со╣ тКВс▒╢ ╔Щр╕Н┼Б ├СсГе╒нсЬЕт░ТсГ╢р╖Бт░Ттактк╡╟НтЗ╢т░ТтбОр▓Ж┼Э сЗес░вт░ТспЩ╟н реТ┼Э zсоб с╕бтв╜си▒ тАл тж╜▌бтАм ╟Ос▒╜ сБ░ ╟Оa ▌Йснеси▒сХ╜со╣ с▒╢р░кс▒в тКВс▒╢ сВКсГ╢си▒ тАл тж╜▌бтАм╟НтДХс▒вспЩ тАл╫ЭтАмсо╣a спХр╡ЙсиХс▓ЩсзЭ тзБ ├дсоЭр▓╜ сЕХспЩ▌Е 6/ 4ZTUFN 5BTL 5FBN C

81 ╥Лрие╙Ър▓В╓Ж раВ╥Лрв│

6/ )-1 сЕХ┼БсХ╜си▒ тАл тж╜▌бтАмсп▒сЦЩтж╜ ╘Х смКсоб спесЧнс╕е 1PTU }сБ╜ теер▒йспесмнтУНскб 6/ ┼Бсне╔ктЮЙ ╒▒ сЕХ┼БсХ╜ }сБ╜тй▓р▓Ж с▒╢тВж┼Э спХсЫй ткЩ тж╜╟О╟Ос▒╜тй▓р▓Ж▌Й си▒сХ╜ тВЯсже сЕЭ сЩ╣ спй▌Е

6/ )-1со╣ тАл╫ЭтАмсо╣█╡ 6/ сп▓сижсБ╣ сЕХ┼БсХ╜си▒сХ╜ с▒╜сЬ╜тж╜ ╩СсЕЩсВКтиЖсое тИКсЭЕтпй сБ╣сйвтж╜ ├д соЭр▓╜ сЕХспЩ▌Е сййр╖Э реЕсиХ тВЙр▓бси▒ ├ЩтД▒ спХр╡ЙсиХс╕е 6/ )-1 тлнсо╣ с╡▓ тДМ сГйс╣Щ с╡Эс▒╜ сДе тАл╫ЭтАмсо╣р▓╜сЯЙ 6/ сп▓сижсБ╣си▒сХ╜ с▒╜сЬ╜тж╜ тАлтзЦ ▌бтАмсЭНтЗ╢со╣ тж╣╙╣спЩ сФНтлн}сБ╜си▒ тАл тзХ▌бтАм .%(Tси▒сХ╜ спХсБЩ ▌Ер╡Йсий▐╣ rспЩe}сБ╜┼Э ┼БсмК сБ░ сФ╛─еsр╖Э с╡▓сЭНсоЭр▓╜ тж╣сйН ▐╡смТ сЭНрае спй█╡ тАл╫ЭтАмсо╣р╖Э с╕етзктж╣сйб▌Е рй▒тж╜ ─Юс▒╜}сБ╜ тк╣─Юс╕бсЧоaтАл▄ЖтАмсЦТ тактк╡скб сжйсЕХсо╣ тзЦсЭНтЗ╢

Happiness for All, with Global KOICA

- 41 -

}сБ╜ ┼Э спХсЫй

р╝Йрв▒р╖Э снетж╜ тгйснеспй█╡ сФЧ 1PTU }сБ╜со╣с▒╜р╖Э снетж╜ 6/ сФНр╛ХтЕ╛с░Ж сЕХ┼БсХ╜

си▒ тАлтзХ▌бтАмсХ╜ ─Юс▒╜сБ╜с▒е┼Э тк╣─Ю тактк╡ сБ░ сжйсЕХр╖Э тбНтзЙтж╣█╡ со╣сБЩсо╣ rтбН┼ес▒в ─Юс▒╜сЦТс░Жs спХ тАл╫ЭтАмсо╣рб╣сий▌Е 6/ C )-1█╡ 6/ сп▓сижсБ╣со╣ тЭнтЬЩ╒йсЭОсое с╡▓сЭНсоЭр▓╜ тж╜ спХтзктДХс▒╜ тАл╫ЭтАмсо╣си▒ сБ╜р╕┐тЗ╡сиХ rсДбтк╡ рб╜ ╔бр▓╜сГн тЭнтЬЩ╒йсЭО B SFOFXFE (MPCBM 1BSUOFSTIJQ sсо╣ }╓▒сое vс│Стж╣сйбсоЭр╗С спХ█╡ )-1 сЕХ┼БсХ╜со╣ с▒╜р╝КспЩ rсФйр▓╜смХ ╔бр▓╜сГн тЭнтЬЩ╒йсЭО с╕бсЧоaтАл} тж╜▄ЖтАмсБ╜сое тШЦтж╜ сКй┼ЕтЩХтК╣скб ─Юс▒╜с▒етк╣ " /FX (MPCBM 1BSUOFSTIJQ &SBEJDBUF 1PWFSUZ BOE 5SBOTGPSN &DPOPNJFT 5ISPVHI 4VTUBJOBCMF %FWFMPQNFOU sси▒сХ╜рае ╙╣тФб╙╣ ┼Б спй▌Е ╙╣сжеa 6/ )-1a с▒╜сЬ╜тж╜ } р╝Ктв╜скб } сЦЩсЗбр╝Ктв╜со╣ }сБ╜┼Эс▒╢си▒сХ╜ █╡ .%(Tси▒█╡ тбНтзЙрб╣с╕б сжлсж╣▐╣ сЗйтакреТ тактк╡скб сЗес░в ├СсГе╒нсЬЕ сп▒сйС с░Нсм▒ спХсмК со╣ тмЙсоЙсЦТ┼Э zсоб с╕бтв╜}сБ╜си▒ тАл тж╜▌бтАм┼Бр▓Еa спХр╡ЙсиХс▓н█╡▀С 6/ C спХ рй▒тж╜ 6/ сп▓сижсБ╣со╣ тШЦ─е сБ░ с╕бтв╜си▒ тАл╫Э тж╜▌бтАмсо╣си▒сХ╜ тВЯсжесЕЭ сЩ╣ спй█╡ ╘ХсмКспХрпЭ тзБ сЩ╣ спй ▌Е рй▒тж╜ 6/ )-1█╡ спХр▒Нтж╜ с╕бтв╜a ╟НтДХс▒вспХ┼Б тКВс▒╢aтАлтж╣▄ЖтАмр╗С тАл▌НтАмсЦТaтАлтж╣▄ЖтАм┼Б сЬ╜ eс▒в р╝Ктв╜р╖Э тШБтАл▌бтАмр▓╜ тж╣раер▓╛ }сБ╜рб╣сиХсзЭ тж╜▌Е█╡ ▀С со╣─Нсое р╝Йсж╣соЭр╗С 6/ C спХ сйОсЬ╜ 6/ сп▓сижсБ╣спХ с╡Эс░Жтж╣┼Б спй█╡ ╘ХсмК┼Э тУН├н ▌Ер╖Э сБ╡ сизсиХ сЕХспЩ▌Е р╕йс╕бр╕ксоЭр▓╜ 6/ )-1█╡ r▀СспХтЦС тйвр╗ж EBUB SFWPMVUJPO sсо╣ тжесл╡сЦТсое vс│Стж╣сйбсоЭ р╗С 6/ C спХ█╡ 6/ сп▓сижсБ╣спХ vс│Стж╜ }рае╟Осо╣ тШЦ─есйОр░к vтк╡скб сЭБр┤Сa тАл▀С тж╜▄ЖтАмспХтЦСсо╣ с╡▓сл╡сЦТ┼Э спЭр╣ЖсФвтШЦтж╜▌Е ▌Ер╕н 6/ сп▓сижсБ╣ сЕХ┼БсХ╜си▒сХ╜ ─Юс▒╜}сБ╜ ┼Э сФНтлн}сБ╜сое ╔Бтй╢спй█╡ ┼бс▒▒си▒сХ╜ сБ╡рпЭсЕХ┼Б спй▌Ер╗Х )-1 сЕХ┼БсХ╜█╡ ╔Щ с▒╜р╝Кси▒сХ╜ сЗбтЦС r─Юс▒╜с▒етк╣sспХрпЭ█╡ смКсиХр╖Э сФНсмКтзЙсоЭр▓╜сЯЙ сп▒тЛМ )-1со╣ тАл╫ЭтАмсо╣a сФНтлн}сБ╜сЕХ▌Е ─Юс▒╜}сБ╜сое ▐╡ с╡▓сл╡сЬ╜тж╣┼Б спй▌Е█╡ скЕтзХр╖Э ╘Й╩С┼Б спй▌Е█╡ сжесЫНсмбспХ спй▌Е спХ█╡ )-1 сЕХ┼БсХ╜ ┼Ф┼Фси▒сХ╜ сБ╜─НтзБ сЩ╣ спй█╡ сФНтлн}сБ╜┼Э ─Юс▒╜}сБ╜со╣ ╔БреТтж╜ с│Стк╡со╣ с╡▓ сл╡сЦТ┼Э█╡ ▌ЕсЧн ▌Ер╖Щ сВКтиЖсоЭр▓╜ сКетЗ╡сиХс╕й сйНс╕бa спй▌Е

81 6'*V рзН▄╛рйЩрж╣▀Й раВ╥Лрв│ 4%(T сйХр╕Ссп▓сижсБ╣соб ╓е см╡ тйес░Н╩нс╕б тЕ╛ тлнсо╣ тлнсо╣р╖Э aс▓нсоЭр╗С тиЖтме ╓Е тВЙр▓бсо╣ тлнсо╣р╖Э сж┐рв▒┼Б спй▌Е с▒╜ тВЙ тлнсо╣█╡ ╓е см╡ спЭси▒сХ╜ спЭ сз▓спЭe сйХр▓ЩсоЭр╗С сйХр╕Ссп▓сижсБ╣си▒ тАл тж╜▌бтАмсЧн}скб 4%(Tси▒ тАл тж╜▌бтАмспЭсБ╣с▒вспЩ тАл╫ЭтАмсо╣a спХр╡ЙсиХс▓н ▌Е с▒╜ тВЙ тлнсо╣█╡ ╓е см╡ спЭси▒сХ╜ спЭ╩нс╕б спЭe сйХр▓ЩсоЭр╗С 4%(T }╓▒ со╣ ╟НтДХтк╡скб сКй┼ЕтЩХтК╣си▒ тАл тж╜▌бтАмс╡Эс▒╜р▓╜ тлнсо╣a с╡ЭтЖ╜рб╣сий▌Е спХ тлнсо╣си▒сХ╜ сйХр╕Ссп▓сиж сБ╣ ╟НсЦТсм▒реЕсоб 4%(T█╡ тк╣─Юси▒ тК╣с╡▓рб╜ }╓▒спХ сжетАл▄йтАмрпЭ ─Юс▒╜т░ТсФНтлнт░Ттк╣─Юсое р╝Йрв▒

Happiness for All, with Global KOICA

- 42 -

}сБ╜ ┼Э спХсЫй

р╝Йрв▒р╖Э снетж╜ тгйснеспй█╡ сФЧ 1PTU }сБ╜со╣с▒╜р╖Э снетж╜ 6/ сФНр╛ХтЕ╛с░Ж сЕХ┼БсХ╜

сжесмСр╖Х█╡ сБ╜с▒ер╝Ктв╜р╖Э со╣сБЩтж╜▌Е█╡ ▀Сси▒ тзКсо╣тж╣сйб▌Е рй▒тж╜ спХр▒Нтж╜ ╔бр▓╜сГн р╝Ктв╜со╣ тзЦсЭНсоб сКй┼ЕтЩХтК╣си▒ спйсоЭр╗С спХ█╡ 1PTU ╔бр▓╜сГн р╝Ктв╜скб 4%(T р╝Йрв▒си▒ тзХтАл▌ЪтАм тж╜▌Е█╡ ├дсое vс│Стж╣сйб▌Е 6/ G 4%(T сйХр╕Ссп▓сижсБ╣со╣ с▒╜ тВЙ тлнсо╣█╡ ╓е см╡ спЭси▒сХ╜ спЭ╩нс╕б сйХр▓ЩсоЭр╗С спХржнсо╣ тлнсо╣█╡ сЬ╛р░ксжйсЕХскб сйвсз▓т░Тс╕бсЧоaтАл╫о тж╜▄ЖтАмсижт░ТсФНр╕ктк╡ сБ░ тШБс╕бтлКта▒тк╡скб a р╛еси▒ тАл тж╜▌бтАмс╡Эс▒╜скб сЬ╛сЩ╣скб снесФ╛си▒ тАл тж╜▌бтАмс╡Эс▒╜р╖Э с╡▓сЭНсоЭр▓╜ спХр╡ЙсиХс▓н▌Е с▒╜ тВЙ тлнсо╣ си▒сХ╜█╡ ╟Чс╡Эр╕Э сиз█╡ сФЧсоб р╝ЙреБ спЩeсо╣ ╩СсЕЩ╟нр╕НрпЭ█╡ ├дспХ vс│Срб╣сийсоЭр╗С спХскб ┼б р▓Йтж╣сйН сжйс▒етж╣┼Б тИКсЗетж╣р╗С сйвсз▓a спй█╡ сЬ╛тгйси▒ тАл тж╜▌бтАмс▒▓╔ЭспХ смСр╕Н р╝Йрв▒си▒├н сЕХ с░Жрб╣сиХсзЭ тж╜▌Е█╡ ├дси▒ сйХр╕Ссп▓сижсБ╣со╣ р╝ЙреБ ╟НсЦТсм▒реЕспХ ра║со╣тж╣сйб▌Е рй▒тж╜ сКй┼Е р╛Щ с▒╜█╡ с╕бсВК SVSBM BSFBT си▒сХ╜ ▐╡смТ сЭНbтж╣р╗С тЬЪтпй сЧнсп▓тАл╫отАмсБЭ┼Э тАл╫отАмс╕бр╖Э сЧнсоБтж╣с╕б сжлсоб тАл╫отАмсЗб ╔Щр╕Н┼Б ╔ЩреЕсо╣ aс│Тсо╣ сКй┼Е┼Э ╩Ссжеa р╣ЕсмС сЭНbтж╣▌Е█╡ ├дспХ vс│Срб╣сий ▌Е ржСрпЭсХ╜ сЧнсп▓тАл╫отАмсБЭсо╣ сФ╛сФСсЦТ┼Э с╕бсВКси▒сХ╜со╣ сЩ╣спжсое с╕бсЧоaтАлтж╣▄ЖтАм├н с╖╛aсЬ╜тФЕ█╡ сВКсжйспХ р╕йр▓Йрб╣сиХсзЭ тж╜▌Е█╡ ▀Сси▒ со╣─НспХ р╝Йсжес▓н▌Е спХскб тзЙ╠╣ тАл╫отАмсЬ╛тгйси▒ тАл тж╜▌бтАмaтК╣ сФНсЬН р╛Щс▒╜скб сЬ╛р░ксЬ╜сЬЕтЦ╜ сйОр░кvтк╡си▒ тАл тж╜▌бтАмсЭНраеспй█╡ тАл╫ЭтАмсо╣a спХр╡ЙсиХс▓н▌Е ╙╣сжеa спХ тлнсо╣си▒сХ╜ сйХр╕Ссп▓сижсБ╣ ╟НсЦТсм▒реЕсоб сЬ╛сЩ╣скб снесФ╛соб с╕бсЧоaтАл} тж╜▄ЖтАмсБ╜сое снетж╜ тзЦ сЭНси▒ спй▌Е█╡ ├дсое vс│Стж╣сйб▌Е 6/ G ╓е см╡ спЭси▒сХ╜ спЭ сФНспХ спЭe сйХр╕Ссп▓сижсБ╣со╣ с▒╜ тВЙ тлнсо╣a }тЖ╜рб╣сийсоЭ р╗С спХ тлнсо╣си▒сХ╜ ╟НсЦТсм▒реЕсоб р╝Йрв▒р╖Э снетж╜ ┼БсмК┼Э спЭ▌ЕсмХ спЭ EFDFOU XPSL т░ТсФНтлн сЕХс░Жт░ТтДО╓ет░Т╞▒соВт░Тр╛Щтк╡си▒ тАл тж╜▌бтАмс╡Эс▒╜скб тзЙ╠╣ сЕХ├Хт░ТспЩ╟НсйОтж║си▒ тАл╫Э тзХ▌бтАмсо╣тж╣сйб ▌Е спХ тлнсо╣си▒сХ╜ сйХр╕Ссп▓сижсБ╣соб тИКсЗетпй сФ╛сФСс▒вспЩ ┼БсмКсое тВЮтЗ╜тж╣р╗С р╝ЙреБ с╕всижспХ спЭ▌ЕсмХ спЭспХ рб╣раер▓╛ тж╣█╡ ├дсоб сКе▌Й }рае╟О сР▒ сжетАл▄йтАмрпЭ сЦБс╕е╟Оси▒├нрае тзХтАлтж╣▌ЪтАм█╡ с╖к р╝ЙреБ ╟Оaa с╕вр╗Хтж╣┼Б спй█╡ с╡Эсл╡ тзХ─С┼Эс▒╜рпЭ█╡ ├дсое vс│Стж╣сйб▌Е сйХр╕Ссп▓сижсБ╣ соб тДО╓е сЭЕсижр╖Бсое qсЧнсЬ╜тФЕ█╡ ├д сйОсЬ╜ ╔бр▓╜сГн тВЙсм▒со╣ смСсЦБ┼Эс▒╜спесое тк╢спЩтж╣╩Срае тж╣сйб▌Е ╙╣сжеa ╞▒соВсоб сиХриБтж╜ с╕бсЧоaтАл} тж╜▄ЖтАмсБ╜р╝Ктв╜си▒ тАлтзХ▌бтАмсХ╜рае с▒ес▒всоЭр▓╜ ╔Щ с╡▓ сЭНси▒ спй▌Е█╡ ├д┼Э ╞▒соВ сжйси▒сХ╜со╣ сЦТтакреТспХ тзЙ╠╣ vс│Срб╣сий▌Е сЕХ├Х┼Э ┼бр▓Йтж╣сйН сйХр╕Ссп▓сижсБ╣соб сЕХ├Хсоб ╔Щ сп▒тДХр▓╜сЯЙ ╟нр╕НспХсп▒ р╝Ктв╜спХр╗С 4%(T тДХс▒╜си▒сХ╜█╡ сЕХ├Хси▒ тАл тж╜▌бтАмр╝Ктв╜a r├Хvтж╜ сФЧсо╣ тЖ╜тАлтк╡▌бтАмsр▓╜ ╔Щ сГ╡снеa тк╢тАлрб╣▌бтАмсиХсзЭ тж╜▌Е█╡ ▀Сси▒ ра║со╣тж╣сйб ▌Е р╕йс╕бр╕ксоЭр▓╜ ╓е спХтмесо╣ сЬ╜тАл▌бтАм█╡ сЛБр╖Х├н сЦТс░Жтж╣█╡ спЩ╟Нскб сп▓соб спЩ╟НспХра║┼Э сКй┼Есо╣ сФв┼б┼б─ер╖Э ┼Бр▓ЕтзХсзЭ тзБ тжесл╡сЦТспХ тзЙ╠╣ vс│Срб╣сий▌Е 6/ G тиЖтме 4%(T сйХр╕Ссп▓сижсБ╣соб ╓е см╡ спЭси▒сХ╜ спЭ╩нс╕б с╕бсЧорб╣┼Б тбН┼ес▒вспЩ

Happiness for All, with Global KOICA

- 43 -

}сБ╜ ┼Э спХсЫй

р╝Йрв▒р╖Э снетж╜ тгйснеспй█╡ сФЧ 1PTU }сБ╜со╣с▒╜р╖Э снетж╜ 6/ сФНр╛ХтЕ╛с░Ж сЕХ┼БсХ╜

─Юс▒╜сЦТс░Ж ╟Ос▒╜р╛ХсйО┼Э zсоб ├СсЬ╜─Юс▒╜с▒╢тВж р╛Щс▒╜ спЩтеерпЭ}сБ╜┼Э сФСсижтк╡со╣ с╡Эс▒╜р▓╜ с▒╜ тВЙ тлнсо╣р╖Э aс╕й сййс▒╢спХр╗С с▒╜ тВЙ тлнсо╣си▒сХ╜█╡ ┼Этж║т░Т╩СсЪБт░Тс╕бсЬ╛┼ЦсоБт░ТсйОр░к╟Н тЗ╢┼Э zсоб спХтзксЩ╣▌Й┼Э с╕бсЧоaтАл} тж╜▄ЖтАмсБ╜ тАл▌НтАмсЦТсое снетж╜ ╔бр▓╜сГн тЭнтЬЩ╒йсЭОси▒ тАл╫Э тж╜▌бтАм со╣р╖Э ╓е см╡ си▒сХ╜ спЭ сз▓спЭe тЬЪсДетж╜ сФвтлКси▒ тГ╣тж╜ ╟Оa сжетеер╕НтЛХ ╟О a -%$T --%$T 4*%4со╣ тАл▄йтАмс╖й сБ░ с╡▓сЧнрд╛╟О .JEEMF *ODPNF $PVOUSJFT .*$T спХ тГ╣тж╜ сЦЩсЗб┼Эс▒╜си▒ тАл╫Э тж╜▌бтАмсо╣р╖Э ╓е см╡ спЭси▒сХ╜ спЭ сз▓спЭe с╕е тзктзБ сййс▒╢спХ▌Е с▒╜ тВЙ тлнсо╣со╣ р╕йс╕бр╕к ╘БспЩ ╓е см╡ спЭси▒█╡ спЩ╟н }сБ╜си▒ тАл тж╜▌бтАм╟нр╕Н }сБ╜╟н ╔Щр╕Н┼Б ╔бр▓╜сГн ├СсГе╒нсЬЕси▒ тАл тж╜▌бтАмс╡Эс▒╜р╖Э с╡▓сЭНсоЭр▓╜ тАл╫ЭтАмсо╣a спХ р╡ЙсиХс╕й ├дспХ▌Е с▒╜ тВЙ тлнсо╣█╡ ╓е см╡ спЭси▒сХ╜ спЭ╩нс╕б сйХр╕Н├н рб╣█╡▀С спХ ржнсо╣ тлнсо╣ с╡Эс▒╜█╡ с╕бсЧоaтАлрае тж╜▄ЖтАмсЬ╜скб спЩр╢╣ ├Ср╢╣с╕б IVNBO TFUUMFNFOUT с╕бсЧоa тАл тж╜▄ЖтАм╞▒тШЦ тк╡тж║с▒╜тгй┼Э та▒╩Ср╛Эсое тбНтзЙтж╜ с╕бсЧоaтАл тж╜▄ЖтАмсЧнсКескб сФ╛сФС ╩СтмесДбтк╡скб с░Н тзХснети╣ qсЧнр▓╜ ╟НсЦТрб╣сиХ спй▌Е ╓е см╡ спЭси▒сХ╜ спЭ сФНспХси▒ сйХр╕Х с▒╜ тВЙ тлнсо╣ р╖Э р╕йс╕бр╕ксоЭр▓╜ сйХр╕Ссп▓сижсБ╣соб ╩Х тАл╫ЭтАмсо╣р╖Э р╕йр╛Хр╕Нтж╣├н рб╣█╡▀С р╕йс╕бр╕к тлнсо╣█╡ тАлсз▓▌бтАм ┼Э сБ╡▌Ет░ТсФСр╕Эт░ТсФ╛р╛Э▌Есз▓сЦТ сФНтлнтакреТт░Тсз▓сЦТтакреТт░ТсйНсЦТ╟нтж╜vтк╡скб zсоб такреТ╟н тЕкс╕е сЗес░всВКс╕бт░ТсЗес░в тме тактк╡╟НтЗ╢т░Т╘Х╟Нс▒в тактк╡тЕкс╕ет░ТсГ╢┼Э ├СсГе╒нсЬЕсо╣ с╡Эс▒╜р╖Э с╡▓сЭНсоЭр▓╜ спХр╡ЙсиХс╕й сййс▒╢спХ▌Е сйХр╕Ссп▓сижсБ╣соб тЕ╛ тлнсо╣ тлнсо╣ ╘ХсмКсое сБ╡тФ╢соЭр▓╜ ╓е см╡ спХс▒е╩нс╕б 6/ сФНр╛ХтЕ╛с░Жси▒├н сЕХ┼БсХ╜р╖Э с▒╜тЗ╜тзБ сййс▒╢спХ▌Е 6/ D спХскб zсоб 4%(T сйХр╕Ссп▓сижсБ╣со╣ тАл╫ЭтАмсо╣█╡ 6/ )-1си▒сХ╜ тАл╫ЭтАмсо╣рб╜ с╡Эс▒╜ сБ░ ┼Эс▒╢спХ сФв тАл▌ЪтАмсЗбсЗе тпВсФНтж╣▌Е█╡ ├дсое сжн сЩ╣ спйсоЭр╗С спХ█╡ ┼И 4%(Tскб 1PTU }сБ╜р╝Ктв╜ сЩ╣р╕Ю тАл╫ЭтАмсо╣a соБсФНтж╜ ┼Эс▒╢сое aс╕б┼Б спХр╡ЙсиХс╕б┼Б спй▌Е█╡ ├дсое сЕХсйНс╡Э█╡ ├дспХрпЭ тзБ сЩ╣ спй▌Е ржСрпЭсХ╜ сж┐си▒сХ╜ сиЩ╔ктж╜ сБ╡скб zспХ ╓е см╡р▓╜ ─етлорб╜ сйХр╕Ссп▓сижсБ╣ тлн со╣си▒сХ╜сЗбтЦС█╡ 1PTU }сБ╜р╝Ктв╜скб 4%(T тАл╫ЭтАмсо╣a тШЦтзКрб╣сиХ спХр╡ЙсиХс╕б█╡ ├дсоб сп▒сйСсЬЕр▒НсмХ тйесФвсоЭр▓╜ сЕХсйНс╕е▌Е

3RVW ╤С▀ЛрйЕркВ▄┤ риер│б ╓Ъ 81 рвПтАл▐ЧтАмрнйрйг раВ╥Лрв│ .%(Tси▒ тАл тж╜▌бтАм6/ сФНр╛ХтЕ╛с░Ж сЕХ┼БсХ╜█╡ сФйтГ╜╓е с▒╢сФвтлнсо╣ .JMMFOOJVN 4VNNJU со╣ тмесЧос│СтК╣ 'PMMPX VQ UP UIF 0VUDPNF PG UIF .JMMFOOJVN 4VNNJU р▓╜сЯЙ тзХр╕й ▌Е см╡си▒ сйХр╕Н█╡ 6/ тЕ╛тлнси▒сХ╜ сЕХ┼Брб╣┼Б спй▌Е сййр╖Э реЕсиХ 6/ сФНр╛ХтЕ╛с░Жсоб rсзЮсЧо с╕бтФЕ╩С .%(T тАл▌НтАмсЦТсое снетж╜ ▌Й─С ,FFQJOH UIF 1SPNJTF 6OJUFE UP "DIJFWF

Happiness for All, with Global KOICA

- 44 -

}сБ╜ ┼Э спХсЫй

р╝Йрв▒р╖Э снетж╜ тгйснеспй█╡ сФЧ 1PTU }сБ╜со╣с▒╜р╖Э снетж╜ 6/ сФНр╛ХтЕ╛с░Ж сЕХ┼БсХ╜

UIF .JMMFOOJVN %FWFMPQNFOU (PBMT рпЭ█╡ с▒╜р╝Ксо╣ сЕХ┼БсХ╜р╖Э ╓е см╡ 6/ тЕ╛тлнси▒ с▒╜тЗ╜тж╣сйН .%(T спХтзксЦТ┼Эси▒ тАл тзХ▌бтАмсЕХ┼Бтж╣сйб▌Е тЬЪтпй спХ сЕХ┼БсХ╜си▒сХ╜ сФНр╛Х тЕ╛с░Жсоб ╓е╩нс╕б .%(Tр╖Э тАл▌НтАмсЦТтж╣╩С снетж╜ с░Нсм▒ ра║см▒со╣ тАл╫ЩтАмр▓ЖспХ ▐╡смТ тжесл╡тж╣▌Е █╡ ├д┼Э тзЙ╠╣ см▒с│Ссо╣ сз▓с▒вс╖╛тАл ▌бтАмсР▒ сжетАл▄йтАмрпЭ с╕йс▒втиЖсФвсое снетж╜ тЭнр╕НсЦБсиЩ┼Э сжетУНрпЭ тзкра║vр▓Ъсо╣ с╡▓сл╡сЦТ┼Э 6/ }сБ╜тй▓р▓ЖтбНр▒Э %FWFMPQNFOU $PPQFSBUJPO 'PSVN %$' со╣ сйОтзБсое vс│Стж╣сйб▌Е 6/ спХтме 6/ сФНр╛ХтЕ╛с░Жсоб ╓е┼Э ╓еси▒ сйХр╕С тЕ╛тлнси▒ с▒╜тЗ╜тж╜ сЕХ┼БсХ╜си▒сХ╜ сйСсЧо тж╣сйН s.%(T спХтзксЦТ┼Эсо╣ aсЧотк╡ с╕бсЧорб╣┼Б тбН┼ес▒вспЩ сЦТс░Жсое снетж╜ сЦБтФ╛┼Э ╓е спХтмесо╣ 6/ }сБ╜со╣с▒╜р╖Э сБ╜с▒есЬ╜тФЕ╩С снетж╜ с╡Эс▒╜ "DDFMFSBUJOH 1SPHSFTT UPXBSET UIF .JMMFOOJVN %FWFMPQNFOU (PBMT 0QUJPOT GPS 4VTUBJOFE BOE *ODMVTJWF (SPXUI BOE *TTVFT GPS "EWBODJOH UIF 6OJUFE /BUJPOT %FWFMPQNFOU "HFOEB CFZPOE рпЭ█╡ с╡Эс▒╜р╖Э сБ╣сЕЦтж╣сйН сФНсмКтж╣сйб▌Е ╓есо╣ сЕХ┼БсХ╜си▒сХ╜█╡ .%(T тАл▌НтАмсЦТтйетлК┼Э тзЙ╠╣ .%(T тАл▌НтАмсЦТсое снетж╜ тзХ─С┼Эс▒╜р▓╜сЯЙ }рае╟Оси▒сХ╜со╣ сжйс▒╢с▒вспХ┼Б ┼Цс▒╢тж╣р╗С тбН┼ес▒вспЩ сЦТс░ЖспХ vс│Срб╣сий▌Е спХ сЕХ┼БсХ╜си▒ █╡ (PBM сое с╡▓сЭНсоЭр▓╜ тж╜ ╔бр▓╜сГн тЭнтЬЩ╒йсЭОсо╣ vтк╡со╣ тжесл╡сЦТ┼Э ╓е спХтмесо╣ }сБ╜со╣с▒╜си▒ тАл тж╜▌бтАмс╡Эсл╡ с▒ер░Цси▒ тАл тж╜▌бтАм╟НсФвспХ тбНтзЙрб╣сий▌Е 6/ спХскб сКе╞▒тж╣сйН ╓е сЕХ┼БсХ╜си▒сХ╜ сФНр╛ХтЕ╛с░Жсоб ╓е сЕХ┼БсХ╜си▒ тбНтзЙрб╜ с╡Эсл╡╘Х смКсое с╡Эр▓╜ тк╢спЩтж╣р╗ХсХ╜ ╓е тЕйси▒ сЦЕр╕Юрб╜ 6/ сп▓сижсБ╣со╣ тЖ╜тЕй тШЦтзКсЕХ┼БсХ╜си▒сХ╜ тАл╫ЭтАмсо╣тж╣┼Б спй█╡ 1PTU }сБ╜со╣с▒╜ сЩ╣р╕Юси▒ тАл тж╜▌бтАмсВКтиЖсЦТсое тбНтзЙтж╣сйб▌Е с╖к сФН тлнт░Т─Юс▒╜т░Ттк╣─Ют░Ттактк╡скб сжйсЕХсо╣ тАлтзЦ ▌бтАмсЭНтЗ╢сое сЧн}тж╣сйб▌Е рй▒тж╜ .%(Tсо╣ сФНтлн }сБ╜ р╝Ктв╜р╖Э тАл▌НтАмсЦТтж╣╩С снетж╜ тбН┼ес▒вспЩ ─Юс▒╜сЦТс░Жсое тЕкс╕етзБ ├дсое тАл╫ЭтАмсо╣тж╣р╗ХсХ╜ тЬЪтпй ┼БсмКтВЮтЗ╜си▒ тЕйс▒▒сое рв▒сий▌Е тж╜таЩ сФНр╛ХтЕ╛с░Жсоб ┼ЦсйН╟Осо╣ см▒с│С╚╜р╝Й с╖╛aр╖Э тЕк╟Нтж╣ р╗ХсХ╜ }сБ╜сое снетж╜ ╔бр▓╜сГн тЭнтЬЩ╒йсЭО vтк╡р╖Э снетж╜ ╟Оaс▒╢тВжсо╣ спЭ┼бсЦТсое vс│Стж╣сйб ▌Е ╙╣сжеa 4%(Tскб 1PTU }сБ╜со╣с▒╜ сЩ╣р╕Ю┼Эс▒╢ eсо╣ спЭ┼бсЦТ сйОсЬ╜ vс│Стж╣сйб ▌Е 6/ 6/ сФНр╛ХтЕ╛с░Жсоб спХскб zсоб ┼Эс▒╢сое ├СтД▒ ╓е см╡со╣ 6/ тЕ╛тлнр╖Э сж┐рв▒┼Б rр╝Йрв▒ р╖Э снетж╜ тгйснеспй█╡ сФЧ .%(T спХтзксЦТ┼Эсо╣ aсЧотк╡скб ╓е спХтмесо╣ 6/ }сБ╜со╣с▒╜ со╣ сБ╜с▒е " -JGF PG %JHOJUZ GPS "MM "DDFMFSBUJOH 1SPHSFTT UPXBSET UIF .JMMFOOJVN %FWFMPQNFOU (PBMT BOE "EWBODJOH UIF 6OJUFE /BUJPOT %FWFMPQNFOU "HFOEB CFZPOE спХрпЭ█╡ с╡Эс▒╜со╣ .%(T спХтзксЦТ┼Э сЕХ┼БсХ╜р╖Э

Happiness for All, with Global KOICA

- 45 -

}сБ╜ ┼Э спХсЫй

р╝Йрв▒р╖Э снетж╜ тгйснеспй█╡ сФЧ 1PTU }сБ╜со╣с▒╜р╖Э снетж╜ 6/ сФНр╛ХтЕ╛с░Ж сЕХ┼БсХ╜

сБ╜тв╜тж╣сйб▌Е 6/ B спХ сЕХ┼БсХ╜со╣ с▒╜р╝Кси▒сХ╜ сжн сЩ╣ спйреРспХ ╔йсГй сФНр╛ХтЕ╛с░Ж сЕХ┼БсХ╜█╡ спХс▒есЗбтЦС с╕бсЧорб╣сиХскЕ▐╣ .%(T сЦТ┼ЭтАл╫ЭтАмсо╣р╖Э сБ╡тФ╢соЭр▓╜ 6/ сп▓сижсБ╣┼Э )-1со╣ тАл╫ЭтАмсо╣скб zсоб 1PTU }сБ╜со╣с▒╜си▒ тАлтЖ╜ тж╜▌бтАм╔Эсо╣ тАл╫ЭтАмсо╣р╖Э р╝Йрв▒ сБ╣сйвтж╜ ─С ┼ЭрпЭ тзБ сЩ╣ спй▌Е 6/ сФНр╛ХтЕ╛с░Жси▒ со╣тж╣р╗Х спХ сЕХ┼БсХ╜█╡ тЕ╛ р╕нр╗жсо╣ со╣─НспХ с╕вс▒▓ с▒всоЭр▓╜ сБ╣сйврб╜ ─С┼ЭспХ╩Срае тж╣▌Е 1PTU ,PSFB 'PSVN ╔йсГйси▒ сБ╜ тв╜рб╜ сФНр╛ХтЕ╛с░Ж сЕХ┼БсХ╜█╡ тзХр╕й▌Е 6/ тЕ╛тлнси▒ сЕХ┼Брб╣█╡ .%(T спХтзксЦТ┼Э сЕХ┼БсХ╜ сЬ╜р╕Нс╖йсо╣ спЭсЗбспХ╩Срае тж╣с╕бр╕н тЬЪтпй ╟О╘Хси▒сХ╜█╡ r1PTU }сБ╜со╣с▒╜р╖Э снетж╜ 6/ сФНр╛ХтЕ╛с░Ж сЕХ┼БсХ╜sр▓╜ сжнр▓Ес╕б┼Б спй▌Е спХ сЕХ┼БсХ╜си▒сХ╜ сФНр╛ХтЕ╛с░Жсоб .%(T спХтзксоб р╕псоб сЗбсЗеси▒сХ╜ сЦТ┼Эр╖Э сЕХспХ┼Б спйсоЭр╗С спХ█╡ тбН┼ес▒в сЦТс░Ж спЭ▌ЕсмХ спЭсп▒р╕Н сФНтлнсЕХс░Ж тжесЩ╣сЗесзЭси▒ тАл тж╜▌бтАмс░Нсм▒сЗесВС ╟Ос▒╜с▒╢ тК╣с▒в тк╣─Ю тиЖсФвсое снетж╜ с▒╢тК╣с▒в со╣с╕б vтк╡скб zсоб сЗбсЗесо╣ с▒╢тВж рй▒█╡ теер▓╜╔Щр░Йсо╣ ╔ос▒╢с▒в тмЙ┼ЭрпЭ тзБ сЩ╣ спйсоЭр╗С спХ█╡ ╓е╩нс╕бсо╣ .%(T тАл▌НтАмсЦТсое снетзХ с╕бсЧорб╣сиХ сзЭ тж╜▌Е┼Б сЕХ┼Б спй▌Е спХскб тзЙ╠╣ сФНр╛ХтЕ╛с░Жсоб .%(T тАл▌НтАмсЦТ┼Эс▒╢си▒сХ╜ тЖ╜сКй}рае╟О┼Э ╘Хр╢║╟О ╔Щр╕Н┼Б сЧн╚╜р╝Й раесХ╜с╕бсйО┼Э zсоб тЙЙсзЮ╟Оси▒ тАл тж╜▌бтАмс╕бсм▒сое vтк╡тзБ ├д┼Э сйН сЦТ сжера║ тАл╫ЩтАмспЩ с░ЖсзБспЩ┼Э zсоб тЙЙсзЮтКЦси▒ тАлтЬЪ тж╜▌бтАмсДетж╜ ┼бсЭНсое тЕк╟Нтж╣сйб▌Е рй▒тж╜ (PBM ┼Э (PBM ┼Э zсоб р╝Ктв╜█╡ ╓е╩нс╕б р╝Ктв╜тК╣ тАл▌НтАмсЦТсое снетзХ ▐╡смТ тАл╫ЩтАмр▓ЖтзХсзЭ тзБ ├дсое vс│Стж╣р╗ХсХ╜ тЬЪтпй (PBM со╣ тк╣─Юс╕бсЧоaтАл▄ЖтАмсЦТсоб тЖ╜╔Эсо╣ ╩СтмесДбтк╡со╣ сйвтиЖ си▒ со╣тзХ сЭНbтж╜ снети╣сЩ╣с╡бси▒ спй▌Е┼Б тзБ сЩ╣ спйсоЭр╗С (PBM со╣ ╔бр▓╜сГн тЭнтЬЩ╒йсЭОсоб ┼ЦсйН╟Осо╣ см▒с│Сс╕бсм▒ qсЧнр▓╜ спЩтж╣сйН ╔Щ сЦТ┼Эa ╩СтАлтК╣▌бтАмсЕХ▌Е ╘Псоб сЩ╣с╡бси▒ р║Щр╛Хр╖Х┼Б спй▌Е█╡ ├дсое тк╢спЩтж╣сйб▌Е спХр╖Э снетзХ сФНр╛ХтЕ╛с░Жсоб тиЖтме 6/ тлнсм▒╟ОреЕсо╣ ╔бр▓╜сГн сБ░ ╟ОaтВЙсм▒си▒сХ╜со╣ с░Нсм▒с│СтАл ▌НтАмтЕкс╕есое vтк╡тж╣╩С снетж╜ сВКсжйсоЭр▓╜сЯЙ 6/ тЭнтЬЩ╒йсЭО ╩С╔й 6OJUFE /BUJPOT 1BSUOFSTIJQ 'BDJMJUZ со╣ сЦЕр╕Юсое с▒╜сжйтж╣сйб▌Е 6/ B ╓ерае сФНр╛ХтЕ╛с░Ж сЕХ┼БсХ╜█╡ .%(T }сБ╜тАл▌ЪтАмсЬ╜си▒█╡ с╡Эр╝КсБ╝с╕б р╝Ьтж╣сйб▐╣ сЗйтакреТ тк╣─Юр╛Щс▒╜ спЩ╟НспХра║ тДО╓е┼БсмК сЗес░в реТси▒ тАл тж╜▌бтАм┼Эс▒╜a 1PTU }сБ╜со╣с▒╜си▒ тбНтзЙрб╣сиХсзЭ тж╜▌Е█╡ ├дсое vс│Стж╣┼Б спй▌Е рй▒тж╜ сФйр▓╜смХ с╕бсЧоaтАл} тж╜▄ЖтАмсБ╜со╣с▒╜р╖Э тШБ тАл▌бтАмр▓╜ ╓е╩нс╕б сЦЩ─е сКй┼Есое тЩХтК╣тж╣┼Б р╝Йрв▒си▒├н aтАлтк╣ тж╜▄ЖтАм─ЮсЕХткЩскб сФНтлнс▒в тбН смКсЦТ┼Э ─Юс▒╜╩Стлнр╖Э тЕкс╕етж╣сйН тгйснеспй┼Б тпНр╕╛спХ спй█╡ сФЧсо╣ ╟нр╕Нр╖Э сЭЕтйесЬ╜тФН сЩ╣ спй раер▓╛ тзХсзЭтж╜▌Е█╡ ├дсое сЕХсйНс╡Э┼Б спй▌Е 6/ B спХр╖Э снетзХ сФНр╛ХтЕ╛с░Жсоб тлнсм▒ ╟ОреЕспХ ▌Есон┼Э zсоб тАл ▌бтАмсКнржКсЙ╡р▓╛си▒ тзКсо╣тзБ ├дсое тЕк╟Нтж╣сйб▌Е

Happiness for All, with Global KOICA

- 46 -

}сБ╜ ┼Э спХсЫй

р╝Йрв▒р╖Э снетж╜ тгйснеспй█╡ сФЧ 1PTU }сБ╜со╣с▒╜р╖Э снетж╜ 6/ сФНр╛ХтЕ╛с░Ж сЕХ┼БсХ╜

#PY 6/ сФНр╛ХтЕ╛с░Ж сЕХ┼БсХ╜ т┐▒ с╕бсЧоaтАл} тж╜▄ЖтАмсБ╜со╣с▒╜ сЭЕтйесое снетж╜ тАл ▌бтАмсКнржКсЙ╡р▓╛ сЗбсЗе сБ╜тИн т░Т " GBS SFBDIJOH WJTJPO PG UIF GVUVSF GJSNMZ BODIPSFE JO IVNBO SJHIUT BOE VOJWFSTBMMZ BDDFQUFE WBMVFT BOE QSJODJQMFT JODMVEJOH UIPTF FODBQTVMBUFE JO UIF $IBSUFS UIF 6OJWFSTBM %FDMBSBUJPO PG )VNBO 3JHIUT BOE UIF .JMMFOOJVN %FDMBSBUJPO т░Т" TFU PG DPODJTF HPBMT BOE UBSHFUT BJNFE BU SFBMJ[JOH UIF QSJPSJUJFT PG UIF BHFOEB т░Т" HMPCBM QBSUOFSTIJQ GPS EFWFMPQNFOU UP NPCJMJ[F NFBOT PG JNQMFNFOUBUJPO т░Т " QBSUJDJQBUPSZ NPOJUPSJOH GSBNFXPSL GPS USBDLJOH QSPHSFTT BOE NVUVBM BDDPVOUBCJMJUZ NFDIBOJTNT GPS BMM TUBLFIPMEFST тЗ╜тГ╣ 6/ B

спХскб тзЙ╠╣ ╔йсГй сЕХ┼БсХ╜█╡ ╓е спХтмесо╣ }сБ╜со╣с▒╜р╖Э снетж╜ сФйр▓╜смХ сКес▒есо╣ тзЦсЭНсл╡ сЧнр╖Э ▌Есон┼Э zспХ с▒╜сЬ╜тж╣сйб▌Е

#PY 6/ сФНр╛ХтЕ╛с░Ж сЕХ┼БсХ╜ т┐▒ ╓е спХтмесо╣ }сБ╜со╣с▒╜р╖Э снетж╜ сФйр▓╜смХ сКес▒есо╣ тзЦсЭН сл╡сЧн сЗбсЗе сБ╜тИн т░Т 6 OJWFSTBMJUZ UP NPCJMJ[F BMM EFWFMPQFE BOE EFWFMPQJOH DPVOUSJFT BOE MFBWF OP POF CFIJOE т░Т 4 VTUBJOBCMF EFWFMPQNFOU UP UBDLMF UIF JOUFSMJOLFE DIBMMFOHFT GBDJOH UIF XPSME JODMVEJOH B DMFBS GPDVT PO FOEJOH FYUSFNF QPWFSUZ JO BMM JUT GPSNT т░Т * ODMVTJWF FDPOPNJD USBOTGPSNBUJPOT FOTVSJOH EFDFOU KPCT CBDLFE CZ TVTUBJOBCMF UFDIOPMPHJFT UP TIJGU UP TVTUBJOBCMF QBUUFSOT PG DPOTVNQUJPO BOE QSPEVDUJPO т░Т 1 FBDF BOE (PWFSOBODF BT LFZ PVUDPNFT BOE FOBCMFST PG EFWFMPQNFOU т░Т " OFX HMPCBM QBSUOFSTIJQ SFDPHOJ[JOH TIBSFE JOUFSFTUT EJGGFSFOU OFFET BOE NVUVBM SFTQPOTJCJMJUJFT UP FOTVSF DPNNJUNFOU UP BOE NFBOT PG JNQMFNFOUJOH UIF OFX WJTJPO т░Т # FJOH GJS GPS QVSQPTF UP FOTVSF UIBU UIF JOUFSOBUJPOBM DPNNVOJUZ JT FRVJQQFE XJUI UIF SJHIU JOTUJUVUJPOT BOE UPPMT GPS BEESFTTJOH UIF DIBMMFOHFT PG JNQMFNFOUJOH UIF TVTUBJOBCMF EFWFMPQNFOU BHFOEB BU UIF OBUJPOBM MFWFM тЗ╜тГ╣ 6/ B

Happiness for All, with Global KOICA

- 47 -

}сБ╜ ┼Э спХсЫй

р╝Йрв▒р╖Э снетж╜ тгйснеспй█╡ сФЧ 1PTU }сБ╜со╣с▒╜р╖Э снетж╜ 6/ сФНр╛ХтЕ╛с░Ж сЕХ┼БсХ╜

6/ сФНр╛ХтЕ╛с░Ж сЕХ┼БсХ╜си▒ со╣тж╣р╗Х ╟Ос▒╜сФНтлн█╡ спХр▒Нтж╜ сКнржКсЙ╡р▓╛ сБ░ сКес▒есое ╩СсБ╣соЭ р▓╜ тж╣сйН 1PTU }сБ╜со╣с▒╜си▒ ▌Есон┼Э zсоб ╘ХсмКсое тжесЩ╣с▒всоЭр▓╜ тбНтзЙтж╣сйНсзЭ тзБ ├дспХ▌Е 6/ B ╦Н р╝ЙреБ с│жр╢╣со╣ сКй┼ЕтЩХтК╣ &SBEJDBUF QPWFSUZ JO BMM JUT GPSNT

╦Н сВСс▒╜скб сЗйтакреТ qсЧн 5BDLMF FYDMVTJPO BOE JOFRVBMJUZ

╦Н сйНсЦТ┼Э сЧн╓бсо╣ ╟нтж╜vтк╡ &NQPXFS XPNFO BOE HJSMT

╦Н сз▓с╕йсо╣ ╞▒соВ┼Э таксФ╛╞▒соВ с▒╜┼Ц 1SPWJEF RVBMJUZ FEVDBUJPO BOE MJGFMPOH MFBSOJOH

╦Н сЕХ├Хс╖╛с╕е *NQSPWF IFBMUI

╦Н ╩СтмесДбтк╡ р╛Щс▒╜ "EESFTT DMJNBUF DIBOHF

╦Н тк╣─Юр╛Щс▒╜ "EESFTT FOWJSPONFOUBM DIBMMFOHFT

╦Н тбН┼ес▒вспХ┼Б с╕бсЧоaтАл тж╜▄ЖтАмсЦТс░Ж┼Э спЭ▌ЕсмХ спЭсп▒р╕Н тЕкс╕е 1SPNPUF JODMVTJWF BOE TVTUBJOBCMF HSPXUI BOE EFDFOU FNQMPZNFOU

╦Н ╩Ссжескб сйвсз▓сЭЕс│С с│жсЬ╛ &OE IVOHFS BOE NBMOVUSJUJPO

╦Н спЩ╟НспХра║ ┼бр▓Й р╛Щс▒╜ "EESFTT EFNPHSBQIJD DIBMMFOHFT

╦Н спХсБЭсо╣ ╔ос▒╢с▒в ╩СсйН vтк╡ &OIBODF UIF QPTJUJWF DPOUSJCVUJPO PG NJHSBOUT

╦Н раесЬ╜тк╡си▒ ┼бтж╜ раес▒е┼Эс▒╜ .FFU UIF DIBMMFOHFT PG VSCBOJ[BUJPO

╦Н сГ╢┼Э сжйс▒╢рб╜ с▒╜раеси▒ ╩СсБ╣тж╜ тактк╡скб тмЙ┼Эс▒в ├СсГе╒нсЬЕ ╟НтЗ╢ #VJME QFBDF BOE FGGFDUJWF HPWFSOBODF CBTFE PO UIF SVMF PG MBX BOE TPVOE JOTUJUVUJPOT

╦Н сДбтк╡рб╜ ╔бр▓╜сГн тЭнтЬЩ╒йсЭО с░Жр▓Е 'PTUFS B SFOFXFE HMPCBM QBSUOFSTIJQ

╦Н ╟Ос▒╜}сБ╜тй▓р▓Ж теер▒йспесмнтУН vтк╡ 4USFOHUIFO UIF JOUFSOBUJPOBM EFWFMPQNFOU DPPQFSBUJPO GSBNFXPSL

спХ с╡▓ тЬЪтпй ╟Ос▒╜}сБ╜тй▓р▓Ж теер▒йспесмнтУН vтк╡р╖Э снетзХ спХсБЩ 6/ тЕ╛тлнси▒ со╣тзХ ╩С сЩ╣р╕Ю рб╜ ┼Бсне╔к с▒╢тК╣ тбНр▒Э )JHI -FWFM 1PMJUJDBM 'PSVN со╣ сйОтзБспХ тиЖтме сЕХтаЩс▒вспХр╗С с╕бсЧоaтАл} тж╜▄ЖтАмсБ╜со╣с▒╜со╣ с│СсоЙ спЭ┼бсЦТ тиЖсФв спХтзк сБ░ р╝ЙтАлтЦС▄йтАмр╕всое тЖ╜сФвсне ▌Й─есо╣ с▒╢тК╣с▒в с╕бс╕бр╖Э сБ╡тФ╢соЭр▓╜ сЦТ┼Цс▒всоЭр▓╜ спХ╥н сЩ╣ спй▌Е█╡ ╩СтАл▌бтАмр╖Э сЕХсйНс╡Э┼Б спй▌Е 6/ сФНр╛ХтЕ╛с░Жсоб снескб zсоб см▒тК║реЕсое ╓е спХтмесо╣ ╔бр▓╜сГн р╝Ктв╜р▓╜сЯЙ с▒╜сЬ╜тж╣сйбсоЭр╗С ╙╣сжеa )-1 сЕХ┼БсХ╜си▒сХ╜ сЧн}тж╜ r▀СспХтЦС тйвр╗жsсое сЕЩ сЕХ┼БсХ╜си▒сХ╜рае сЧн}тж╣р╗ХсХ╜ тбН ┼ес▒вспЩ DPNQSFIFOTJWF р╝ЙтАлтЦС▄йтАмр╕в теер▒йспесмнтУНскб тк╢┼Бтж╜ тВжр╛ХсЦТ р║╡тНЕтАл▄йтАмс╖╣со╣ тжесл╡ сЦТсое vс│Стж╣сйб▌Е рй▒тж╜ сФНр╛ХтЕ╛с░Жсоб р╝ЙреБ 6/ тлнсм▒╟ОспХ ╓е ╘Йс╕┤ ╘Йсоб .%(T спХ тзкскер┤н ╩Сe╩нс╕б .%(T тАл▌НтАмсЦТсое снетж╜ тАл╫ЩтАмр▓Жси▒ тЖ╜сЦБсое ▌ЕтзБ ├дсое тЕк╟Нтж╣сйб▌Е 6/

Happiness for All, with Global KOICA

- 48 -

}сБ╜ ┼Э спХсЫй

р╝Йрв▒р╖Э снетж╜ тгйснеспй█╡ сФЧ 1PTU }сБ╜со╣с▒╜р╖Э снетж╜ 6/ сФНр╛ХтЕ╛с░Ж сЕХ┼БсХ╜

сФНр╛ХтЕ╛с░Жсоб с╕бсЧоaтАл} тж╜▄ЖтАмсБ╜спХ тзЦсЭНaтК╣р▓╜ сБ╣сйврб╜ сЕХтаЩс▒вспЩ 1PTU }сБ╜со╣ с▒╜р╖Э р╝ЙреБ тлнсм▒╟ОспХ сЩ╣смКтзБ ├дсое ▌ЕсЬ╜ тж╜сГй тк╢спЩтж╣р╗ХсХ╜ спХр▒Нтж╜ со╣с▒╜р╖Э с╕бсм▒тж╣╩С снетзХ 6/сое тбНтзЙтж╜ ╟Ос▒╜ сЬ╜сЬЕтЦ╜спХ с│б ▐╡ спЭ┼брб╣┼Б тмЙ┼Эс▒вспЩ тАл▌бтАмсо▓сое тзХс╡е ├дсое тАл▌ЪтАм сЗбтж╣сйб▌Е р╕йс╕бр╕ксоЭр▓╜ сФНр╛ХтЕ╛с░Жсоб р╝ЙреБ тлнсм▒╟ОспХ ╓есоЭр▓╜ тиЖтж╣█╡ р▓╜рд╜р╣Ц тй╢ сЦТ┼Эс▒╢сое р╗жтк╢тпй с▒╜сЬ╜тзБ ├дсое с░Жр▓Етж╣сйб▌Е спХр╖Э снетзХ сжес╕в╩нс╕б р╕йр╛Хр╕Нрб╣с╕б сжлсоб 4%(T сйХр╕Ссп▓сижсБ╣со╣ тАл╫ЭтАмсо╣─С┼Эскб тйес░Н с╕етзкс╡▓спЩ с╕бсЧоaтАл} тж╜▄ЖтАмсБ╜с░Нсм▒си▒ тАл тж╜▌бтАмс▒е р╛Щaсо╣ с▒╢сЗбeснесм▒тлн *OUFSHPWFSONFOUBM $PNNJUUFF PG &YQFSUT PO 4VTUBJOBCMF %FWFMPQNFOU 'JOBODJOH скб zсоб ╩Сс▒╜реЕсо╣ ─С┼Эa ╓е см╡ 6/ тЕ╛тлнси▒ с▒╜тЗ╜рвБ сЕХ┼БсХ╜си▒ сБ╣сйврб╣сиХ ╓е ╔бр▓╜сГн р╝Ктв╜ сЩ╣р╕Юси▒ ╩СсйНтзБ сЩ╣ спй раер▓╛ тзХсзЭ тзБ ├дсое тАл▌ЪтАмсЗбтж╣сйб▌Е 6/ B

╤┐тАл▄АтАм ╔йсГй сФНр╛ХтЕ╛с░Ж сЕХ┼БсХ╜█╡ ╔Щра║сжйсо╣ 6/ сп▓сижсБ╣со╣ тАл╫ЭтАмсо╣скб )-1со╣ тАл╫ЭтАмсо╣ ╔Щр╕Н┼Б 4%4/со╣ тАл╫ЭтАмсо╣скб zсоб ▌Есз▓тж╜ тАл╫ЭтАмсо╣╘ХсмКсое тбН┼ес▒всоЭр▓╜ сБ╣сйвтж╣сйб▌Е┼Б такaрб╜▌Е сЕХ ┼БсХ╜си▒сХ╜рае спХр▒Нтж╜ тАл╫ЭтАмсо╣a с╕вс▒▓с▒всоЭр▓╜ спЩсмКрб╣╩Срае тж╣сйб▌Е спХр▒Нтж╜ ╔йсГй сФНр╛ХтЕ╛ с░Ж сЕХ┼БсХ╜█╡ сЕХтаЩс▒вспХ┼Б с╕бсЧоaтАл} тж╜▄ЖтАмсБ╜сое снетж╜ тзЦсЭН сл╡сЧнр╖Э 1PTU }сБ╜ со╣с▒╜си▒ сБ╣сйвтж╣┼Бсп▒ тж╣█╡ со╣с╕бр╖Э тк╢сЭЕтж╣├н сЕХсйНс╡Э┼Б спй▌Е тЬЪтпй ╔Щ ра║сжй ╟Ос▒╜с▒в тзКсо╣р╖Э спХр╡Йсий▌Е┼Б тзБ сЩ╣ спй█╡ тбН┼ес▒в сЦТс░Жсое ╩СсБ╣соЭр▓╜ тж╜ ─Юс▒╜с▒етк╣┼Э сФНтлн}сБ╜ тк╣─Юс╕бсЧоaтАл▄ЖтАмсЦТ ╔Щр╕Н┼Б тактк╡скб сжйсЕХ сБ░ ├СсГе╒нсЬЕa сБЩрп╣ ╔бр▓╜сГн р╝Ктв╜со╣ с╡ЭтЗ╢сое спХр╡Й┼Б спй▌Е█╡ ├дсое тк╢спЩтзБ сЩ╣ спйсий▌Е рй▒тж╜ 1PTU }сБ╜р╝Ктв╜█╡ ╟Ос▒╜ сБ░ ╟О aтВЙсм▒со╣ }рае╟О┼Э ┼ЦсйН╟О р╝Йрв▒р╖Э тбНтзЙтж╣█╡ ╔Щр╕Н┼Б тЙЙсзЮ╟О сБ░ тЙЙсзЮ─етКЦсое ┼Бр▓Е тж╣сйН сЩ╣р╕ЮрвБ ├дспХ тк╢сЭЕтзХ сЕХспЩ▌Е р╛ХсиисЕХ▌Ерае .%(Tси▒сХ╜█╡ vс│Срб╣с╕б р╝Ьтж╣сйб▐╣ спХтзктДХс▒╜скб сФвткЩ тВжр╛ХсЦТ р║╡тНЕтАл▄йтАмс╖╣спХ 1PTU }сБ╜со╣с▒╜ сЩ╣р╕Ю┼Эс▒╢си▒сХ╜█╡ сДерае со╣ ┼Эс▒╜р▓╜ спЩсЬ╛рб╣сиХ }сБ╜рб╣┼Б спй▌Е█╡ ├дспХ рй▒ тж╣╙╣со╣ с╡▓сл╡тж╜ с▒▒спХрпЭ тзБ сЩ╣ спй─Б ▌Е сЕЩ сйС╟Н█╡ спХскб zсоб тАл╫ЭтАмсо╣р╖Э р╕йс╕бр╕ксоЭр▓╜ тиЖтме }сБ╜рвБ 1PTU }сБ╜со╣с▒╜ a с╕б╔й╩нс╕бсо╣ тАл╫ЭтАмсо╣р╖Э тйер╗жтж╣├н сБ╣сйвтж╣р╗С спХтзк сБ░ р╝ЙтАлтЦС▄йтАмр╕в теер▓╜сЦЩсЬЕ╩нс╕б ┼Бр▓Е тж╜ сВКтиЖсоЭр▓╜ р╗жтк╢тпй }сБ╜рвБ сЩ╣ спй╩Ср╖Э ╩СтАлтзХ▌бтАмсЕЩ▌Е

Happiness for All, with Global KOICA

- 49 -

}á ˝ Ĺ? áŻ&#x2022;á&#x203A;Š

ŕź&#x2030;ŕ˘ąŕˇ? áĽâŚ˝ âŁŠáĽáŻŠŰľ á&#x201D;&#x2014; 1PTU }á ˝áŽšáą˝ŕˇ? áĽâŚ˝ 6/ á&#x201D;?ŕž&#x2022;â&#x2026;žá°&#x2020; á&#x2026;&#x2022;Ĺ á&#x2022;˝

ŢˇÄ&#x152;Đ&#x203A;ŕĽś ÄśÇ´Đ&#x203A;ŕĽś áŻĽá&#x2014;á¸Ľ Ç&#x17D;áą˝á&#x201D;?âŤáŽš 1PTU }á ˝ âĽĽŕąŠáŻĽáŹâ&#x201C;? á&#x2122;šŕ¸&#x17E;ŕ şâ¨&#x2020; á ° âŚ˝Ç&#x17D; 0%"áŽš Ę&#x2018;áŠ?á&#x201A;&#x160; áŚŠ ,0*$" }á ˝áąśâ&#x201A;Ś âĄ?â?&#x2026;á&#x153;&#x2026; áą˝ âŞ&#x2122; âŚ˝Ç&#x17D;Ç&#x17D;áą˝âŠ˛ŕ˛&#x2020;Ý&#x2030; @@@@@@@@ 1PTU }á ˝ âĽĽŕąŠáŻĽáŹâ&#x201C;?áŞĄ 6/ Ĺ áĽÉŞâ&#x17E;&#x2030;Őą á&#x2026;&#x2022;Ĺ á&#x2022;˝ }á ˝âŠ˛ŕ˛&#x2020; áąśâ&#x201A;Ś Ĺ? áŻ&#x2022;á&#x203A;Š âŞ&#x2122; âŚ˝Ç&#x17D;Ç&#x17D;áą˝âŠ˛ŕ˛&#x2020;Ý&#x2030; 1PTU ,PSFB 'PSVN á šĘ&#x2018;ŕž&#x2122; 6/ á&#x201D;?ŕž&#x2022;â&#x2026;žá°&#x2020; áŠ&#x2018;á&#x2013;&#x2026;ŕž&#x2122; á&#x2022;˝áŹ&#x2122; áŤ&#x2122;Ćąá&#x2021;Ą

ŕĽŠâ&#x20AC;ŤŮ˝â&#x20AC;ŹĐ&#x203A;ŕĽś UN (2010). Keeping the Promise: United to Achieve the Millennium Development Goals. General Assembly. A/65/L.1. New York, UN. ________ (2011). Accelerating Progress towards the Millennium Development Goals: Options for Sustained and Inclusive Growth and Issues for Advancing the United Nations Development Agenda beyond 2015. General Assembly. A/66/126. New York, UN. ________ (2012). Accelerating Progress towards the Millennium Development Goals: Options for Sustained and Inclusive Growth and Issues for Advancing the United Nations Development Agenda beyond 2015. General Assembly. A/67/257. New York, UN. ________ (2013a). A Life of Dignity for All: Accelerating Progress towards the Millennium Development Goals and Advancing the United Nations Development Agenda beyond 2015. General Assembly. A/68/202. New York, UN. ________ (2013b). A New Global Partnership: Eradicate Poverty and Transform Economies through Sustainable Development. The Report of the High-Level Panel of Eminent Persons on the Post-2015 Development Agenda. New York, UN.

Happiness for All, with Global KOICA

- 50 -

}á ˝ Ĺ? áŻ&#x2022;á&#x203A;Š

ŕź&#x2030;ŕ˘ąŕˇ? áĽâŚ˝ âŁŠáĽáŻŠŰľ á&#x201D;&#x2014; 1PTU }á ˝áŽšáą˝ŕˇ? áĽâŚ˝ 6/ á&#x201D;?ŕž&#x2022;â&#x2026;žá°&#x2020; á&#x2026;&#x2022;Ĺ á&#x2022;˝

________ (2013c). General Assembly Open Working Group on Sustainable Development Goals. Programme of Work 2013-2014. 28 May 2013. ________ (2013d). Open Working Group of the General Assembly on Sustainable Development Goals. General Assembly. A/67/L.48/Rev.1. New York, UN. ________ (2013e). Post-2015 Process Overview. ________ (2013f). Progress Report on the Work of the General Assembly Open Working Group on SDGs at Its First Four Sessions (Advanced Unedited Copy). UN System Task Team (2012a). Building on the MDGs to Bring Sustainable Development to the Post-2015 Development Agenda. ________ (2012b). Realizing the Future We Want for All. Report to the SecretaryGeneral. New York, UN. ________ (2013a). A Renewed Global Partnership for Development. New York, UN. ________ (2013b). Statistics and Indicators for the Post-2015 Development Agenda. New York, UN.

Happiness for All, with Global KOICA

- 51 -

}á ˝ Ĺ? áŻ&#x2022;á&#x203A;Š

ŕź&#x2030;ŕ˘ąŕˇ? áĽâŚ˝ âŁŠáĽáŻŠŰľ á&#x201D;&#x2014; 1PTU }á ˝áŽšáą˝ŕˇ? áĽâŚ˝ 6/ á&#x201D;?ŕž&#x2022;â&#x2026;žá°&#x2020; á&#x2026;&#x2022;Ĺ á&#x2022;˝

ß? Ň&#x2122; ß?Ň&#x2122; 6/ Ű&#x161;â&#x20AC;ŤŘşâ&#x20AC;ŹŃ&#x160;â&#x20AC;Ť Ű&#x2020;â&#x20AC;ŹČ&#x203A;ĘŞ Üłâ&#x20AC;ŤÜ&#x192;â&#x20AC;ŹŃť Ů?ÄľĐ&#x20AC;Î&#x20AC; â°&#x2019;Addressing Inequalities: The Heart of the Post-2015 Agenda and the Future We Want for All. â°&#x2019;Building on the MDGs to Bring Sustainable Development to the Post-2015 Development Agenda. â°&#x2019;Countries with Special Needs â°&#x2019;Culture: a Driver and an Enabler of Sustainable Development. â°&#x2019;Disaster Risk and Resilience. â°&#x2019;Education and Skills for Inclusive and Sustainable Development beyond 2015. â°&#x2019;Emerging Development Challenges for the Post-2015 UN Development Agenda: Employment. â°&#x2019;Governance and Development. â°&#x2019;Health in the Post-2015 Development Agenda. â°&#x2019;Imagining a World Free from Hunger: Ending Hunger and Malnutrition and Ensuring Food and Nutrition Security. â°&#x2019;Macroeconomic Stability, Inclusive Growth and Employment. â°&#x2019;Migration and Human Mobility. â°&#x2019;Peace and Security. â°&#x2019;Population Dynamics. â°&#x2019;Science, Technology and Innovation and Intellectual Property Rights: The vision for Development. â°&#x2019;Social Protection: A Development Priority in the Post-2015 UN Development Agenda. â°&#x2019;Sustainable Urbanization. â°&#x2019;Towards Freedom from Fear and Want: Human Rights in the Post-2015 Agenda.

Happiness for All, with Global KOICA

- 52 -

}á ˝ Ĺ? áŻ&#x2022;á&#x203A;Š

ŕź&#x2030;ŕ˘ąŕˇ? áĽâŚ˝ âŁŠáĽáŻŠŰľ á&#x201D;&#x2014; 1PTU }á ˝áŽšáą˝ŕˇ? áĽâŚ˝ 6/ á&#x201D;?ŕž&#x2022;â&#x2026;žá°&#x2020; á&#x2026;&#x2022;Ĺ á&#x2022;˝

ß?Ň&#x2122; 6/ Ű&#x161;â&#x20AC;ŤŘşâ&#x20AC;ŹŃ&#x160;â&#x20AC;Ť Ű&#x2020;â&#x20AC;ŹČ&#x203A;ĘŞ Üłâ&#x20AC;ŤÜ&#x192;â&#x20AC;ŹŃť Ů?ÄľĐ&#x20AC;Î&#x20AC; â°&#x2019;Analysis and Overview of New Actors and Formats for the Global Partnership for Development Post 2015. â°&#x2019;Assessment of MDG 8 and Lessons Learnt. â°&#x2019;Building Resilience to Disasters through Partnerships. â°&#x2019;Financing for Sustainable Development in the Global Partnership beyond 2015. â°&#x2019;Global Governance and Governance of the Global Commons in the Partnership for Development beyond 2015. â°&#x2019;Global Partnerships in the Area of Population and Migration. â°&#x2019;Partnerships for Development: Perspectives from Global Health. â°&#x2019;Science, Technology and Innovation for Sustainable Development in the Global Partnership beyond 2015. â°&#x2019;Trade and Development and the Global Partnership beyond 2015. â°&#x2019;Trade in the Global Partnership for Development beyond 2015.

Happiness for All, with Global KOICA

- 53 -

сйС╟Нсп▒р┤н 0%"сйС╟Н

~}сБ╜тй▓р▓Ж с▒╢тВж┼Э спХсЫй a ▐╡смТ тгосЦТтж╜ с╡Эс▒╜т░Т╘ХсмК┼Э тзЙ╠╣ ~}сБ╜┼Э спХсЫй рпЭ█╡ сФйр▓╜смХ спХр╖есоЭр▓╜ сБ╜e рвКтАл ▌Е▄йтАмсЕЩ р╕НтбНтЬЩ█╡ сКес▒╢╩С сБ╜eр╛Эр▓╜сЯЙ ╟О╘ХслЩ }сБ╜тй▓р▓Ж тАл▌ХтАмр│Б сБ░ с▒╢тВж┼Э тзЙ╠╣ ,0*$"со╣ с╡Эсл╡ с▒ер░Ц с╡▓с▒▒ сЗесзЭскб сГ╡сЗесзЭ ┼бр▓Й с╡Эсл╡ тйесжй┼Э ▌Есз▓тж╜ сФНсижсФНр▓б реТсое сЬ╜со╣ с▒вс▒йтж╣├н сЧн}тзБ сййс▒╢спжтАл ▌Е▄йтАмсЕЩ сБ╜eр╛Эсо╣ ╘ХсмКсоб тЗ╜тГ╣ сБ░ с╕▓тжесп▒ р╗жсЬ╜ тж╣си▒ спЩсмКспХ aтАл ▌Е▄йтзК▄ЖтАм т▓╝ сЕЩ сп▒р┤н█╡ ,0*$" 0%"с▒есп▒раесХ╜┼б MJC LPJDB HP LS сое тШЦтзХсХ╜рае сЕЭ сЩ╣ спйсЬЦтАл ▌Е▄йтАм

─Ю╩Срае сЦТ╘ЙсЬ╜ сЩ╣с▒╢╟Н тАл▌бтАмск╢тЭ▒╞▒р▓╜ сГйс╕б 5FM 'BY IUUQ XXX LPJDB HP LS

- 54 -

A/68/202

United Nations

General Assembly

Distr.: General 26 July 2013 Original: English

Sixty-eighth session Item 118 of the provisional agenda* Follow-up to the outcome of the Millennium Summit

A life of dignity for all: accelerating progress towards the Millennium Development Goals and advancing the United Nations development agenda beyond 2015 Report of the Secretary-General Summary The present report is submitted pursuant to General Assembly resolution 65/1, in which the Assembly requested the Secretary-General to report annually on progress in the implementation of the Millennium Development Goals until 2015 and to make recommendations for further steps to advance the United Nations development agenda beyond 2015. Renewed efforts are essential for achieving the Millennium Development Goals by the end of 2015. While providing an assessment of progress to date, the report also identifies policies and programmes that have driven success in the achievement of the Goals and can contribute to accelerating it. These include emphasizing inclusive growth, decent employment and social protection; allocating more resources for essential services and ensuring access for all; strengthening political will and improving the international policy environment; and harnessing the power of multi-stakeholder partnerships. A new post-2015 era demands a new vision and a responsive framework. Sustainable development â&#x20AC;&#x201D; enabled by the integration of economic growth, social justice and environmental stewardship â&#x20AC;&#x201D; must become our global guiding principle and operational standard. This is a universal agenda that requires profound economic transformations and a new global partnership. It also requires that the international community, including the United Nations, embrace a more coherent and effective response to support the agenda. As we make the transition to this new era, we need to continue the work begun with the Millennium Development Goals and ensure that extreme poverty is ended within a generation. In keeping with United Nations principles, this post-2015 framework can bring together the full range of human aspirations and needs to ensure a life of dignity for all.

* A/68/150.

13-40932 (E) 130813

*1340932*

- 55 -

A/68/202

I. Introduction 1. The worldâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s quest for dignity, peace, prosperity, justice, sustainability and an end to poverty has reached an unprecedented moment of urgency. 2. In 2000, the States Members of the United Nations agreed on a bold vision for the future that reaffirmed the fundamental values of freedom, equality, solidarity, tolerance, respect for the planet and shared responsibility. 3. That vision, enshrined in the Millennium Declaration (General Assembly resolution 55/2) and rooted in the Charter of the United Nations, recognized the need to pool efforts as never before and to advance on three fronts simultaneously: development, peace and security, and human rights. Global challenges, local solutions; shared burden, shared gain: this remains the credo of international action for our collective well-being. 4. Among the promises made in the Millennium Declaration was a compelling pledge to spare no effort to free all women, men, girls and boys from the abject and dehumanizing conditions of poverty. The call itself was not new; the commitment to better standards of living is part of the purposes and principles of the United Nations. But what was new was the sense of possibility â&#x20AC;&#x201D; the conviction that through a combination of targets, tangible investments, genuine action and political will, countries and people working together could end poverty in all its forms. 5. The Millennium Development Goals gave expression to this resolve. Since their adoption, Governments, partners and an inspiring constellation of groups and individuals around the world have mobilized to tackle the many dimensions of poverty. Those efforts have generated unprecedented advances in human development. 6. There has been substantial progress in achieving the Millennium Development Goals and several successes in reaching specific targets globally and in individual countries. However, the prospects for achieving all of the Goals differ sharply across and within countries and regions. More than a billion people still live in extreme poverty. Far too many people face serious deprivation in health and education, with progress hampered by significant inequality related to income, gender, ethnicity, disability, age and location. The prolonged global economic downturn and violent conflicts in recent years have exacerbated poverty, inequality and exclusion. Biodiversity loss, the degradation of water, drylands and forests and the intensifying risks of climate change threaten to reverse our achievements to date and undermine any future gains. 7. We must do everything we can to achieve the Millennium Development Goals by the end of 2015. That work is unfinished and must continue in order to secure the well-being, dignity and rights of those still on the margins today, as well as of future generations. By meeting our existing commitments, we will be in the best possible position from which to agree upon and implement a universal agenda for sustainable development after 2015. 8. At the same time, the world has changed radically since the turn of the millennium. New economic powers have emerged, new technologies are reshaping our societies and new patterns of human settlement and activity are heightening the pressures on our planet. Inequality is rising in rich and poor countries alike.

13-40932

- 56 -

A/68/202

9. A new era demands a new vision and a responsive framework. Sustainable development, enabled by the integration of economic growth, social justice and environmental stewardship, must become our global guiding principle and operational standard. This framework can bring together the full range of human aspirations and needs. It offers a template for mutually reinforcing approaches to global challenges. Sustainable development is, in short, the pathway to the future. 10. So the challenge remains, even as it has taken on new complexity and increased in scale: we must fulfil our promises and meet the aspirations of the world’s peoples, and we must summon the unity to realize the dream of the Charter and the Millennium Declaration. Ours is the first generation with the resources and know-how to end extreme poverty and put our planet on a sustainable course before it is too late. 11. The transition to sustainable development must not mean any diminishment whatsoever in the commitment to ending poverty. As underscored in the outcome document of the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, in 2012 (General Assembly resolution 66/288), poverty eradication is an indispensable requirement for sustainable development. This is a matter of basic justice and human rights. It is also a historic opportunity. If ours is the generation that can end poverty, there should be no deferring this essential mission, no shrinking away from the task. In a world of great wealth and technological advances, no person anywhere should be left behind. No person should go hungry, lack shelter or clean water and sanitation, face social and economic exclusion or live without access to basic health services and education. These are human rights, and form the foundations for a decent life. 12. Nor can progress be achieved or sustained amid armed conflict, violence, insecurity and injustice. These ills often have roots in social and economic deprivation and inequality. In the same vein, poverty can be a precursor and breeding ground of instability. We know that upholding human rights and freeing people from fear and want are inseparable; it is imperative that we do more to act on this basic truth. 13. The present report is intended to galvanize greater efforts to end poverty and achieve sustainable and inclusive growth. We will need enlightened and courageous leadership in the halls of government and the engagement of responsible businesses and civil society the world over. I have drawn considerable inspiration from a dynamic United Nations-led process — a global conversation launched in 2012 on the priorities of a new development agenda that would build on the Millennium Development Goals. In a series of global, regional and national consultations in nearly 100 countries and through a social media platform, more than a million people have shared their views on “the world they want”. I am profoundly grateful to all who expressed their hopes and expectations and offered ideas and constructive criticism. The United Nations is strongly committed not just to listening to those voices, but also to amplifying and acting on what we have heard and learned. 14. In defining a new agenda, Member States can also benefit from the insights of a set of illuminating reports. My High-level Panel of Eminent Persons on the Post-2015 Development Agenda, co-chaired by Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, President of Indonesia, Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf, President of Liberia, and David Cameron, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, called for major transformative economic and institutional shifts: a new

13-40932

- 57 -

A/68/202

global partnership and a data revolution for monitoring progress and strengthening accountability. 15. Reports by the Sustainable Development Solutions Network, the Global Compact Office, the United Nations System Task Team on the Post-2015 United Nations Development Agenda, the regional commissions and our partners in civil society and academia have also provided important inputs and recommendations for the formulation and content of the processes ahead. 16. The common ground in these contributions far outweighs any differences. Indeed, it is possible to see the emerging outlines of a new sustainable development agenda: universal in nature yet responsive to the complexities, needs and capacities of individual countries and regions; bold in ambition but simple in design; combining the economic, social and environmental dimensions while putting the highest priority on ending poverty and reducing inequality; protective of the planet, its biodiversity, water and land; rights-based, with particular emphasis on women, young people and marginalized groups; eager for new and innovative partnerships; and supported by pioneering approaches to data and rigorous accountability mechanisms. Guided by this far-reaching vision, a limited set of goals with sustainable development at the core, as called for at the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, could be constructed to encapsulate current challenges and the priorities of the new agenda and to guide the transformation we need. 17. In the present report we take stock of where we are and where we need to go — first, in the time that remains until the end of 2015, and second, in the period beyond that. As a contribution to the discussions and negotiations of Member States, I offer my sense of the lessons we have derived from the Millennium Development Goals and set out a number of possible elements for consideration in charting a way forward. I look forward to a rich process of consultation and debate as the crucial year of 2015 draws near. 18. We are all aware of the vulnerabilities and perils that define daily life across the world. But there is also simultaneously a sense of wondrous potential made possible in part by science and technology but even more by our own hard work and devotion to common progress. Based on everything I have seen and heard during my six and a half years as Secretary-General, I am convinced that, collectively, we have the leadership, conviction and courage to address short-term uncertainties while seizing the opportunity for long-term change. In that spirit of hope and resolve, I offer the present report to the membership of the United Nations.

II. Achieving the Millennium Development Goals and accelerating progress 19. The Millennium Development Goals are our promise to the world’s poorest and most vulnerable. They have succeeded in placing people at the centre of the development agenda. 20. We have made remarkable progress. Many countries — including some of the poorest — have aligned their policies and resources with the Goals to make unparalleled gains. Several critical targets have already been met or will be met by the end of 2015, both at the aggregate level and in individual countries. Sizable gains have occurred in even the poorest countries.

13-40932

- 58 -

A/68/202

21. However, progress has been insufficient and highly uneven. Rural areas and marginalized groups continue to lag behind on virtually all goals and targets. Countries in or emerging from conflict, disaster or instability face significant challenges. In addition, the economic and financial crisis has complicated efforts, including by putting pressure on official development assistance. 22. Yet progress continues. In the Millennium Development Goals Report 2013, it is stressed that despite challenges and gaps, the agenda embodied by the Goals retains great power in engendering collective action for faster results.

Where do we stand on the Goals? 23. At the global level, poverty and hunger have been reduced significantly. In developing regions, the proportion of people living on less than $1.25 a day fell by more than half, from 47 per cent in 1990 to 22 per cent in 2010, with the majority living in rural areas. Much of this progress, however, has been made in a few large countries, primarily China and India. Moreover, even if the poverty target has been met, 1.2 billion people are still living in extreme poverty. For example, despite recent strong economic growth and declining poverty rates in sub-Saharan Africa, the number of people living in poverty is rising, and the region is still vulnerable to shocks that can rapidly erode gains. 24. The target of halving the percentage of people suffering from hunger by 2015 is within reach. The proportion of undernourished people in developing regions fell from 23.2 per cent in the period from 1990 to 1992 to 14.9 per cent in 2010-2012. However, one in eight people remain chronically undernourished, and one in four children suffers from stunted growth because of malnutrition. 25. We risk failing to keep our promise to enable all children to go to school. The number of children out of primary school declined from 102 million to 57 million between 2000 and 2011. But progress has slowed significantly over the past five years. Without renewed efforts, the target of universal primary education by 2015 seems beyond reach, particularly in conflict-affected countries. Half the world’s out-of-school children live in sub-Saharan Africa, with the gap largest for children and adolescents from the poorest households. Much stronger efforts are needed to improve the quality of education and provide lifelong learning opportunities, especially for girls and women, those belonging to ethnic minorities, persons with disabilities and children living in conflict-affected areas, rural areas or urban slums. 26. Women and girls are major drivers of development. Yet challenges to achieving gender equality and women’s rights remain significant. In many developing countries, girls are denied their right to primary education. Women have been gaining employment in non-agricultural sectors, but often in less secure jobs with fewer social benefits than those held by men. In both the public and private spheres, women continue to be denied opportunities to influence decisions that affect their lives. Gender-based violence contravenes women’s and girls’ rights, undermines development and is an affront to our common humanity. 27. Despite significant progress globally and in many countries, a renewed commitment is needed to improve the health and life prospects of mothers and children. The mortality rate for children under 5 dropped by 41 per cent between 1990 and 2011 — a significant achievement, yet far short of the target of a two-thirds reduction. The maternal mortality rate fell by 47 per cent over the past

13-40932

- 59 -

A/68/202

two decades — again, important progress, but still far from the target of 75 per cent. Intensified efforts are needed to reach the most vulnerable women and children and ensure their sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights, including full access to basic health services and sexual and reproductive education. 28. New HIV infections declined by 21 per cent globally over the past decade, and close to 10 million people living with HIV are receiving lifesaving antiretroviral treatment. Expanded treatment and prevention yielded a 25 per cent reduction in AIDS-related deaths between 2005 and 2011. Yet 2.5 million new infections still occur each year and in many parts of the globe, millions lack access to treatment. The last decade saw a 25 per cent fall in mortality rates from malaria globally, sparing the lives of an estimated 1.1 million people. Between 1995 and 2011, 51 million tuberculosis patients were treated successfully, saving 20 million lives. 29. Some of the targets for ensuring environmental sustainability have been achieved: the target for improved water sources was met ahead of schedule, and over the past decade over 200 million slum dwellers — double the target — benefited from improved water and sanitation facilities, durable housing or sufficient living space. Furthermore, from 1990 to 2011, 1.9 billion people gained access to a latrine, flush toilet or other improved sanitation facility. With rapid urbanization and population growth, however, the number of slum dwellers is on the rise. Two and a half billion people lack access to improved sanitation, while a billion practise open defecation, a continued source of illness. 30. In all countries, the achievement of Goal 7, on ensuring environmental sustainability, remains at significant risk because of the profound and urgent challenges posed by climate change. Carbon dioxide emissions are more than 46 per cent higher than in 1990. The atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide has exceeded 400 parts per million, a level not seen in millions of years and threatening the existence of the planet. 31. Biodiversity loss continues at a rapid pace. Freshwater resources are being depleted and fish stocks are overexploited. Land degradation and desertification, ocean acidification and the loss of species and forests continue at an alarming rate. 32. As shown in the forthcoming MDG Gap Task Force Report 2013, progress towards a global partnership for development has fallen short of expectations. Following an encouraging rise in official development assistance since 2000, over the past two years aid flows have declined. Despite significant debt relief for many countries, the debt-servicing burden of some low-income countries remains intolerably high. Progress in improving market access for many developing countries has been slow, and “aid for trade” has not escaped the impact of reduced official development assistance. Despite welcome gains in connectivity, a substantial digital divide remains between developed and developing regions.

Which policies and programmes have best driven progress? 33. It is crucial to know what works and what does not. More than a decade of experience has painted a revealing picture. Strong national ownership and well-managed policies, supported coherently by partners at all levels, has underpinned progress in achieving the Millennium Development Goals. Policies that foster robust and inclusive economic growth, accompanied by measures to improve the access of poor and excluded people to quality basic services, have produced 13-40932

- 60 -

A/68/202

gains in many countries. Much has been learned by formulating and implementing those policies. Applying these lessons will be important for making more rapid progress in the time that remains. Emphasizing inclusive growth, decent employment and social protection 34. Inclusive economic growth with decent employment and decent wages has proven to be a prerequisite for achieving the Millennium Development Goals, particularly Goal 1, on eradicating extreme poverty and hunger. Progress in East Asia has been strong, and several countries in Latin America and Africa have successfully combined economic growth and redistributive policies. 35. Targeted investments in public health infrastructure and agricultural productivity achieving the Goals and promoting economic synergistic way and are therefore highly programmes. Cash transfers targeting poor bolstered progress.

systems, fighting disease, education, have all played important roles in growth. These interventions work in a effective in integrated development and marginalized families have also

36. In East Asia, reforms in the agricultural sector have lifted hundreds of millions of people out of extreme poverty. Many Governments in the region have also adopted policies that increase social spending, expand social protection and raise the minimum wage. 37. Policies promoting rural employment have proved to have positive results in terms of poverty reduction, food consumption, household spending on education and health, debt reduction and asset creation. 38. In addition, programmes in Latin America and South-East Asia that have combined increased food production and distribution with skills training, microfinance, land distribution and nutrition education programmes have had positive impacts on child mortality and maternal health. Allocating more resources for essential services and ensuring access for all 39. To accelerate progress on education, some countries have eliminated school fees and reduced the indirect costs of schooling. In Africa and the Middle East, policies have targeted orphans and other vulnerable children with vouchers for uniforms and books. In Asia, countries have scaled up stipend programmes and introduced financial support mechanisms for ethnic minority students. 40. In West Africa, complementing investments in infrastructure with female literacy campaigns to overcome resistance to girlsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; education in rural areas led to a significant increase in the rate of enrolment of girls in primary schools. 41. Some countries have expanded access to primary education while tackling gender disparities at the same time. Achieving the parity target by 2015 is within reach if entrenched gender disadvantages can be overcome, particularly in countries where early marriage remains pervasive. 42. Countries in Sub-Saharan Africa have launched nationwide midwifery schemes to train and deploy tens of thousands of front-line health workers to accelerate progress in preventing maternal and child mortality. 43. Improved national strategies supported by additional financial resources have contributed to faster progress on the Millennium Development Goals in the area of

13-40932

- 61 -

A/68/202

health in many countries. The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, the GAVI Alliance and the United States Presidentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief have played a major role, complementing national efforts. 44. Investments in human and physical infrastructure for the public health-care sector are paying off in South Asia, where services have been provided free of charge in facilities close to patients. 45. Policies supporting free universal access to quality primary health care for women and children have reduced child mortality in some countries in Sub-Saharan Africa, especially when special attention is given to reducing deaths from malaria, pneumonia, diarrhoea and measles and to rapidly scaling up the provision of insecticide-treated bednets, measles vaccine and vitamin A supplements. 46. National initiatives have proven to be effective in achieving water and sanitation targets. In South-East Asia, partnerships between local governments, builders and community leaders have been launched to meet the need for drinking water and sanitation. Access to latrines has increased significantly, driven by community empowerment activities, strengthened institutions and a community hygiene campaign. Strengthening political will and improving the international policy environment 47. The global nature of many current challenges requires coordinated global action. I am very concerned by any developments or trends that threaten the global partnership for development, a core part of the Millennium Development Goal framework. There is an urgent need to stop and reverse the two-year contraction of official development assistance and aid for trade, especially for the least developed countries. Stakeholders should strengthen coordination and follow through on commitments to and for effective aid delivery, as well as cracking down on illicit capital flows, returning stolen assets and stemming tax avoidance and evasion. 48. I urge the members of the World Trade Organization to redouble their efforts to reach a development-oriented conclusion of the Doha Round of trade negotiations and improve duty-free, quota-free market access for products of least developed countries. Further efforts are needed to ensure timely debt relief for critically indebted developing countries, thus improving their chances of achieving the Millennium Development Goals. 49. A stronger partnership is also needed among governments, pharmaceutical companies, research facilities and philanthropic organizations to make essential medicines more affordable and available in public health facilities, including using the provisions available to developing countries in the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights. 50. Limiting and reversing the increase in the average global temperature to 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels in line with international agreements demands bold, coordinated national and international action. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change contains commitments and guidance, most notably the agreement of Governments to negotiate an ambitious, legally binding global agreement by 2015 that will cover all countries of the world in a fair way. The situation calls for full and urgent adherence to what was agreed.

13-40932

- 62 -

A/68/202

51. Bolder measures are equally urgent on other environmental sustainability targets, including those related to biodiversity, water, land use and forests. Where commitments already exist, we need faster implementation of the corresponding multilateral environmental agreements. 52. With support from the international community, developing countries should accelerate efforts to improve the transfer of and access to information and communications technology, as well as to lower its cost, especially in key service-delivery areas. In order for technology transfers to countries embracing deep structural economic transformations to be successful, the institutional and human capacity gaps will need to be addressed at the local level. 53. The multi-stakeholder partnership model has emerged as a promising way to share burdens, catalyse action and bring all relevant actors to bear in addressing specific problems. We need to mobilize more action to deliver on commitments and exploit the full potential of the partnership approach.

Accelerating progress towards the Goals to 2015 54. Fulfilling our existing commitments and promises on the Millennium Development Goals must remain our foremost priority. Member States, with the continued support of development agencies, civil society and the private sector, should and can take bolder action to accelerate progress. 55. Together, we need to focus on those Goals that are most off-track and on countries that face particular development challenges, including the least developed countries, landlocked developing countries, small island developing States and countries affected by or recovering from conflicts or disasters. In so doing, we must pay particular attention to the needs and rights of the most vulnerable and excluded, such as women, children, the elderly, indigenous people, refugees and displaced families, as well as people with disabilities and those living in poor rural areas and urban slums. 56. The preceding section highlighted some successful strategies for achieving the Millennium Development Goals. They show that accelerating progress requires national ownership and international commitment, with the right policies backed by reliable, timely financial resources and people-centred multi-stakeholder partnerships. Countries should make every effort to mobilize domestic resources. At the same time, these resources should be supplemented by external support where necessary. 57. In April I launched the campaign â&#x20AC;&#x153;MDG Momentum â&#x20AC;&#x201D; 1,000 Days of Actionâ&#x20AC;? as a spur to achieve the gains we need by 2015. My appeal seeks to give additional impetus to several key initiatives that were already under way in response to the call for acceleration made at the 2010 high-level plenary meeting of the General Assembly on the Millennium Development Goals. 58. The Millennium Development Goals Acceleration Framework, a coordinated effort by the United Nations Development Group, is firmly rooted in national ownership and supports the systematic identification of bottlenecks and local solutions. Acceleration plans are being implemented in more than 46 countries across all regions, covering a range of goals and targets and bringing together a full spectrum of actors. Those efforts are assessed by the United Nations system in

13-40932

- 63 -

A/68/202

collaboration with the World Bank under the umbrella of the United Nations System Chief Executives Board for Coordination. 59. In one sub-Saharan African country, an acceleration plan on maternal health is being implemented through the revised national reproductive health policy and protocol. This is backed by a multi-pronged strategy that includes the use of mobile telephones for diagnosis and referrals and partnerships with local road transport associations to facilitate the travel of women in labour. 60. When implemented at the subnational level, the Acceleration Framework can also help to address disparity and inequality, as well as underlying causes such as discrimination and sociocultural exclusion. In one South American country, provinces and municipalities are implementing acceleration plans to address local priorities, such as poverty reduction and the economic empowerment of women, where progress lags behind the national level. 61. The €1 billion Millennium Development Goals initiative of the European Union has been supporting countries in the African, Caribbean and Pacific regions to accelerate progress on the Goals that are the most off-track: eradicating hunger, improving maternal health, curbing child mortality and improving access to water and sanitation. Nearly 50 have been supported to date. 62. Regional initiatives are an increasingly important part of the picture. In 2012, the African Union Commission adopted a road map on shared responsibility and global solidarity to accelerate progress in the response to HIV, tuberculosis and malaria. The actions in the road map are organized around three strategic pillars: diversified financing, access to medicines and enhanced health governance. Similarly, in 2012, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations adopted a road map for the attainment of the Millennium Development Goals focusing on five key areas: advocacy and linkages, knowledge, resources, expertise, and regional cooperation and public goods. 63. Every Woman Every Child, a multi-stakeholder partnership launched in 2010, seeks to save the lives of 16 million women and children by 2015. The United Nations secured commitments of $20 billion from more than 250 partners, including governments, multilateral organizations, the private sector and civil society. A new partnership between governments and United Nations agencies, “Committing to child survival: a promise renewed”, was launched to reduce the under-5 mortality rate to fewer than 20 deaths per 1,000 live births in all countries by 2035. 64. The Sustainable Energy for All initiative, launched in 2011, aims to provide universal access to modern energy, double the global rate of improvement in energy efficiency and double the share of renewables in the global energy mix, all by 2030. Over $50 billion has been committed from all sectors to make this a reality, and more than 70 countries have signed up. 65. The Global Agriculture and Food Security Programme mobilizes resources to scale up agricultural assistance to low-income countries. The Zero Hunger Challenge, launched at the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, calls for universal access to adequate food year-round, steps to prevent childhood stunting, a sustainable transformation of food systems, a doubling of productivity and incomes among smallholder farmers and drastic reductions in food losses and waste. Through the “Scaling Up Nutrition” movement, a partnership effort involving governments, civil society, the United Nations system, business and researchers,

13-40932

- 64 -

A/68/202

more than 100 partners are supporting 40 countries in their efforts to reduce malnutrition and child stunting. 66. The Global Education First Initiative, launched in September 2012, aims to raise the political profile of education and seeks to ensure access, improve the quality of learning and foster global citizenship. 67. The Call to Action on Sanitation, initiated in March, has provided new momentum on an area that has received inadequate attention. The campaign for universal access to bednets by the end of 2010 made important inroads in tackling malaria. The One Million Community Health Workers campaign in Sub-Saharan Africa is expected to be critical in generating gains across the health-related Millennium Development Goals. 68. The replenishment of the Global Fund in the third quarter of 2013 will be of decisive significance for continued progress against AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria. I call upon all donors, public and private, to do their part to support the Fund at this moment of utmost urgency as well as opportunity. 69. Multi-stakeholder arrangements have proven successful because they expand on traditional partnerships by significantly increasing available resources, improving the effectiveness of their use and increasing policy and operational coherence. To build on those advantages, I have put forward a proposal to Member States for a new United Nations Partnership Facility, which would aim to enhance the Organizationâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s ability to facilitate delivery at scale at both the global and country levels.

Making the transition to a new sustainable development agenda that builds on the Goals 70. The adoption of the Millennium Development Goals represented a major shift in galvanizing global political will for poverty eradication. The Goals focused the worldâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s attention on halving extreme poverty and promoting human development by setting priorities, goals and targets. Yet the Goals represent only the halfway mark towards the aim of tackling poverty in all its forms. United Nations projections for 2015 indicate that almost 1.3 billion people will still live in extreme poverty, mothers will continue to die needlessly in childbirth and children will suffer and die from hunger, malnutrition, preventable diseases and a lack of clean water and sanitation. 71. The job we started with the Millennium Development Goals therefore needs to be finished. Careful attention will be needed as we make the transition to an agenda that embraces the three dimensions of sustainable development yet ensures that poverty eradication is its highest priority and that extreme poverty is ended within a generation. 72. Since the Millennium Development Goals were devised, major new challenges have emerged, while existing ones have been exacerbated. Inequality has deepened. Environmental degradation has increased, threatening our common future. People across the world are demanding more responsive governments and better governance and rights at all levels. Migration challenges have grown, and young people in many countries face poor prospects for decent jobs or livelihoods. Conflicts and instability have halted or reversed progress in many countries,

13-40932

- 65 -

A/68/202

affecting primarily women and children. Organized crime, including trafficking in people and drugs, violates human rights and undermines development. The deepening ways in which the lives of people and countries are linked demand a universal agenda addressing the world’s most pressing challenges and seizing the opportunities of a new era.

III. Advancing the United Nations development agenda beyond 2015 A.

Vision and transformative actions of the agenda 73. The articulation of a post-2015 development agenda provides an opportunity to place sustainable development where it should be: at the core of humankind’s pursuit of shared progress. With a new sustainable development agenda, the world can make many historic achievements: eradicating extreme poverty by 2030, protecting the environment and promoting social inclusion and economic opportunities for all. Ultimately, the aspiration of the development agenda beyond 2015 is to create a just and prosperous world where all people realize their rights and live with dignity and hope. 74. As agreed at the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, the framework for sustainable development reflects our commitment to three interconnected objectives: economic development, social inclusion and environmental sustainability. Each of these dimensions contributes to the others and all are necessary for the well-being of individuals and societies. Together, they are meant to enable people to fulfil their potential within the finite resources of our planet. 75. For such a sustainable development agenda to take root, four building blocks need to be agreed upon: (a) a far-reaching vision of the future firmly anchored in human rights and universally accepted values and principles, including those encapsulated in the Charter, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Millennium Declaration; (b) a set of concise goals and targets aimed at realizing the priorities of the agenda; (c) a global partnership for development to mobilize means of implementation; and (d) a participatory monitoring framework for tracking progress and mutual accountability mechanisms for all stakeholders. 76. Decisions on the shape of the next agenda rest with Member States. To support their deliberations, I put in motion an inclusive and transparent process to hear from all stakeholders. Through the efforts of the United Nations Development Group and others, I sought the views of people around the world through consultations in nearly 100 countries, global thematic consultations on 11 issue areas and a global online conversation and “My World” survey. These efforts have reached more than a million people. A large number of civil society organizations and academic institutions worldwide have also actively participated in the discussions. 77. In addition, my High-level Panel of Eminent Persons on the Post-2015 Development Agenda provided critical proposals (see A/67/890, annex). I have made the report available to all Member States and recommend it as an important contribution to this process. 78. I also benefited from the expertise of the science and technology community through the Sustainable Development Solutions Network. The contributions of the 13-40932

- 66 -

A/68/202

private sector around the world were conveyed through the Global Compact. The United Nations System Task Team, comprising more than 60 agencies and international organizations, conveyed the knowledge and experience of the Organization, while regional perspectives were provided by the regional commissions. 79. Reflecting on many of these inputs, the Open Working Group on Sustainable Development Goals is conducting a series of discussions aimed at formulating goals for sustainable development to be proposed to the General Assembly at its sixtyeighth session. 80. The common ground in the findings of these processes is encouraging. Discussions point to the importance of arriving at a single and coherent development agenda centred on sustainable development, applicable to all countries while taking into account regional, national and local circumstances and priorities. 81. The key elements of the emerging vision for the development agenda beyond 2015 include: (a) universality, to mobilize all developed and developing countries and leave no one behind; (b) sustainable development, to tackle the interlinked challenges facing the world, including a clear focus on ending extreme poverty in all its forms; (c) inclusive economic transformations ensuring decent jobs, backed by sustainable technologies, to shift to sustainable patterns of consumption and production; (d) peace and governance, as key outcomes and enablers of development; (e) a new global partnership, recognizing shared interests, different needs and mutual responsibilities, to ensure commitment to and means of implementing the new vision; and (f) being â&#x20AC;&#x153;fit for purposeâ&#x20AC;?, to ensure that the international community is equipped with the right institutions and tools for addressing the challenges of implementing the sustainable development agenda at the national level. 82. Bringing this vision to life will require a number of transformative and mutually reinforcing actions that apply to all countries. 83. Eradicate poverty in all its forms. Poverty has many manifestations and is aggravated by discrimination, insecurity, inequality and environmental and disaster risks. Therefore, the eradication of poverty calls for a multifaceted approach, encapsulated in the concept of sustainable development, focusing on both immediate and underlying causes. 84. Tackle exclusion and inequality. In order to leave no one behind and bring everyone forward, actions are needed to promote equality of opportunity. This implies inclusive economies in which men and women have access to decent employment, legal identification, financial services, infrastructure and social protection, as well as societies where all people can contribute and participate in national and local governance. 85. Empower women and girls. The new agenda must ensure the equal rights of women and girls, their full participation in the political, economic and public spheres and zero tolerance for violence against or exploitation of women and girls. The practice of child marriage must be ended everywhere. Women and girls must have equal access to financial services, infrastructure, the full range of health services, including in the area of sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights, and water and sanitation; the right to own land and other assets; a safe environment in which to learn and apply their knowledge and skills; and an end to

13-40932

- 67 -

A/68/202

discrimination so they can receive equal pay for equal work and have an equal voice in decision-making. 86. Provide quality education and lifelong learning. Young people should be able to receive high-quality education and learning, from early childhood development to post-primary schooling, including not only formal schooling but also life skills and vocational education and training. 87. Improve health. Address universal health-care coverage, access and affordability; end preventable maternal and child deaths; realize womenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s reproductive health and rights; increase immunization coverage; eradicate malaria and realize the vision of a future free of AIDS and tuberculosis; reduce the burden of non-communicable diseases, including mental illness, and road accidents; and promote healthy behaviours, including those related to water, sanitation and hygiene. 88. Address climate change. The international community must reconcile the challenges of mitigating and adapting to climate change while supporting the growth of developing countries. While the worst effects of climate change can still be averted by building the resilience of and investing in those communities and nations most vulnerable to disasters risk, those efforts will require a greatly stepped-up response, in keeping with the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities. A successful outcome to the intergovernmental climate change negotiations is critical. Every effort must be made to arrive at a legally binding agreement by the end of 2015, as decided in Durban, South Africa, in 2011. 89. Address environmental challenges. Environmental change has compounded problems worldwide, especially in vulnerable countries, reducing their capacity to cope and limiting their options for addressing development challenges. Managing the natural resources base â&#x20AC;&#x201D; fisheries, forests, freshwater resources, oceans, soil â&#x20AC;&#x201D; is essential for sustainable development. So too is building the resilience of and investing in those communities and nations most vulnerable to disasters, especially in the least developed countries and small island developing States. 90. Promote inclusive and sustainable growth and decent employment. This can be achieved by economic diversification, financial inclusion, efficient infrastructure, productivity gains, trade, sustainable energy, relevant education and skills training. Labour market policies should focus in particular on young people, women and people with disabilities. 91. End hunger and malnutrition. Addressing hunger, malnutrition, stunting and food insecurity in a world experiencing rapid population growth will require a combination of stable and adequate incomes for all, improvements in agricultural productivity and sustainability, child and maternal care and strengthened social protection for vulnerable populations. 92. Address demographic challenges. While the population of developed countries is projected to remain unchanged at around 1.3 billion, the population of developing countries is projected to increase from 5.9 billion in 2013 to 8.2 billion in 2050. Countries with a high rate of population growth are generally on a path of falling fertility, especially as education for girls and sexual and reproductive health services become more widely available. Progress in these areas would enable many households to slow fertility rates, with consequent benefits for health, education, sustainability and the demographic dividend for economic growth. Countries with a

13-40932

- 68 -

A/68/202

high proportion of young people need to offer education and opportunities for decent work. Countries with an ageing population need policy responses to support the elderly so as to remove barriers to their full participation in society while protecting their rights and dignity. 93. Enhance the positive contribution of migrants. More than a billion people rely on international and domestic migration to improve the income, health and education of their families, escape poverty and conflict and adapt to environmental and economic shocks. Countries receiving migrants can also benefit significantly. Yet many barriers limit the positive effects of migration, including possible large economic and social gains. Discrimination is widespread and the human rights of migrants are often denied at different points in the migration process. The scourge of human trafficking, an unacceptable dimension of migration, must be ended. 94. Meet the challenges of urbanization. Some 70 per cent of the world’s population will live in cities by 2050. Urbanization poses the challenge of providing city dwellers with employment, food, income, housing, transportation, clean water and sanitation, social services and cultural amenities. At the same time, living in cities creates opportunities for the more efficient delivery and use of physical facilities and amenities. Rural prosperity, land management and secure ecosystem services should form an integral part of sustainable urbanization and economic transformation. 95. Build peace and effective governance based on the rule of law and sound institutions. Peace and stability, human rights and effective governance based on the rule of law and transparent institutions are outcomes and enablers of development. There can be no peace without development and no development without peace. Lasting peace and sustainable development cannot be fully realized without respect for human rights and the rule of law. Transparency and accountability are powerful tools for ensuring citizens’ involvement in policymaking and their oversight of the use of public resources, including to prevent waste and corruption. Legal empowerment, access to justice and an independent judiciary and universal legal identification can also be critical for gaining access to public services. 96. Foster a renewed global partnership. The Millennium Development Goals, in particular Goal 8, on the global partnership for development, speak to the importance of our common humanity and the values of equity, solidarity and human rights. The post-2015 development agenda will need to be supported by a renewed global partnership grounded on such values. As noted in the report of my High-level Panel, “the partnership should capture, and will depend on, a spirit of mutual respect and mutual benefit”. 97. The global partnership should finish the job started with Goal 8, including meeting the assistance objective of 0.7 per cent of gross national income, as well as other existing and future intergovernmental agreements, such as the Millennium Declaration, the Monterrey Consensus of the International Conference on Financing for Development, the Principles set out in the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, the Johannesburg Plan of Implementation and the Istanbul Programme of Action, as well as the outcome of the Ad Hoc Working Group of the Durban Platform for Enhanced Action. All partners should deliver on past commitments, particularly those on official development assistance, climate finance and domestic resource mobilization.

13-40932

- 69 -

A/68/202

98. The transformative actions of the post-2015 development agenda should be supported by multi-stakeholder partnerships that respond to the sustainable development agenda. These should include not only governments but also businesses, private philanthropic foundations, international organizations, civil society, volunteer groups, local authorities, parliaments, trade unions, research institutes and academia. Such partnerships can channel commitments and actions from a wider set of actors, and their success depends on assigning roles, responsibilities and clear accountability. 99. Official development assistance will remain crucial, including for leveraging other finance, particularly for the least developed countries, landlocked developing countries and small island developing States, many countries in Africa and countries emerging from conflict and disasters. In addition to delivering on past commitments, it will be critical for donors to establish a timetable for meeting official development assistance targets and enhancing development effectiveness, including through the principles and actions set out in the Busan Partnership for Effective Development Cooperation. The impact of official development assistance can be magnified by other sources of finance, including innovative sources. 100. A universal development agenda beyond 2015 will require a robust framework for sustainable development finance including both private and public funding. International efforts are needed to create an environment conducive to business and thus channel capital flows and portfolio investments to the sustainable development agenda, to eliminate illicit financial flows, to enhance the regulation of secrecy jurisdictions and to promote asset recovery. Multilateral development banks have an important role to play in identifying novel sources of sustainable development financing. 101. At the same time, the financing framework for the post-2015 period will require the mobilization of domestic resources, including by broadening the tax base and improving tax administration, including in developing countries, and improving corporate and public governance of extractive industries in resource-rich countries. In addition, the financing framework will require commitment by the public and private scientific and research communities to develop new and transformative technologies. Harnessing science, technology and innovative methods will be central in areas ranging from information and communications technology to transportation, the environment and life-saving medicines. 102. South-South and triangular cooperation will also play a key role. This has increased significantly in recent years and has taken various forms, including infrastructure investment, technical cooperation, joint research and investment and information-sharing. 103. I welcome the Intergovernmental Committee of Experts on Sustainable Development Financing, which will propose options on a strategy to facilitate the mobilization of resources and their effective use. The biennial high-level Development Cooperation Forum and the follow-up to the International Conference on Financing for Development also provide important opportunities for charting a way forward. 104. Strengthen the international development cooperation framework. In order to respond to the challenges of funding and implementing a sustainable development agenda, both national and international institutions need to be strengthened to overcome the institutional and operational separation between economic, social and

13-40932

- 70 -

A/68/202

environmental responsibilities. I particularly welcome, in that regard, General Assembly resolution 67/290, in which the mandate, organizational structure and the working methods of the high-level political forum on sustainable development were defined. There is broad agreement that the forum should bring political support at the highest level to the coordination, coherence, implementation and monitoring of the commitments in a universal sustainable development agenda.

Comprehensive monitoring framework and robust accountability mechanisms 105. Strong monitoring and accountability will be crucial for the implementation of the post-2015 development agenda. Governments, especially parliaments, will play a central role. The monitoring and accountability framework can be strengthened through the direct engagement of citizens and responsible businesses making use of new technologies to expand coverage, to disaggregate data and to reduce costs. 106. The availability of information has improved during the implementation of the Millennium Development Goals. Still, there is an urgent need to further improve data collection, dissemination and analysis. Better baseline data and statistics are needed, especially because the post-2015 development agenda will involve measuring a broader range of indicators, requiring new and disaggregated data to capture gaps within and between population groups. Assessing the quality of outcomes should also feature more prominently in a results-based framework. As suggested by my High-level Panel, targets will be considered to have been achieved only if they are met for all relevant income and social groups. 107. In this context, the advances in information technology over the past decade provide an opportunity for a “data revolution”, which should enable countries to strengthen existing data sources and develop new and participatory sources of information. Many developing countries will require technical and financial support to build solid statistical systems and capacity so as to take advantage of these new opportunities.

Setting goals for the agenda 108. Experience with the Millennium Development Goals shows us that goals can be a powerful way of mobilizing common action. To be effective, they need to be limited in number, measurable, easy to communicate and adaptable to both global and local settings. 109. At the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, Member States agreed that the sustainable development goals “should be coherent with and integrated into the United Nations development agenda beyond 2015”. The many consultations and reports suggest that a single, balanced and comprehensive set of goals, universal to all nations, which aims to eradicate all forms of poverty and integrate sustainable development in all its dimensions, should form the core of the agenda. 110. The framing of the set of goals for sustainable development will inevitably need to be broader than that of the Millennium Development Goals in order to reflect new challenges. Illustrative goals and targets have been proposed in a range

13-40932

- 71 -

A/68/202

of reports, including those of the High-level Panel, the Sustainable Development Solutions Network and the Global Compact, and in several initiatives from the research community. 111. Goals and targets should take into account cross-cutting issues such as gender, disability, age and other factors leading to inequality, human rights, demographics, migration and partnerships. The new goals should embrace the emphasis on human well-being and include the use of metrics that go beyond standard income measures, such as surveys of subjective well-being and happiness, as introduced by many countries and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

Towards the formulation and launch of the agenda 112. The special event of the President of the General Assembly to be convened on 25 September will review current efforts to achieve the Millennium Development Goals and provide a timely opportunity for rallying political support for their acceleration. The event will also serve as an occasion to reflect on the broad contours of the development agenda beyond 2015. 113. Member States should therefore use the special event to generate clarity and a solid momentum for the important discussions and decisions that will follow. In the outcome of the event they could issue a call for convening a United Nations summit in 2015 to adopt the new development agenda. To that end, the Assembly could request its President to hold consultations on a procedural resolution for initiating preparations for the summit, in which it could request the Secretary-General to prepare a report on modalities, format and organization for submission to the Assembly by March 2014. That report could serve as the basis for the Assemblyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s consultations on a comprehensive resolution on the timing, scope, format, participation and expected outcome of a summit in 2015. 114. The General Assembly could launch the final phase of the intergovernmental consultations on a post-2015 development agenda at its sixty-ninth session. Those consultations could draw on the outcomes of several intergovernmental events, including the high-level meeting on disability and development, to be held in September, the high-level dialogue on international migration and development, to be held in October, the third International Conference on Small Island Developing States, the climate change summit in 2014 as well as the next conference on financing for development. Our goal must be to make 2015 a defining moment for people and the planet and to show what the United Nations and Member States, working together, can achieve.

IV. Recommendations 115. I call upon all Member States and the entire international community to take every step possible to achieve the Millennium Development Goals. This will require political courage and enlightened leadership on the part of all countries, regardless of their level of development. But we must, as stated in the Millennium Declaration, spare no effort to deliver on our policy and financial commitments. This is our duty â&#x20AC;&#x201D; our responsibility to humanity today and in the future. With political will and adequate resources, much can be accomplished before the 2015 deadline. Even then, some goals may not be met. Others, even if met, were designed

13-40932

- 72 -

A/68/202

to address only part of the challenge. The post-2015 development agenda will therefore need to complete the Millennium Development Goals, scale up their success, expand their scope and address new challenges. 116. I call upon Member States to adopt a universal post-2015 development agenda, with sustainable development at its core. Poverty eradication, inclusive growth targeting inequality, protecting and managing the natural resource base of our planet within a rights-based framework and cognizant of the nexus between peace and development — these are the overarching objectives of sustainable development. To realize this agenda, all countries need to recognize the profound transformations required to address the emerging challenges of sustainable development. These include economic shifts to sustainable patterns of production and consumption, effective governance and a renewed global partnership and means of implementation. 117. I call upon the international system, including the United Nations, to embrace a more coherent and effective response to support this agenda. I welcome the leadership of Member States as they establish the high-level political forum, tasked with providing coordination and coherence at the highest political level to foster sustainable development in every country. The United Nations system will continue to reform and make itself “fit for purpose” so as to respond to the challenges of this new path to sustainable development. 118. I encourage Member States to provide clarity on the road map to 2015. As Member States consider the processes leading up to 2015, they could be supported by a report of the Secretary-General during the main part of the sixty-ninth session of the General Assembly. This would draw upon the outcomes of the Open Working Group on Sustainable Development Goals, the Intergovernmental Committee of Experts on Sustainable Development Financing and other bodies. The intergovernmental process could lead to an agreement on the vision, principles, goals and targets of the post-2015 development agenda, as well as on the renewed global partnership for development.

V. Conclusion 119. Acting upon our common challenges demands a renewed commitment to international cooperation. Multilateralism is being tested. The United Nations, as a global beacon of solidarity, must do its part to strengthen collaboration and show that it can be effective in building the just, prosperous and sustainable world that people want and have a right to expect. Defining the post-2015 development agenda is thus a daunting yet inspiring and historic task for the United Nations and its Member States. 120. In so doing we must continue to listen to and involve the peoples of the world. We have heard their calls for peace and justice, eradicating poverty, realizing rights, eliminating inequality, enhancing accountability and preserving our planet. The world’s nations must unite behind a common programme to act on those aspirations. No one must be left behind. We must continue to build a future of justice and hope, a life of dignity for all.

13-40932

- 73 -

- 75 -

- 76 -

- 77 -

- 78 -

Asia Development Alliance (ADA) ADA Statement to Asia-Pacific Ministerial Dialogue On the UN Secretary General Report on MDGs and Post-2015 Development Agenda beyond 2015(A/68/202) 27 August 2013 We, members and partners of the Asia Development Alliance (ADA) composed of national and subnational development CSO/NGO platforms in Asia, participating in the 2nd Regional Consultation on Post-2015 development agenda, convened jointly with Global Call to Action against Poverty (GCAP)Asia in Bangkok, Thailand on 25 August 2013, Recognizing the importance of the Post 2015 Development Agenda as an opportunity and challenge to CSOs in Asia to empower people living in poverty and insecurity to claim their own rights, Welcoming the Asia-Pacific Ministerial Dialogue held in Bangkok on 26 and 27 August 2013, which is part of the engagement process between governments, civil society and other stake-holders in the UN development agenda beyond 2015, Welcoming the report of the UN Secretary “A life of dignity for all: accelerating progress towards the Millennium Development Goals and advancing the United Nations development agenda beyond 2015” (A/68/2015) submitted to the 68th session of the UN General Assembly Recalling the previous ADA statements on Post-2015 development agenda including ADA statement on Post-2015 Development Agenda (Bangkok, 2 Feb. 2013), ADA response to the Commu 4th HLP (Bali, 21 April 2013) and statement on the UN HLP Final Report (12 June, 2013), Recognizing the importance of inclusive and equitable partnerships for sustainable development among civil society, government including parliament, and private sector in line with internationally recognized principles such as Rio Principles, the UN Declaration on the Right to Development and the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, Recognizing the importance of Busan Global Partnership for Effective Development Partnership (GPEDC) as a means of implementation as well as a normative framework for inclusive and equitable partnerships in the Post-2015 process, Welcoming the inclusion in the report of UN Secretary General of exclusion and inequality, climate change, migration and democratic challenges, urbanization as well as the international development cooperation framework as stand-alone goals among 15 proposed goals for Post-2015 development agenda, Supporting the proposal in the Report of ‘a single, balanced and comprehensive set of goals , universal to all nations’ as core of the Post-2015 development agenda which is ‘limited in number, measurable, easy to communicate and adaptable to both global and local settings’,

1 - 79 -

Welcoming the recognition in the Report that the new sustainable development goals should include the emphasis on human well-being and go beyond the usual economic measures like Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and per capita income to include the use of new indicators such as surveys of wellbeing and happiness, Welcoming the emphasis in the Report on the role of civil society and parliaments in monitoring and accountability mechanisms in MDGs and Post-2015 development agenda, Welcoming the emphasis in the Report the importance of solid statistical system and capacityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; monitoring the progress in the realization of MDGs and Post-2015 development agenda, Mindful of the assessment of the achievement of MDGs in the Report that â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;progress has been insufficient and highly uneven despite significant progress in many countries and in some targetsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; 1.

Underscore the importance of addressing in the Post-2015 development agenda, in the context of prolonged global financial crisis, the root causes of structural poverty and increasing exclusion and inequality,

Emphasize the importance and urgency to transform current development paradigm and architecture from the current neoliberal framework to one that prioritizes human development, social protection and ecological sustainability over profits,

Stress the urgent need to reshape and revitalize global governance and partnerships, including the international financial institutions, to ensure the centrality and primacy of human rights, a more just, fairer and equitable global financial and trade architecture and framework, and the effectiveness of transparency and accountability mechanisms,

Stress the importance of upholding and implementing internationally recognized principles such as common but differentiated responsibilities, human rights-based approach to development, principle of free, prior and informed consent, principle of access to information, justice and public participation, and polluter pay principle,

Underscore the urgent need for innovate financing and to establish and strengthen national and international mechanisms to regulate transnational corporations and speculative financial capital including Financial Transaction Tax (FTT),

Emphasize the importance of disarmament and demilitarization to build sustainable peace and also to use the sizable military spending for poverty eradication and financing for development,

Emphasize the importance of universal ratification of all international human rights treaties, in particular, International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) and its Optional Protocol as well as their full implementation at domestic level,

Stress the importance of making full use of existing available monitoring and accountability human rights mechanisms, such as the UN special procedures, treaty bodies and Universal Periodic Review (UPR), and of effective CSO participation in all these,

Stress the importance of democratic ownership, transparency and multiple accountability for both providers and partners of development cooperation in Asia as emphasized in the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness and Busan Partnership for Effective Development Cooperation,

2 - 80 -

10. Stress the need to give priority to least developed countries, landlocked developing countries, small island developing countries as well as fragile and conflict-affected countries in Post-2015 development agenda, 11. Stress the urgent need for transition to low carbon economy while respecting bio-diversity and ecological limit and planetary boundary, 12. Stress the importance of comprehensive transfer of technology and environmentally sound technologies that respond to the needs and build capacities of developing countries and communities, more than just Information and Communication Technology (ICT), 13. Stress the need to respect and promote gender equality, equity and justice as well as womenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s human rights for gender empowerment, 14. Stress the need to recognize historical and ecological debts in addressing foreign debts, 15. Stress the need to recognize corruption as a key barrier to transparent and accountable governance and to promote transparency and democratic governance, 16. Urge Asian governments to take the following concrete actions proactively in order to make the Post-2015 process more inclusive and meaningful: a)

Recognize and work with civil society as a legitimate and equal partner for policy-sharing, monitoring and evaluation in the Post-2015 process and beyond, b) Hold regular policy consultation with civil society to get peopleâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s voices heard in the Post2015 development process and beyond, c) Facilitate CSOsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; access and participation in the UN inter-governmental consultations such as the UN Open Working Group on Sustainable Development Goals (OWG-SDGs) and other inter-governmental consultation and negotiation processes related to Post 2015, d) Ensure and promote an enabling environment for civil society to implement the Istanbul Principles and Seam Reap Consensus for CSO Development Effectiveness as recognized in the Article 22 of the Busan Partnership for Effective Development Cooperation in 2011, 17. Commit ourselves to make the Post-2015 process and outcome more meaningful and beneficial to billions of people living in poverty, injustice and insecurity for survival in Asia and other parts of the world.

Asia Development Alliance (ADA) is a regional forum of national and sub-national development NGO/CSO platforms in Asia to promote more effective communication, coordination and cooperation in the Post-2015 Development Agenda process. It was officially launched in Bangkok on 2 February 2013. http://www.facebook.com/groups/ADA2013/ ADA201322@gmail.com

3 - 81 -

▒ 참고자료

효과적인 개발협력을 위한 글로벌 파트너십(GPEDC) / CPDE 관련 주요 문서

- 83 -

Guide to the Monitoring Framework of the Global Partnership Preliminary version for consultation

Final guidance to be issued by mid-April 2013

Contacts: Ms. Marjolaine Nicod, tel. +33 1 45 24 87 67, email: marjolaine.nicod@oecd.org Ms. Hanna-Mari Kilpelainen, tel. +33 1 45 24 98 32, email: hanna-mari.kilpelainen@oecd.org Ms. Yuko Suzuki, tel. +1.212.906.6509, email: yuko.suzuki@undp.org Mr. Derek Kilner, tel. +1 212 906 5742, derek.kilner@undp.org 1 March 2013

- 85 -

ABOUT THIS DOCUMENT This document explains the objectives, process and methodology for monitoring the implementation of the selected commitments made in the Busan Partnership agreement through the set of global indicators and targets agreed in June 2012. It is designed to guide interested countries and organisations that wish to participate in monitoring efforts at the international level within the Global Partnership for Effective Development Co-operation (hereafter â&#x20AC;&#x153;the Global Partnershipâ&#x20AC;?). The first part of the document provides an overview of the ten indicators of progress and associated targets that are designed to support global accountability. It presents the purpose of the global monitoring framework and a description of the indicators and targets, as well as the process through which data will be collected, analysed and reported by the UNDP/OECD joint team supporting the Global Partnership. The second part of the document provides operational guidance for the collection and reporting of data on those global indicators that will draw on country-level sources of information. It includes guidance on how the process could be managed at country level and a set of questions and detailed definitions designed to assist relevant country stakeholders in collecting the necessary data. This guide is issued as a preliminary version for consultation. It is intended to provide country stakeholders with an understanding of what participation in the monitoring framework of the Global Partnership will entail and an opportunity to influence the finalisation of the guidance, including on aspects related to the monitoring process and methodology.

Specific aspects of the guidance where feedback is invited from country-level stakeholders are highlighted in boxes such as this throughout the document. Feedback would be particularly helpful on: - Arrangements at country level to collect the data (page 10) - Process for consolidating and submitting the data (page 12) - Finalising and field testing the indicator on results (page 30) - Field testing the indicator on predictability (page 34) - Field testing the indicator on mutual accountability (page 37) Feedback should be sent no later than 1 2 April 2013 so that the UNDP/OECD joint support team can finalise the operational guidance by mid-April 2013. See the list of contacts on the cover page of this document. Based on the feedback received, the joint UNDP/OECD support team will finalise this document and distribute it to country stakeholders to guide them as they participate in the global monitoring process. Country-level data should be submitted to the joint support team by 15 June 2013. This will enable the preparation of a global progress report to inform the ministerial-level meeting of the Global Partnership in the last quarter of 2013. These materials and further information on global monitoring can be found online on the Global Partnership website [website under construction - link to be added in due course].

2 Guide to the Monitoring Framework of the Global Partnership - Preliminary version for consultation

- 86 -

CONTENTS PART I – OVERVIEW OF THE GLOBAL FRAMEWORK FOR MONITORING PROGRESS IN IMPLEMENTING BUSAN COMMITMENTS ............................................................................................................................................. 4 Purpose of global monitoring .............................................................................................................................4 How will global monitoring inform dialogue within the Global Partnership? .............................................................4 Indicators and targets .......................................................................................................................................5 Data sources ....................................................................................................................................................6 What has changed with the global monitoring framework? ...................................................................................6 Indicative timeline for 2013................................................................................................................................7 PART II – GUIDANCE FOR DEVELOPING COUNTRY PARTICIPATION IN GLOBAL MONITORING EFFORTS .................9 Scope of monitoring efforts at country level.........................................................................................................9 Approach to collecting and validating data......................................................................................................... 10 Help Desk ...................................................................................................................................................... 11 Submission of data.......................................................................................................................................... 12 REFERENCES .................................................................................................................................................. 14 ANNEX I- INDICATOR FACTSHEETS.................................................................................................................. 15 ANNEX II – QUESTIONS AND DEFINITIONS TO GUIDE DATA COLLECTION AT COUNTRY LEVEL ........................... 28

About the Global Partnership for Effective Development Co-operation The Global Partnership is an inclusive political forum bringing together a wide range of countries and organisations from around the world that are committed to strengthen the effectiveness of development co-operation. The Global Partnership emerged from an agreement reached among the 160 countries, territories and organisations at the Fourth High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness in Busan, Republic of Korea, in 2011. It fosters engagement and knowledge exchange among the many, varied actors in the implementation of the agreements reached in Busan. It also supports regular monitoring of progress in implementation of the commitments made in Busan. The Busan Partnership agreement invited the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) to work together to provide support for the effective functioning of the Global Partnership. The UNDP/OECD joint support team includes dedicated staff across the two organisations to provide day to day support to the Global Partnership. This joint support team has been tasked to develop, refine and implement the global methodology for monitoring the implementation of Busan commitments. More information at: http://www.aideffectiveness.org/busanhlf4/about/global-partnership.html

3 Guide to the Monitoring Framework of the Global Partnership - Preliminary version for consultation

- 87 -

PART I – OVERVIEW OF THE GLOBAL FRAMEWORK FOR MONITORING PROGRESS IN IMPLEMENTING BUSAN COMMITMENTS This section presents the monitoring framework of the Global Partnership. It includes:

Key features of the global monitoring framework;

An overview of the set of indicators and associated targets which act as a basis for supporting international accountability for implementing the Busan Partnership agreement (each indicator is described in more detail, including means of measurement, method of calculation and data sources in Annex I); and

A description of the process and timeline through which data will be collected, analysed and reported at the international level.

PURPOSE OF GLOBAL MONITORING The purpose of the global monitoring framework is to support international accountability for “making progress in the implementation of commitments and actions agreed in Busan” (Busan Partnership agreement §35). It places particular emphasis on behaviour change in development co-operation efforts, which is in turn expected to contribute to the achievement of results as defined in the developing countries’ development strategies. Its aim is not to monitor development outcomes themselves, which are addressed through other international frameworks (e.g. the Millennium Development Goals). While entirely voluntary, participation in global monitoring efforts is important to provide evidence of progress and signal opportunities as well as obstacles for further progress. In this process, global monitoring efforts contribute to: x

Support accountability for the implementation of the Busan commitments and actions by providing a snapshot of progress at the international level;

Stimulate multi-stakeholder dialogue at both country and international levels on how to improve the effectiveness of development co-operation; and

Promote agreements on specific actions that are needed to enhance successful implementation of the Busan Partnership agreement and support accountability at country level.

The focus on accountability, which remains a central feature of the Busan Partnership agreement, needs to be balanced against the broader scope of the Global Partnership as a space for learning and knowledge-sharing. The nature of the agreement reached in Busan recognizes that different stakeholders may approach a common agenda for development in different ways. As such, partners engaged in South-South co-operation are not expected to participate in the monitoring framework of the Global Partnership but they will be invited to share their experience and achievements in implementing agreed principles of effective development co-operation on a voluntary basis.

HOW DOES GLOBAL MONITORING INFORM DIALOGUE WITHIN THE GLOBAL PARTNERSHIP? Global reports of progress on implementing Busan commitments will be produced to inform high-level political dialogue within the Global Partnership during ministerial-level meetings, which are expected to take place every 1824 months. A first stock-take of progress will be undertaken by mid-2013 to inform the preparation of the first ministerial-level meeting of the Global Partnership scheduled for the last quarter of 2013 (date and venue to be confirmed).

4 Guide to the Monitoring Framework of the Global Partnership - Preliminary version for consultation

- 88 -

While the indicators offer a degree of insight into the efforts of individual countries and organisations as they implement their commitments, they are intended to act as an input to a broader political dialogue on development co-operation and its effectiveness, rather than to act as a narrow score card for the ranking of individual countries and organisations. Evidence generated by the indicators will be complemented, where available, by additional relevant evidence of a more qualitative nature to enrich the analysis.

INDICATORS AND TARGETS The set of global indicators (see table below) includes some indicators which are based on the previous indicators from the Paris Declaration that developing countries have identified as particularly important. Other indicators capture some of the broader dimensions of the Busan Partnership agreement. INDICATORS TARGETS FOR 2015 1. Development co-operation is focused on results that meet developing countries’ priorities Extent of use of country results frameworks All providers of development co-operation use country results frameworks by co-operation providers 2. Civil society operates within an environment which maximises its engagement in and contribution to development A subset of measures from the Enabling Continued progress over time Environment Index 3. Engagement and contribution of the private sector to development Measure of the quality of public-private Continued progress over time dialogue 4. Transparency: information on development co-operation is publicly available Measure of state of implementation of the common standard by co-operation providers

Implement the common standard – All development co-operation providers are on track to implement a common, open standard for electronic publication of timely, comprehensive and forward-looking information on development cooperation 5. Development co-operation is more predictable (a) annual: proportion of development Halve the gap – halve the proportion of aid not disbursed within the fiscal year cooperation funding disbursed within the for which it was scheduled fiscal year within which it was scheduled by (Baseline year 2010) co-operation providers; and (b) medium-term: proportion of development Halve the gap – halve the proportion of development cooperation funding not cooperation funding covered by indicative covered by indicative forward spending plans provided at country level forward spending plans provided at country level 6. Aid is on budgets which are subject to parliamentary scrutiny % of development cooperation funding Halve the gap – halve the proportion of development cooperation flows to the scheduled for disbursement that is recorded government sector not reported on government’s budget(s) (with at least 85% in the annual budgets approved by the reported on budget) (Baseline year 2010) legislatures of developing countries 7. Mutual accountability among development co-operation actors is strengthened through inclusive reviews % of countries that undertake inclusive All developing countries have inclusive mutual assessment reviews in place mutual assessments of progress in (Baseline year 2010) implementing agreed commitments 8. Gender equality and women’s empowerment % of countries with systems that track and All developing countries have systems that track and make public resource make public allocations for gender equality allocations for gender equality and women’s empowerment and women’s empowerment 9. Effective institutions: developing countries’ systems are strengthened and used (a) Quality of developing country PFM systems; and

Half of developing countries move up at least one measure (i.e. 0.5 points) on the PFM/CPIA scale of performance (Baseline year 2010)

(b) Use of country PFM and procurement systems

Reduce the gap. [use the same logic as in Paris – close the gap by two-thirds where CPIA score is >=5; or by one-third where between 3.5 and 4.5] (Baseline year 2010)

10. Aid is untied % of aid that is fully untied

Continued progress over time (Baseline year 2010)

5 Guide to the Monitoring Framework of the Global Partnership - Preliminary version for consultation

- 89 -

A global target is available for each global indicator. This does not prevent stakeholders from agreeing different targets at the country level. For indicators where data is available, 2010 will be used as the baseline year. For others, a baseline will be determined depending on data availability. A detailed description of each indicator is provided in Annex I, which includes factsheets setting out the means of measurement, method of calculation and data source for each indicator.

DATA SOURCES The global monitoring framework consists of: i) indicators measured at the level of individual developing countries and aggregated to offer an overview of global progress; ii) and indicators established through desk reviews and other mechanisms. The table below establishes the distinction between those two categories of indicators. COUNTRY LEVEL (1)

INDICATORS 1 2 3 4 5a+b

Development co-operation is focused on results that meet developing countries’ priorities Civil society operates within an environment that maximises its engagement in and contribution to development

CIVICUS Enabling Environment Index Desk review in collaboration with the World Bank Institute

Engagement and contribution of the private sector to development Transparency: information on development co-operation is publicly available Development co-operation is more predictable (annual and medium-term)

OTHER PROCESSES

TBD

Aid is on budgets which are subject to parliamentary scrutiny

Mutual accountability strengthened through inclusive reviews

Gender equality and women’s empowerment

Collected by UN Women

Quality of developing country PFM systems

CPIA Desk review

Use of developing country PFM and procurement systems

Aid is untied

UNDESA work on mutual accountability

Collected by OECD-DAC

(1) See details provided in Part II of this document for guidance on data collection at country level.

WHAT HAS CHANGED WITH THE GLOBAL MONITORING FRAMEWORK? Indicators In line with the Busan Partnership agreement, which calls for a selective and relevant set of indicators and targets, the number of indicators relying on data collection at country level has been reduced in comparison with the Paris Declaration monitoring framework. This should alleviate the reporting burden on developing countries. Part II of this document focuses on guidance and definitions for data collection for the five indicators relying on country level sources of information. For indicators drawing from the Paris Declaration monitoring framework, it also highlights changes from previous practice for ease of reference for country stakeholders. Scope of reporting For the purpose of monitoring the Busan Partnership agreement, indicators relying on country-level sources of data will continue to assess the effectiveness of development co-operation, looking at transactions qualifying as Official Development Assistance (ODA), which include grants or loans of a concessional nature and whose main objective is the promotion of economic development and welfare. In addition, developing countries interested to monitor the effectiveness of a broader range of official development co-operation funds (e.g. non concessional lending) are encouraged to do so. 6 Guide to the Monitoring Framework of the Global Partnership - Preliminary version for consultation

- 90 -

Â&#x201E; Data collection grounded in existing processes To produce periodic global progress reports, the UNDP/OECD joint support team will draw to the extent possible on existing sources of data where available. At present, an increasing number of countries have their own frameworks and tools in place to monitor the effectiveness of development co-operation. By incorporating the standard indicators and definitions set out in this guide in such monitoring tools/frameworks, these countries can collect data and feed these to inform global monitoring efforts without the need to administer stand-alone questionnaires as was previously the case with the OECD-supported Survey on Monitoring the Paris Declaration. The idea behind this approach is to ensure a degree of aggregation and comparability in the evidence generated through national frameworks, while avoiding the creation of parallel monitoring tools and cycles that primarily serve international reporting needs. Ad hoc arrangements may need to be established for countries which are interested in participating in global monitoring efforts but do not have in place processes or tools for periodic collection of country-level data required for global indicators. Developing countries interested in participating in global monitoring efforts are encouraged to ground data collection in existing national monitoring processes, using their own tools when they exist, according to their own calendar agreed in-country. However, to ensure a maximum degree of consistency and comparability in the data, it will be important that the standard methodology and definitions agreed at the international level be used for those indicators which rely on country-level sources of information (see Annex II of this document). Â&#x201E; Dissemination of findings The UNDP/OECD joint support team will produce global reports of progress in implementing Busan commitments to inform ministerial-level dialogue. The preparation of such reports will be timed to coincide with ministerial-level meetings of the Global Partnership every 18-24 months. It will draw in part on evidence of progress and challenges gathered through the set of global indicators and relevant qualitative evidence to generate richer analysis. The scope of global progress reports will be guided by the work of the Steering Committee to ensure that the analysis is focused on areas of relevant interest to the Global Partnership. Global progress reports will not include standard country chapters (as was the case with the Paris Declaration monitoring surveys). As such, countries will need to consider how best to consolidate evidence of both quantitative and qualitative nature in the form of narrative reports and produce country-specific assessments of progress in implementing Busan commitments at country level which meet their own development co-operation priorities and monitoring needs. The UNDP/OECD joint support team will draw on existing country-level products to complement the evidence generated through the global indicators and will invite countries to point the team in the direction of any such products.

INDICATIVE TIME LINE FOR 2O13 The main steps and milestones described below are presented to guide countries and organisations interested to participate in global monitoring efforts so that they can plan and organise their efforts. Country-level specific milestones should be adapted to country contexts.

February

Dissemination of preliminary guidance

The dissemination of preliminary guidance provides an opportunity for interested country stakeholders to familiarise themselves with the Global Partnership monitoring process and methodology. This also provides an opportunity for country stakeholders to provide feedback on the guidance by 12 April.

March/April

Notification of participation in the process

Developing countries indicate their interest to the UNDP/OECD joint support team to participate in global monitoring efforts

7 Guide to the Monitoring Framework of the Global Partnership - Preliminary version for consultation

- 91 -

Mid-April

Finalisation of the guidance

The UNDP/OECD joint support team finalises the guidance, drawing on feedback received by 12 April

May-June

Data consolidation and validation

Developing country authorities engage with government representatives, providers of development co-operation and non-executive stakeholders to review collectively the country-level data to be used for measuring global indicators

Mid June

Submission of data

By 15 June 2013 at the latest, developing countries submit the data to the UNDP/OECD joint support team

July-August

Data validation and analysis at global level

The UNDP/OECD joint support team verifies the submitted data and uses it as the basis for the assessment of progress. By end July, draft calculations and tables of results by country and by provider of development cooperation are shared for review as part of the final validation process.

MidSeptember

Dissemination of data and analysis

Preliminary global progress report is made available to inform ministerial level discussions in October 2013 (timing TBC).

End 2013/Early 2014

Review of lessons learned

Under the strategic guidance of the Steering Committee, the UNDP/OECD joint support team will take stock of monitoring efforts to date and lessons learned to inform assessments of progress in the future through multistakeholder consultations and dialogue.

8 Guide to the Monitoring Framework of the Global Partnership - Preliminary version for consultation

- 92 -

PART II – GUIDANCE FOR DEVELOPING COUNTRY PARTICIPATION IN GLOBAL MONITORING EFFORTS This section describes the scope of country level efforts to feed into the global monitoring framework and includes a description of the process at country level (detailed definitions and advice to assist in the data collection for indicators based on country level information are available in Annex II). Country stakeholders are invited to provide feedback on arrangements for collecting data (page 10) and the process for consolidating and submitting the data (page 12).

SCOPE OF MONITORING EFFORTS AT COUNTRY LEVEL Which global indicators are measured using country-level sources of information? The global indicators listed below will be measured at the level of individual developing countries and aggregated to offer an overview of global progress: Indicators 1

Development co-operation is focused on results that meet developing countries’ priorities

Development co-operation is more predictable (annual)

Development co-operation is more predictable (medium-term)

Aid is on budgets which are subject to parliamentary scrutiny

Mutual accountability strengthened through inclusive reviews

Use of developing country PFM and procurement systems

The global framework complements and builds on country-level efforts to monitor progress and strengthen mutual accountability. Countries may include additional indicators and targets relevant for their specific context and priorities when developing their own frameworks to monitor the effectiveness of development co-operation. Other global indicators of progress which are assessed through desk reviews and other mechanisms are not described here (See Annex I for detailed factsheets on each indicator). What kind of development co-operation is included? For the purpose of monitoring the Busan Partnership agreement at the international level, development co-operation funding primarily refers to Official Development Assistance (ODA). This includes all transactions undertaken: i) with the promotion of economic development and welfare as the main objective; and ii) at concessional financial terms (if a loan, having a grant element of at least 25%). 1 In addition, developing countries interested to monitor the effectiveness of a broader range of development cooperation funds (e.g. non concessional lending) are encouraged to do so, provided that the following criteria are met: official source (bilateral or multilateral); and promotion of economic development and welfare as the main objective. Where development co-operation funding is provided to a developing country as part of a regional (multi-country) programme and it is possible to identify those activities and disbursements that are specific to that developing country, these disbursements should also be recorded.

Detailed definitions available in OECD-DAC Statistical Directives (OECD, 2007).

9 Guide to the Monitoring Framework of the Global Partnership - Preliminary version for consultation

- 93 -

The following official transactions are excluded from the scope of the Global Partnership monitoring efforts and should not be recorded: x

Transactions made to beneficiaries that are not based in the developing country or to regional organisations that cannot be identified at country level.

Debt reorganisation/restructuring.

Emergency and relief assistance.

APPROACH TO COLLECTING AND VALIDATING DATA F eedback invited by 12 April: Arrangem ents at country level to collect data Developing country governments are invited to discuss this section with country stakeholders and to provide feedback to the UNDP/OECD joint support team on: - the feasibility and ways of grounding data collection in existing country-level processes and tools – including examples which could be added in the box below; - suggestions on ad hoc government-led arrangements to be put in place when data required for informing Busan global monitoring indicators are not collected routinely at the country level. Grounding data collection in country processes Consistent with the focus of the Busan Partnership agreement on implementation at country level, developing countries are encouraged to agree on their own country-specific frameworks for monitoring progress and promoting mutual accountability (BPa §35a). Such frameworks could provide the basis for the collection of data necessary for global indicators. Embedding such data collection within countries’ existing processes, using their own tools and agreed in-country calendars would help to avoid the creation of parallel monitoring tools and cycles that primarily serve international reporting needs. Ways of grounding data collection in country processes – Illustrative examples A growing number of countries have embedded monitoring of development co-operation effectiveness or partnership commitments in their own systems and processes. Ways of achieving this include the following approaches: -

Incorporation of selected Paris Declaration and now Busan global indicators in data collection through country-level aid management systems (e.g. Burundi Aid Management Platform, Cambodia ODA database, Rwanda Development Assistance Database). Use of some or all Paris Declaration and now Busan global indicators in country-level mutual accountability frameworks (e.g. Mozambique Performance Assessment Framework of the Programme Aid Partnership, Rwanda Donor Performance Assessment Framework) Collection and analysis of data from provider of development co-operation in advance of annual partnership talks.

Ad hoc arrangements may need to be established for countries which are interested in participating in global monitoring efforts but do not have in place processes or tools for periodic collection of country-level data required for global indicators. These could include arrangements similar to those used for the Paris Declaration surveys (e.g. using stand alone questionnaires). However, such arrangements should, whenever possible, be designed in a way that supports broader country-level monitoring and reporting efforts beyond those of the Global Partnership.

10 Guide to the Monitoring Framework of the Global Partnership - Preliminary version for consultation

- 94 -

Roles of various stakeholders Developing country governments play a central role in leading monitoring efforts at country level. This involves the following aspects: x

ensuring that country stakeholders are fully informed about Busan global monitoring efforts and facilitating their contribution to the process;

overseeing the collection of data on Busan global indicators either through existing mechanisms and tools or ad hoc processes;

organising multi-stakeholder dialogue in support of data consolidation and validation and ensuring the overall quality of data; and

submitting data to the UNDP/OECD joint support team.

In previous global efforts to monitor aid effectiveness, governments found it useful to nominate national coordinators who were typically senior officials in ministries of finance, planning or foreign affairs responsible for aid management and coordination. They also found it useful to appoint a ‘donor’ focal point to assist and support them in this process. Providers of development co-operation are called upon to actively support the process at country level by providing the necessary data to the government. Global programmes (for example, The Global Fund, GAVI…) are also invited to participate. The in-country head of the organisation providing development co-operation is responsible for ensuring the quality and accuracy of reporting. Parliamentarians, civil society organisations, the private sector and other stakeholders play an important role in monitoring progress in implementing Busan commitments although country-level data used to measure global indicators is mainly provided by governments and providers of development co-operation. While they are not expected to report to developing country authorities in the context of country-level data collection for selected Busan indicators (even when they implement projects and programmes funded by official development assistance), they are encouraged to take part in inclusive country level dialogue on effective development co-operation through relevant consultations and meetings convened by the government. The UNDP/OECD joint support team will also in due course facilitate country-level access to information on the indicators measured through global processes so that they can also reflect on the findings in their country-level dialogue. Validation of data through inclusive country level dialogue Close communication among a wide range of stakeholders is important in ensuring the quality of the reporting on indicators as a monitoring tool, and in strengthening mutual understanding. Local authorities, parliamentarians, CSOs and representatives of the private sector are encouraged to participate in country dialogue around monitoring Busan commitments. Undertaken in the context of countries’ own monitoring frameworks and coordination processes, these should wherever possible be used as an opportunity to review key data that will be shared with the UNDP/OECD joint support team. Such multi-stakeholder dialogue and validation is an important contribution to ensure the accuracy of data used to monitor progress at the global level. In order to document good practice in multi-stakeholder countrylevel engagement in global monitoring efforts, countries will be invited to report on the consultation around the process as part of their submission of data to the UNDP/OECD joint support team.

HELP DESK A web-based “help desk” will be established within the knowledge platform for the Global Partnership, which is intended to provide a peer exchange space to share access to expertise, technical information and good practices. 2

This web solution will build on the UNDP Teamworks web platform and will offer a password-protected ‘intranet’ for Global Partnership stakeholders.

11 Guide to the Monitoring Framework of the Global Partnership - Preliminary version for consultation

- 95 -

For the purpose of global monitoring, the help desk will provide a space for exchange of experience among country stakeholders and access to technical advice about the implementation of the agreed methodologies and processes for monitoring. The purpose will be to ensure that arrangements for global monitoring, while relying on existing sources of data, will provide reliable and comparable data across participating countries and organisations. The monitoring section in the web-based knowledge platform will include key reference materials. It will be regularly updated with examples illustrating responses to frequently asked questions and will offer a “one stop shop” for all ad hoc questions on indicators and the supporting methodology. The help desk function is co-ordinated by the UNDP/OECD joint support team and brings together specialists from the two organisations, including from the UNDP regional centres and country offices, which play a key role in supporting overall country-level implementation of Busan commitments and monitoring of progress.

H ow d o I contact the help desk? [Contact details and relevant link to the global monitoring section in the web-based knowledge platform of the Global Partnership will be provided here in due course.] You may also wish to visit the global monitoring section of the knowledge platform for the Global Partnership [under construction], which contains relevant documents and responses to frequently asked questions.

SUBMISSION OF DATA Feedback invited by 31 M arch: Process for consolidating and subm itting the data Developing country governments are invited to provide feedback on options regarding the consolidation and reporting of data to the UNDP/ OECD joint support team: - appropriateness of consolidating data from government and providers of development co-operation into a single Country spreadsheet (Excel format); - desirability and feasibility of reporting data into an online system, using web-based forms. This could also include exploring the feasibility for developing country governments to extract data from AIMS/DADS for the purpose of reporting on Busan global monitoring indicators. Completing the country spreadsheet It is envisioned that developing countries would report to the UNDP/OECD joint support team by means of a country spreadsheet specially designed for the purpose of participating in global monitoring efforts. This Country Spreadsheet is an Excel spreadsheet that records the data for the indicators measured through country-level information. It combines data provided by both developing country governments and providers of development cooperation, as summarised in the table below:

INDICATORS

Providers of development cooperation

Governments

Development co-operation is focused on results that meet developing countries’ priorities

Development co-operation is more predictable (annual)

Development co-operation is more predictable (medium-term)

Aid is on budgets which are subject to parliamentary scrutiny

Mutual accountability strengthened through inclusive reviews

12 Guide to the Monitoring Framework of the Global Partnership - Preliminary version for consultation

- 96 -

Use of developing country PFM and procurement systems

Notes: i. ii. iii.

Definitions of key terms, specific questions and additional guidance for all of the indicators listed in the above table are provided in Annex II. Data concerning providers of development co-operation that have different entities (agencies of distinct programmes) should be combined 3. In order to avoid double counting in cases where one provider of development co-operation disburses funds on behalf of another provider – bilateral or multilateral, it is o nly the provider of development co-operation who makes the final disbursement to the government that should report on these funds.

The Country Spreadsheet can be downloaded from [Relevant web link will be provided here in due course.] Submission of the country spreadsheet Once the Country Spreadsheet has been completed and validated at country level, it should be communicated to the UNDP/OECD joint support team by 15 June 2013 at the latest. Following this, the UNDP/OECD joint support team will follow up with the designated developing country authorities for any necessary clarification. The Country Spreadsheet should be submitted by email to [Contact details will be provided here in due course]. Complementary evidence Countries are also encouraged to share any additional information (e.g. existing country reports and narratives) that the UNDP/OECD joint support team could use as a basis to enrich the global analysis of progress and challenges in implementing Busan commitments. This would best be done by providing the link to websites where such documentation can be downloaded and pointing the joint support team in the direction of such documentation, highlighting relevant country-specific messages that could be used to inform the preparation of global progress reports.

UN agencies are encouraged to report individually at country level. However, for the purpose of Busan global monitoring efforts, only combined reporting from ALL UN agencies should be included in the Country Spreadsheet. Results at the global level will be presented under a single heading: “United Nations”, with the exception of IFAD.

13 Guide to the Monitoring Framework of the Global Partnership - Preliminary version for consultation

- 97 -

REFERENCES B. Herzberg and A. Wright (2006), The Public-Private Dialogue Handbook: a Toolkit for Business Environment Reformers, DFID, World Bank, IFC, OECD, December 2006, available online at: www.publicprivatedialogue.org/papers/PPD%20handbook.pdf CIVICUS (2012), Global Index on the Enabling Environment: monitoring global trends in civil societyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s operating environment, draft methodological note shared with the Post-Busan Interim Group, May 2012, available online at: www.csoeffectiveness.org/IMG/pdf/civicus_note_to_oecd_monitoring_the_enabling_environment_for_civil_society.pdf OECD (2007), Reporting Directives for the Creditor Reporting System, 4 September, DCD/DAC(2007), Reporting directives for the Creditor Reporting System, available online at: www.oecd.org/dac/stats/crsdirectives OECD (2011), Aid Effectiveness 2011: Progress in Implementing the Paris Declaration, OECD, Paris, available online at: http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/development/aid-effectiveness-2011_9789264125780-en World Bank (2011), CPIA 2011, 15 September, Operations Policy and Country Services, World Bank, available online at: http://www.worldbank.org/ida/IRAI-2011.html

14 Guide to the Monitoring Framework of the Global Partnership - Preliminary version for consultation

- 98 -

ANNEX I â&#x20AC;&#x201C; INDICATOR FACTSHEETS

Detailed information on each indicator of the monitoring framework of the Global Partnership (see Table in Part I of the document) is provided in the factsheets presented in this Annex. These provide details on the methodology underpinning each indicator, including means of measurement, method of calculation and data source.

15 Guide to the Monitoring Framework of the Global Partnership - Preliminary version for consultation

- 99 -

Indicator 1. Development co-operation is focused on results that meet developing countries’ priorities Note: This is an area where no measurement has been undertaken so far. As such, the detailed definitions and means of measurement for this indicator remain subject to further work of a technical nature and would require field testing to refine the proposed assessment criteria. The purpose of this indicator is not to serve a narrow scorecard but to provide a basis to better understand the reasons for progress and remaining challenges in strengthening country-led results frameworks and their associated monitoring and evaluation systems by using them and to raise political attention on issues such as continued additional or parallel reporting requirements by providers of development co-operation. Ways of establishing a link with the quality of results frameworks, and in particular the inclusive process through which they have been developed, has been factored in the proposed dimensions for assessing progress in this area which are currently being reviewed (see Annex II for the proposed approach). Relevant Busan commitment Paris Declaration (§45) and Accra (§23) commitments, as reaffirmed in Busan, to rely on partner country results frameworks and monitoring and evaluation systems. Busan commitment to adopt transparent, country-led and country-level results frameworks and platforms as a common tool among all concerned actors to assess performance based on indicators drawn from country development priorities and goals and with providers of development co-operation minimising their use of additional frameworks. (§18a) Indicator construction Numerator:

Denominator:

Measure

Number of development co-operation providers that are using country results frameworks Total number of development cooperation providers

% of providers of development co-operation using country results frameworks.

It is proposed to assess the extent to which providers of development co-operation use country results frameworks on the basis of: use of objectives and targets from national development strategy as a reference for delivery and performance assessment; and use of the country’s own indicators, national statistics and monitoring and evaluation systems to monitor progress.

A score will be assigned using a graduated scale to assess the extent to which providers of development cooperation use country results frameworks, ranging from non use, through partial use to full use, on the basis of several dimensions which are still under discussion.

Data source

Aggregation

Country level data – partner country government assessment against three dimensions.

Global, developing country, and provider of development co-operation.

Periodicity to be determined at country level depending on needs and priorities and existing mutual accountability review processes.

Developing country and provider aggregation: % of providers and % of developing countries respectively. For global aggregation, a weighted average is used: i.e. sum of all numerator values divided by the sum of all denominator values. The unit of observation is the provider of development cooperation in a given developing country. Proposed target All providers of development co-operation use country results frameworks.

Baseline To be determined

Rationale: based on the Busan commitment which calls on all actors to change behaviour in this area.

16 Guide to the Monitoring Framework of the Global Partnership - Preliminary version for consultation

- 100 -

Indicator 2. Civil society operates within an environment that maximises its engagement in and contribution to development Note: Review and consultation efforts have pointed to the absence of an existing, proven methodology that can be drawn on to assess the Busan commitments in this area. Consensus was reached on the proposal to draw on a new Environment Index being developed and implemented by CIVICUS. This approach will see CIVICUS collecting data and providing it for use in the global reports of progress. Work on the development of the EEI is ongoing. It is hoped that initial results of the first index would be made available in time to be featured in the global progress report which will be prepared by mid-2013 ahead of the ministerial-level meeting of the Global Partnership in October 2013. Relevant Busan commitment [we will] “implement fully our respective commitments to enable CSOs to exercise their roles as independent development actors, with a particular focus on an enabling environment, consistent with agreed international rights, that maximises the contributions of CSOs to development.” (Busan §22a). Indicator construction This global indicator will draw on part of the CIVICUS Enabling Environment Index, and will take the form of an average of selected dimensions/measures from within the Index. The final selection of dimensions and measures will be influenced by CIVICUS’ ongoing work as part of a broader civil society-led initiative on the methodology for the Enabling Environment Index.

Measure Selected components of the CIVICUS Enabling Environment Index. Note: this index is currently being developed, and will offer a composite measure of the external environment within which civil society operates.

In finalising the selection of dimensions or sub-dimensions to be drawn from the CIVICUS index and used in this global indicator, particular consideration will be given to those components that relate most directly to the Busan commitments, and are largely within the control of stakeholders adhering to the Busan Partnership, i.e: x

Legal and regulatory framework for civil society operations; and

Selected elements of the governance / political environment that have a direct bearing on CSO activity.

The index is being constructed in a way that supports comparison over time and across countries. Data source

Aggregation

CIVICUS Enabling Environment Index Measures and underlying data sources are still being identified and are likely to include datasets compiled by a range of public, private and non-governmental entities. CIVICUS (2012) provides a draft mapping of potential data sources.

The unit of observation is the individual country (for all countries – both developing and developed – that choose to participate and for which data are available).

The method for global aggregation will depend in part on final choice of indicator (could look at % of countries scoring above a particular score; or average score across all countries) to judge whether the target is met or not.

Baseline

Proposed target

To be determined (based on finalisation of indicator and first round of data compilation to be undertaken by CIVICUS).

Continued progress over time. Rationale: there is no basis in the Busan Partneship agreement for a more specific target and the purpose of the indicator is to provide an entry point for a political discussion based on broad trends observed.

17 Guide to the Monitoring Framework of the Global Partnership - Preliminary version for consultation

- 101 -

Indicator 3. Engagement and contribution of the private sector to development Note: Dialogue among interested stakeholders within the Building Block on Public-Private Co-operation have confirmed that the monitoring and evaluation framework provided in the Public-Private Dialogue Handbook (B. Herzberg and Wright A., 2006 at www.publicprivatedialogue.org) provides a useful basis for further work on the indicator. The Public-Private dialogue is an initiative aimed at building knowledge and capacity for public-private dialogue. It is hosted in the World Bank Institute and has been sponsored by DFID, the World Bank, IFC, and the OECD Development Centre. Next steps include: development of a comparative measurement tool and consultation with relevant stakeholders, using the Building Block as a sounding board; piloting the tool in a selected group of countries; and reviewing the findings from the pilot and validating the proposed methodology through a broad consultative process involving the full range of stakeholders involved in public-private dialogue. This approach will provide initial benchmarking on the quality of public-private dialogue in a selected number of countries, which will serve as a basis to inform the ministerial-level discussions within the Global Partnership scheduled in October 2013. Relevant Busan commitment Commitment to enable the participation of the private sector in the design and implementation of development policies and strategies to foster sustainable growth and poverty reduction (BPaยง32b) Indicator construction The indicator will assess the quality of public-private dialogue as a proxy for private sector engagement (local and foreign, small, medium and large enterprises, business associations, chambers of commerce) and trade unions in country level dialogue around policy strategies and reforms of the enabling environment for private sector investment and development. Proposed dimensions to be assessed could include: x existence of a mandate / legal basis formalising the dialogue; x representativeness of private sector actors engaged in the dialogue; mechanisms in place to facilitate the dialogue; x some basic indication on the outcomes of the dialogue (e.g. number of reforms proposals and reforms enacted). Data source In the absence of existing data sources in this area, the UNDP/OECD joint support team is working closely with the WBI to review self assessments by countries having a public private dialogue process in place to ensure a credible and comparable assessment. This process consists of a desk review complemented with targeted interviews with a selected range of stakeholders to complement the assessment with perspectives from a wider range of stakeholders.

Measure Detailed measure to be determined, drawing on the existing methodology for the assessment of the effectiveness of public-private dialogue. A multidimensional index is envisaged to assess the quality of public-private dialogue on a scale from 1 to 10 to support benchmarking and comparison.

Aggregation The unit of observation is the individual developing country. The method for global aggregation will depend in part on the final choice of the indicator (could look at % of countries scoring above a particular score; or average score across all countries).

Baseline

Proposed target

To be determined (depending on the final choice of the indicator and data source).

Continued progress over time. Rationale: the purpose of the indicator is to provide means to support broader political discussion on enhanced public private cooperation and further mobilisation of the private sector within the Global Partnership.

18 Guide to the Monitoring Framework of the Global Partnership - Preliminary version for consultation

- 102 -

Indicator 4. Transparency: information on development co-operation is publicly available Note: Since the agreement on the common, open standard in June 2012, work has been on-going to determine what constitutes implementation of the standard as called for in the Busan agreement. Given that the common standard comprehensively draws together two existing standards – the DAC Creditor Reporting System and Forward Spending Survey (CRS/FSS) and IATI – there remains a need to further clarify what the ‘minimum requirement’ is that all providers must fulfil in order to implement the standard by 2015. Based on discussions with relevant stakeholders, including inputs from the ad hoc group that defined and brokered the common standard itself, the UNDP/OECD joint support team is further consulting with relevant stakeholders to forge agreement on the indicator. Relevant Busan commitment “Implement a common, open standard for electronic publication of timely, comprehensive and forward-looking information on resources provided through development co-operation... This standard must meet the information needs of developing countries and non-state actors... We will [aim to] implement it fully by December 2015. Busan (§23c). Indicator construction

Measure

Ongoing discussions suggest that the indicator could be constructed from three main components referred to in the Busan commitment, measuring the i) timely; ii) comprehensive; and iii) forward looking nature of providers’ resource information.

A graduated measure of the degree of implementation of the common standard by each provider of development co-operation (exact measure to be determined).

It is envisioned that the indicator will assess provision of information on historical, current and future resource flows with a sufficient degree of disaggregation to meet recipient countries’ information needs. Exact definitions and criteria will be determined drawing on the agreed main components of the indicator. Data source

Aggregation

Desk review of data available through reporting on the components of the common, open standard (CRS/FSS and IATI). No collection of data at the country level is foreseen.

The proposed unit of observation is the individual country providing development co-operation (in the case of bilateral co-operation providers) or organisation (in the case of multilateral providers). In other words, the indicator looks at whether a given provider of development co-operation has implemented the common standard (not how much aid or development cooperation funding is covered by the standard).

Details to be determined, depending on final choice of indicator.

Ideally the indicator would be defined in a way that supports aggregation to the global level, offering a snapshot of progress. Baseline To be determined on the basis of the final indicator construction (2011 would measure progress since Busan, whereas 2012 would link measurement to implementation plans prepared in 2012)

Proposed target for end 2015 Implement the common standard – All providers of development co-operation are on track to implement by 2015 a common, open standard for electronic publication of timely, comprehensive and forward-looking information on development co-operation Rationale: Busan commitment

19 Guide to the Monitoring Framework of the Global Partnership - Preliminary version for consultation

- 103 -

Indicator 5a. Development co-operation is more predictable (annual predictability) Paris Declaration commitment to “disburse aid in a timely and predictable fashion according to agreed schedules” (PD §26; reaffirmed in Busan) Indicator construction Numerator:

Denominator:

Measure

Development co-operation flows reported by provider as disbursed in year n Development co-operation flows scheduled for disbursement by provider in year n and communicated to developing country government

% of development cooperation funding for the government sector disbursed in the year for which it was scheduled by providers of development co-operation Note that this indicator builds on the broad approach used in Paris Declaration indicator 7

Data source Country-level data (self-reporting development co-operation)

Aggregation by

providers

In order to avoid the situation in which under- and overdisbursements cancel each other out, the ratio is inverted in cases where the numerator is greater than the denominator. This is consistent with the approach taken in OECD (2011). Note however that when aggregating (globally, by country or by provider of development co-operation), a weighted average is now used. i.e. sum of all numerator values divided by the sum of all denominator values. This replaces the average country ratio used in OECD (2011) and previous work.

Baseline

Proposed target for 2015

2010 (estimate, 78 countries): 75%

Halve the gap – halve the proportion of development cooperation funding not disbursed within the fiscal year for which it was scheduled Rationale: based on Paris Declaration target

20 Guide to the Monitoring Framework of the Global Partnership - Preliminary version for consultation

- 104 -

Indicator 5b. Development co-operation is more predictable (medium-term predictability) Relevant Busan commitment “By 2013... provide available, regular, timely rolling three- to five-year indicative forward expenditure and/or implementation plans as agreed in Accra...” (Busan §24a). Indicator construction

Measure

For a single co-operation provider in a given country:

Estimated proportion of development co-operation covered by indicative forward expenditure and/or implementation plans covering at least three years ahead.

indicator year t = average (at+1, at+2, at+3) ...where at+n takes a binary value depending on the availability by the end of year t of a forward expenditure plan covering year t+n. 1 if plan available, else 0. Developing country government determines whether, on the basis of its records, a forward expenditure plan is available for each co-operation provider covering each of the next three years. In order to score “Yes”, the plan must meet the following criteria: x The plan covers all known components of the co-operation provider’s country programme (for example, it covers all development co-operation modalities, and includes estimates of future development co-operation flows that have yet to be allocated to specific activities or signed in cooperation agreements). x Figures provided relate to the partner country government’s fiscal year. (These criteria are subject to field-testing and further refinement). Data source

Aggregation

Data collected at country level (reporting by developing country governments on the availability of forward plans).

Aggregation at the level of each developing country, cooperation provider, and at the global level. Average weighted by volume of development co-operation disbursed in t-1 (previous year). Note that this method of aggregation is intended to provide an estimate of the scale of resources covered by indicative forward expenditure and/or implementation plans. This reflects the relative importance that a developing country attaches to obtaining forward spending information from a large co-operation provider vis-à-vis a small provider.

Baseline

Proposed target

Not available.

Halve the gap – halve the proportion of development cooperation not covered by indicative forward spending plans provided at the country level. (Baseline year: 2011). Rationale: following the same approach as for in-year predictability (see indicator 5a)

21 Guide to the Monitoring Framework of the Global Partnership - Preliminary version for consultation

- 105 -

Indicator 6. Aid is on budgets which are subject to parliamentary scrutiny Relevant Busan commitment Busan commitment to “...strengthen the role of parliaments in the oversight of development processes” (§21a); and also Accra commitment to “facilitate parliamentary oversight by implementing greater transparency in public financial management, including public disclosure of revenues, budgets, expenditures...” (AAA §24). Indicator construction

Measure

Numerator:

Development co-operation funding recorded in annual budget for year n.

Denominator:

Development co-operation funding scheduled for disbursement in year n by co-operation providers and communicated to developing country government at the outset of year n

% of development co-operation funding scheduled for disbursement that is recorded in the annual budgets approved by the legislatures of developing countries. Note that this indicator builds on the broad approach used in Paris Declaration indicator 3

Note that the denominator used in this indicator is the same as that used in the calculation of indicator 5a (annual predictability) Data source

Aggregation

Data collected at the country level (data taken from existing government budgets and self-reporting by providers of development co-operation)

In order to avoid the situation in which under- and overestimates cancel each other out, the ratio is inverted in cases where the numerator is greater than the denominator. This is consistent with the approach taken in OECD (2011). Note however that when aggregating (global, developing country or co-operation provider), a weighted average is now used. i.e. sum of all numerator values divided by the sum of all denominator values. This replaces the average country ratio used in OECD (2011) and previous work.

Baseline

Proposed target

To be determined and only available for countries having the calendar year as a fiscal year (data for the denominator are currently available only by calendar year)

Halve the gap – halve the proportion of development cooperation flows to the government sector not reported on government’s budget(s) (with at least 85% reported on budget)

For reference, aid captured in budgets in 2010 as a percentage of aid disbursements (PD indicator 3, 78 countries): 41%

Baseline year 2010 Rationale: Paris Declaration target

22 Guide to the Monitoring Framework of the Global Partnership - Preliminary version for consultation

- 106 -

Indicator 7. Mutual accountability among co-operation actors is strengthened through inclusive reviews Relevant Busan commitment Paris commitment to jointly assess mutual progress in implementing aid effectiveness commitments (PD §50). Accra commitment to ensure mutual assessment reviews in place in all countries, with stronger parliamentary scrutiny and citizen engagement (AAA §24b). Busan commitment to encourage participation of all development co-operation actors in these processes (§18d); agree country-led frameworks to monitor progress and promote mutual accountability (§35a). Indicator construction

Measure

Numerator:

Number of countries considered to have a mutual assessment

Denominator:

Total number of countries

% of countries that undertake inclusive mutual assessments of progress in implementing agreed commitments and meet at least four of the five proposed criteria

A country is considered to have a mutual assessment in place when at least four of the five criteria below are met: x Existence of an aid or partnership policy that defines a country’s development co-operation priorities x Existence of country-level targets for effective development co-operation for both developing country government and providers of development co-operation x Assessment against these targets undertaken jointly by government and providers at senior level in the past two years. x Active involvement of local governments and non executive stakeholders in such reviews. x Comprehensive results of such exercises are made public.

Note that this indicator takes the form of an improved version of Paris Declaration indicator 12

Data source

Aggregation

Country-level data. Self-reporting against established criteria, using UNDESA work on mutual accountability.

The unit of observation is the individual developing country (score across five dimensions). Global aggregation based on % of countries meeting at least four of the five criteria.

Baseline

Proposed target

2010 estimate * = 38% (of 78 countries)

All developing countries assessment reviews in place

* Note that the criteria proposed in the current methodology have evolved since those used to collect the 2010 baseline. As such this is an estimate only.

Rationale: Paris target

23 Guide to the Monitoring Framework of the Global Partnership - Preliminary version for consultation

- 107 -

have

inclusive

mutual

Indicator 8. Gender equality and women’s empowerment Note: UN Women is currently leading field testing of this indicator in 14 countries and intends to roll out the indicator in 20 countries in 2013. In the spirit of the on-going discussions on the post-2015 development framework, countries at all stages of development are welcome to share evidence on their efforts in this area and performance against this indicator in view of the interest in advancing mutual learning and the exchange of experiences.

Relevant Busan commitment “[We will] accelerate and deepen efforts to collect, disseminate, harmonise and make full use of data disaggregated by sex to inform policy decisions and guide investments, ensuring in turn that public expenditures are targeted appropriately to benefit both women and men.” (Busan §20a). Indicator construction

Measure

Numerator: Number of countries that have a system for tracking allocations for gender equality and women’s empowerment

Proportion of developing countries with systems to track and make public allocations for gender equality and women’s empowerment

Denominator: Total number of countries It is suggested that in order to be considered to “have a system in place”, countries would need to fulfill two of the following criteria, noting that criteria 4 is required: 1. There is an official government statement on a system for tracking allocations for gender equality and women’s empowerment. This can for example be a framework or legislation on gender responsive budgeting. 2. Allocations for gender equality and women’s empowerment are systematically tracked. 3. There is leadership and oversight of the tracking system by the central government unit in charge of public expenditures (for example the Finance Ministry or a sector ministry). 4. Gender equality focused budget information is publically available. This could be through parliamentary oversight, civil society scrutiny, publications, websites or other means. Countries may indicate if they a) use gender-specific indicators and data disaggregated by sex to inform budget allocation decisions at sectoral and/or local/district level; and b) if they conduct regular impact assessments of budgets which address how women and men benefit respectively from government expenditures. Data source

Aggregation

UN Women corporate reporting, based on data collected from ministries of finance at country level, drawing on existing data sources wherever possible

The unit of observation is the individual developing country.

Baseline

Proposed target

Not available. Data from UN Women annual reports for 2013 will provide the baseline.

All developing countries have systems that track and make public allocations for gender equality and women’s empowerment by 2015.

Global aggregation: sum of or percentage of developing countries.

24 Guide to the Monitoring Framework of the Global Partnership - Preliminary version for consultation

- 108 -

Indicator 9a. Quality of developing country PFM systems Relevant Busan commitment Paris Declaration commitments to strengthen country systems at the same time as increasing their use (PD §17-30; reaffirmed in Busan §19) Indicator construction

Measure

This indicator takes the form of a score ranging from 1.0 (lowest) to 6.0 (highest), scored in half-point increments (0.5).

Same as Paris Declaration indicator 2a

The following three dimensions are rated by the World Bank using established criteria: a. b.

This indicator is based on the World Bank Country Policy and Institutional Assessment (CPIA). It takes the value of one CPIA criterion – indicator 13 – which offers a measure of the quality of a developing country’s budget and financial management system

a comprehensive and credible budget, linked to policy priorities; effective financial management systems to ensure that the budget is implemented as intended in a controlled and predictable way; and timely and accurate accounting and fiscal reporting, including timely and audited public accounts and effective arrangements for follow up.

All three dimensions are given equal weighting. See World Bank (2010) for the detailed criteria underpinning each dimension. Data source

Aggregation

World Bank (existing international dataset, published on an annual basis and available for IDA countries).

The unit of observation is the individual developing country.

Baseline

When aggregating to the global level, the measure used is the percentage of developing countries moving up at least one measure (i.e. 0.5 points) since the baseline year. Proposed target for 2015

2010 (for countries participating in the 2011 PD Survey): CPIA PFM Score Num. of countries %

>=5

4.5

4.0

3.5

<3.0

All

14%

45%

21%

Half of developing countries move up at least one measure (i.e. 0.5 points) on the PFM/CPIA scale of performance Rationale: Paris Declaration target

16% 100%

25 Guide to the Monitoring Framework of the Global Partnership - Preliminary version for consultation

- 109 -

Indicator 9b. Use of country PFM and procurement systems Relevant Busan commitment Paris Declaration (§21, 26) and Accra (§15) commitments, as reaffirmed in Busan. Busan commitment to “use country systems as the default approach for development co-operation in support of activities managed by the public sector” (§19a) Indicator construction Numerator:

Denominator:

Measure

Development co-operation flows using country systems (average of a, b ,c and d) Total development co-operation flows for the government sector

Note that this indicator combines Paris Declaration indicators 5a (use of country PFM systems) and 5b (use of country procurement systems) to offer a single composite indicator

where: a = Development co-operation funding disbursed for the government sector using national budget execution procedures b = Development co-operation funding disbursed for the government sector using national financial reporting procedures c = Development co-operation funding disbursed for the government sector using national auditing procedures d = Development co-operation funding disbursed for the government sector using national procurement systems Data source Country-level data (self-reporting development co-operation)

% of development co-operation disbursements for the government sector using the developing country’s PFM and procurement systems (average across use of four components a-d below)

Aggregation by

providers

Developing country, co-operation provider, global: total of numerators divided by total of denominators

Baseline

Proposed target for 2015

2010 (78 countries): 49%

Country target depends on score for indicator 9a above (quality of PFM systems): x Reduce the gap by two thirds – a two-thirds reduction in % of development co-operation funding not using country PFM and procurement systems for countries with a score of >=5 on indicator 9a x Reduce the gap by one third – a one-third reduction in % of development co-operation not using country PFM and procurement systems for countries with a score between 3.5 and 4.5 on indicator 9a Rationale: based on the logic underpinning the Paris Declaration target (though procurement is now one of the four components of country systems now included in the indicator, rather than being subject to a separate target)

26 Guide to the Monitoring Framework of the Global Partnership - Preliminary version for consultation

- 110 -

Indicator 10. Aid is untied Relevant Busan commitment “Pursuant to the Accra Agenda for Action, we will accelerate our efforts to untie aid.” (§18e) Indicator construction

Measure

Numerator:

Amount of untied ODA

Same as Paris Declaration indicator 8

Denominator:

Total ODA

% of ODA that is fully untied For detailed definitions, see OECD (2007).

Data source

Aggregation

Existing international data source: self-reporting on tying status by providers of development co-operation through the OECD-DAC Creditor Reporting System

Developing country, co-operation provider, global: total of numerators divided by total of denominators

Baseline

Proposed target

2009 (all bilateral ODA): 79%

Continued progress over time Rationale: Paris target

27 Guide to the Monitoring Framework of the Global Partnership - Preliminary version for consultation

- 111 -

ANNEX II â&#x20AC;&#x201C; QUESTIONS AND COLLECTION AT COUNTRY LEVEL

DEFINITIONS

GUIDE

DATA

This annex provides advice to assist developing country authorities in collecting the data and to enable providers of development co-operation and other stakeholders to engage in the process. It includes guiding questions to support data collection for each indicator using country-level sources of information as well as detailed definitions for key concepts to ensure accurate reporting.

GENERAL DEFINITIONS

Development cooperation transactions to be recorded

For the purpose of the monitoring framework of the Global Partnership, development co-operation funding primarily refers to Official Development Assistance (ODA). This includes all the official transactions as defined in OECD-DAC Statistical Directives (OECD, 2007), including grants or loans to developing countries which are: x undertaken with the promotion of the economic development and welfare as the main objective; and x concessional in character (if a loan, having a grant element of at least 25%). In addition, developing countries interested to monitor the effectiveness of a broader range of development co-operation funding (e.g. non concessional lending) are encouraged to do so, provided that the following criteria are met: x official source (bilateral of multilateral); x promotion of economic development and welfare as the main objective; x the grant element is too low to qualify as ODA.

Development cooperation transactions NOT to be recorded

Disbursements

The following official transactions are excluded from the scope of the Global Partnership monitoring framework and should not be recorded:

transactions made to beneficiaries that are not based in the country receiving development co-operation funding or to regional organisations which cannot be identified at country level;

debt reorganisation/restructuring; and

emergency and relief assistance.

A disbursement is the placement of resources at the disposal of a developing country as defined above (see development co-operation transactions). Resources provided in-kind should only be included when the value of the resources have been monetised in an agreement or in a document communicated to government. Where development co-operation funding is provided to the developing country as part of a provider of development co-operationâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s regional (multi-country) programme and it is possible to identify those activities and disbursements that are specific to that developing country, these disbursements should also be recorded. In order to avoid double counting in cases where one provider of development co-operation disburses funds on behalf of another, it is only the provider who makes the final disbursement to the government who should report on these funds. The only exception to this is Qp4, against which providers should record total development co-operation funds channelled through other providers (in the case of delegated co-operation, funds provided through multilateral organisations at the country level or multi-donor trust funds administered by another provider).

28 Guide to the Monitoring Framework of the Global Partnership - Preliminary version for consultation

- 112 -

Disbursements for government sector

the

Development co-operation funding disbursed in the context of an agreement with administrations (ministries, departments, agencies or municipalities) authorised to receive revenue or undertake expenditures on behalf of central government. This includes works, goods or services delegated or subcontracted by these administrations to other entities such as: x

non-governmental organisations (NGOs);

semi-autonomous government agencies (e.g. parastatals), or;

private companies.

For the purpose of reporting against indicators 5a (annual predictability), 6 (aid on budget) and 9b (use of country PFM and procurement systems), development co-operation funding focuses on disbursements for the government sector. Exchange rates

Development co-operation transactions should be reported in US dollars. A table of exchange rates is provided on the global monitoring website [link to be provided in due course].

Provider of development co-operation

A provider of development co-operation is a country, organisation or official agency - including state and local governments and multilateral institutions â&#x20AC;&#x201C; that provide development co-operation funding. Under this definition, non-governmental organisations (NGO) and private companies are not considered providers of development co-operation, even when they implement programmes funded by providers of development co-operation.

Reporting reference

The reporting year of reference is t he latest fiscal year of the developing country for which there is information available on relevant aspects of development co-operation.

year

This also means that all data from providers of development co-operation is expected to be provided according to the developing country governmentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s fiscal year. In developing countries where the fiscal year differs from the calendar year, and where monitoring data is easily available through existing systems, governments may wish to complement fiscal year data with calendar year data. While this would remain optional, it would contribute to facilitate aggregation and comparability of data.

29 Guide to the Monitoring Framework of the Global Partnership - Preliminary version for consultation

- 113 -

INDICATOR 1: DEVELOPMENT CO-OPERATION IS FOCUSED ON RESULTS THAT MEET DEVELOPING COUNTRIES’ PRIORITIES F eedback invited by 15 M arch: Finalising and field testing the indicator Developing country governments interested in participating in the finalisation of this indicator are invited to review the proposed approach below with country stakeholders and to provide feedback to the UNDP/OECD joint support team. The questions below are provided to guide the discussion at country level: - Does the proposed definition for country results frameworks capture what constitutes a country results framework in various country contexts and approaches? - Do the proposed dimensions to be assessed (see below) capture the key elements of using country results frameworks? Are there other dimensions that should be included? - Would it be better to use a simpler approach, even if this would only capture some aspects of the use of country results frameworks? What is the appropriate balance to strike between the scope of assessment/the level of detail needed to support rigorous analysis and the need to keep a manageable level of complexity at country level? - What other optional questions could be included to help feed into and promote in-country dialogue on the issue of use of country results frameworks between governments and other country stakeholders? In addition, developing countries interested in piloting the indicator are invited to indicate their interest to the UNDP/OECD joint support team as soon as possible. This will provide them with the opportunity of contributing to define guidance on how to refine assessment criteria and to actually assess performance against the proposed dimensions. Feedback will be used to refine and finalise the operational guidance for the monitoring framework of the Global Partnership by mid-April 2013. The proposal for a Global Monitoring Framework agreed in June 2012 noted this indicator would be measured by “the percentage of providers of development co-operation using country results frameworks. The proposed approach was to assess a variety of dimensions and aggregate them into the final indicator. In line with this approach, it is proposed to assess the extent to which providers of development cooperation use country results frameworks against the following dimensions: 1.

The extent to which a provider of development co-operation uses the objectives and targets from the National Development Strategy as a reference to deliver and assess the performance of its own country programme.

(Could be measured through examination of the provider’s Country Assistance Strategy, sector agreements with government or project documents) 2.

The extent to which a provider of development co-operation uses the partner country’s Results Framework and its associated M&E systems, including national statistical systems, to monitor the progress of its programme and projects.

(Could be measured through the use of the country’s indicators, national statistics and M&E systems as reflected in actual reporting processes associated with Country Assistance Strategies, sector agreements, loan and grant agreements, project documents) 3.

The extent to which a provider of development co-operation’s country programme is aligned with the developing country’s own programmes.

(Could be measured through the importance of development co-operation funding delivered through programme-based approaches such as projects delivered in support to SWAps, basket/pooled funds or budget support)

30 Guide to the Monitoring Framework of the Global Partnership - Preliminary version for consultation

- 114 -

The proposed approach is to construct various scenarios for each dimension against a high, medium and low scale. Developing countries would then use these scenarios to help them score each provider of development cooperation against this scale. In order to ensure consistency of assessment across countries and across providers of development cooperation within a country, the provision of some concrete examples for each of the scenarios would help developing countries to make assessment and provide guidance in identifying behaviour matching various levels of performance. The varying stages that each country is at in developing National Development Strategies, Results Frameworks and the underlying data systems to feed these have been factored in the different scenarios. Accordingly, where appropriate country results frameworks do not exist, the performance of providers of development cooperation could be assessed in terms of how they support to develop them and the extent to which agreed processes to deliver these are on track. This approach of using several dimensions attempts to capture the complex nature of this indicator. However this raises certain challenges in conducting the necessary assessments to inform this indicator and to ensure consistency across countries and in each country, across providers of development co-operation. Alternative approaches could be considered which would involve a much simpler assessment. This could include focus on one of the above dimensions. This would probably focus simply on whether a provider of development cooperation uses the partner country’s Country Results Framework. (This would require very clear definitions of “Country Results Framework” and what constitutes “use”.) The advantage of this approach is that it would be simpler and less resource-intensive for the developing country. The disadvantage is that it might not always tell the whole story and the extent to which limited use of country results frameworks may distort partner country efforts and initiatives. In addition it would leave out some of the other dimensions that may be useful to generate dialogue between the partner country and providers of development co-operation on what actually needs to change for more effective engagement. One option to address such shortcomings would be to have a two-level assessment process. The first level would be the simple assessment, and this would be the measure for the global indicator. The second level would be a further set of optional questions covering a wider set of dimensions. These would not feed into the main (global) score – but they could be used for in-country dialogue between the developing country and providers of development cooperation.

DEFINITIONS Country frameworks

National strategies

National systems

results

Country results frameworks define a country’s approach to results and its associated monitoring and evaluation systems focusing on performance and achievement of development results. They include agreed objectives and output / outcome indicators with baselines and targets to measure progress in implementing them, as stated in national development strategies, sector plans and other frameworks (e.g. budget support performance matrices). Such frameworks should have been developed through participatory processes, involving inclusive dialogue with relevant stakeholders at country level.

development

National development strategies include Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers (PRSPs) and/or similar overarching strategies. These are typically prepared to cover a clearly identified period of time covering several years. The quality of these national development strategies in operational terms depends on the extent to which they constitute a unified strategic framework to guide the country’s development policy and include strategic priorities linked to a medium-term expenditure framework and reflected in annual budgets. They are expected to have been developed through an inclusive consultative process involving the full range of relevant development stakeholders at country level.

statistical

The national statistical system includes all the statistical organisations and units within a country that jointly collect, process and disseminate official statistics on behalf of the national government.

31 Guide to the Monitoring Framework of the Global Partnership - Preliminary version for consultation

- 115 -

Programme-based approaches

Programme-based approaches are a way of engaging in development co-operation based on the principles of co-ordinated support for a locally owned programme of development, such as a national development strategy, a sector programme, a thematic programme or a programme of a specific organisation. Programme-based approaches share the following features: i) leadership by the host country or organisation; ii) a single comprehensive programme and budget framework; iii) a formalised process for donor-coordination and harmonisation of procedures for reporting, budgeting, financial management and procurement; iv) efforts to increase the use of local systems for programme design and implementation, financial management, monitoring and evaluation. Providers of development co-operation can support and implement programme-based approaches in different ways and across a range of modalities, including budget support, sector budget support, project support, pooled arrangements and trust funds.

32 Guide to the Monitoring Framework of the Global Partnership - Preliminary version for consultation

- 116 -

INDICATOR 5A: DEVELOPMENT CO-OPERATION IS MORE PREDICTABLE (ANNUAL PREDICTABILITY) This indicator focuses on in-year predictability of development co-operation. In doing so, it recognises that shortfalls in the total amount of funding for the government sector and delays in the in-year disbursements of scheduled funds can have serious implications for a government’s ability to implement development policies and strategies as planned. This indicator measures the gap between development co-operation funding scheduled by providers of development co-operation and development co-operation funding effectively disbursed as reported by the provider. This indicator is not identical to indicator 7 of the former Survey on Monitoring the Paris Declaration, though it is similar in many ways. It aims to provide a better proxy for predictability of disbursements than the indicator used in the Paris Declaration monitoring framework. In contrast with past measurement, data for both the numerator and denominator of the indicator are now sourced from providers of development co-operation. The inclusion of disbursements in the measurement of this indicator no longer depends on the recording of these disbursements by the developing country government in its accounts. Further changes include the reference period, which can now be the developing country’s fiscal year.

QUESTIONS TO BE INTEGRATED IN COUNTRY-LEVEL DATA COLLECTION PROCESS PROVIDER OF DEVELOPMENT CO-OPERATION How much development cooperation funding did you disburse at country-level in… Qp1. …the reporting year of reference ? USD ________ How much of this was for the government sector in… Qp2. … the reporting year of reference? USD ________ How much development co-operation funding did you schedule for disbursement at country-level in … Qp3. … the reporting year of reference? USD ________ For reference purposes only, how much development co-operation funding for the government sector did you disburse through other providers (funds which are not captured in your responses to Qd1 – Qd3 above) at the country level in Qp4. ... the reporting year of reference? USD ________

MEASUREMENT OF INDICATOR At the global level, this indicator is calculated as follows: 5 (%) = 100 ×

2 3

DEFINITIONS Development cooperation funding scheduled for disbursement

Development co-operation funding scheduled for the reporting year of reference n are considered to have been “scheduled for disbursement” when notified to government within the reporting year of reference n-1; it includes development co-operation funding scheduled for disbursement in agreements entered during year n.

33 Guide to the Monitoring Framework of the Global Partnership - Preliminary version for consultation

- 117 -

INDICATOR 5B: DEVELOPMENT CO-OPERATION IS MORE PREDICTABLE (MEDIUMTERM PREDICTABILITY) This indicator focuses on medium-term predictability of development co-operation. In doing so, it recognises that lack of comprehensive and credible forward information on development co-operation funding can have serious implications for a government’s ability to plan and implement policies and strategies, deliver public services and design and conduct sound macro-economic policy. This indicator measures whether developing country governments have at their disposal a forward expenditure and/or implementation plan for each provider of development co-operation which covers the next three years. Such plans must cover all known components of the co-operation provider’s country programme. For example, they cover all development co-operation modalities used by that provider (e.g. budget support, projects, technical co-operation, in-kind aid) and include estimates of future flows that have yet to be allocated to specific activities or signed in cooperation agreements (i.e. “unallocated” resource envelopes, which will be provided to the developing country, but where the modality/sector/activity of spending has yet to be decided).

QUESTIONS TO BE INTEGRATED IN COUNTRY-LEVEL DATA COLLECTION PROCESS F eedback invited by 31 M arch: Field testing of m ethodology at country level Developing country governments interested in testing the proposed definitions for this indicator are invited to review them with country stakeholders and to provide feedback to the UNDP/OECD joint support team. Such feedback would be necessary to ensure that developing country governments are able to collect data and to report accurately on this indicator. The questions below are provided to guide the discussion at country level: - Are the definitions provided below both clear and relevant to your priorities for forward spending / implementation arrangements? - Does your government hold sufficient information to answer this question for each provider of development cooperation? If not, where were challenges encountered? - How do providers of development co-operation generally provide your government with forward spending information? To what extent do you consider that this is meeting the Accra and Busan commitments on medium-term predictability? Feedback will be used to refine and finalise the operational guidance for the monitoring framework of the Global Partnership by mid-April 2013. GOVERNMENT – For each provider of development co-operation: Has the provider of development co-operation made available a comprehensive forward expenditure and/or implementation plan setting out expected development co-operation flows in... Qg2. Fiscal year ending 2014? (if “Yes”, record 1; if “No” record 0) _____ Qg3. Fiscal year ending 2015? (if “Yes”, record 1; if “No” record 0)_____ Qg4. Fiscal year ending 2016? (if “Yes”, record 1; if “No” record 0)_____

34 Guide to the Monitoring Framework of the Global Partnership - Preliminary version for consultation

- 118 -

MEASUREMENT OF INDICATOR At the global level, this indicator is calculated as follows:

5 ( . 3 %) = 100

2 + 3 + 4 3

DEFINITIONS Forward spending and/or implementation plan

The developing country government should, for every provider of development co-operation participating in the global monitoring process, establish whether or not it holds information on that cooperation providerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s forward spending and/or implementation plans in the country. The national co-ordinator /reporting entity should consult with ministries or departments responsible for managing development co-operation (typically finance, planning, foreign affairs...) to ascertain whether adequate information has been received from each co-operation provider. A forward spending and/or implementation plan meets ALL THREE of the following criteria: x

Made available by the provider of development co-operation in written or electronic form (e.g. a single document or â&#x20AC;&#x201C; where appropriate systems are made available in country â&#x20AC;&#x201C; entered appropriately in an aid information management system).

Sets out clearly indicative information on future spending and/or implementation activities in the country, including:

programmed or committed resources, where the activity and modality is known; and

other resources that have yet to be allocated to specific activities in the country.

Amounts are presented by year (or in greater detail â&#x20AC;&#x201C; e.g. by quarter or month) using the

developing countryâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s fiscal year. Expected development co-operation flows in fiscal year ending in year 2014, 2015, 2016

A plan may be available which meets all of the criteria above, but the information provided may vary for different years. In responding to questions Qg2, Qg3 and Qg4, national coordinators should examine the data for each year. (The reason for this is that a forward spending/implementation plan may provide comprehensive information for next year, but not the following year). For each year, answer 1 (â&#x20AC;&#x153;Yesâ&#x20AC;?) if the information provided meets BOTH of the following additional criteria: x

Comprehensive in its coverage of known sectors, types and modalities of support (for example, a provider using both project and budget support modalities should include the amounts foreseen under both modalities); and

The amount and currency of development co-operation funding is clearly stated (where support takes the form of technical co-operation and the provision of goods and services in kind, the cost of these planned activities is provided).

Where these criteria are not met for a given year, or where none of the criteria defining a forward spending / implementation plan (above) are met, answer 0 (â&#x20AC;&#x153;Noâ&#x20AC;?).

35 Guide to the Monitoring Framework of the Global Partnership - Preliminary version for consultation

- 119 -

INDICATOR 6: AID IS ON BUDGETS WHICH ARE SUBJECT TO PARLIAMENTARY SCRUTINY The formulation of the budget is a central feature of the policy process in all countries. So the degree to which financial contributions from providers of development co-operation to the government sector are fully and accurately reflected in the budget provides a significant indication of the degree to which there is a serious effort to connect development co-operation programmes with country policies and process and to support domestic oversight and accountability for the use of development co-operation funding and results. Budget support is always on budget, but other modalities including project support can and should also be recorded on budget, even if funds do not pass through the country’s treasury. This indicator builds on the broad approach used in indicator 3 of the Survey on Monitoring the Paris Declaration, while introducing modifications that are intended to make it a better proxy for budget comprehensiveness. The denominator is now the amount of development co-operation funding scheduled for disbursement at the outset of year n, rather than ex-post disbursements. This separates the measurement of the extent to which government budgets reflect ex-ante aid estimates (indicator 6) from the measurement of the realism of ex-post estimates (captured by indicator 5a).

QUESTIONS TO BE INTEGRATED IN COUNTRY-LEVEL DATA COLLECTION PROCESS GOVERNMENT How much estimated development co-operation funding was recorded in the annual budget as grants, revenue or loans (concessional and non concessional)? Qg5. In the annual budget of the reporting year of reference: USD ________ Note that the denominator for this indicator is the same as that used in the calculation of indicator 5a (annual predictability).

MEASUREMENT OF INDICATOR At the global level, this indicator is calculated as follows: 6 (%) = 100 ×

5 3

DEFINITIONS Annual budget

It is the annual budget as it was originally approved by the legislature. In order to support discipline and credibility of the budget preparation process, subsequent revisions to the original annual budget — even when approved by the legislature — should N OT be recorded under question Qg5. This is because it is the credibility of the original, approved budget that is important to measure and because revisions to the annual budget in many cases are retroactive.

36 Guide to the Monitoring Framework of the Global Partnership - Preliminary version for consultation

- 120 -

INDICATOR 7: MUTUAL ACCOUNTABILITY AMONG DEVELOPMENT CO-OPERATION ACTORS IS STRENGTHENED THROUGH INCLUSIVE REVIEWS This indicator seeks to measure progress made by developing countries in undertaking mutual assessment reviews. This indicator takes the form of a modified version of indicator 12 of the Survey on Monitoring the Paris Declaration (OECD, 2011) to build on the lessons learned and evidence on national-level mutual accountability (including evidence generated by UNDESA for the United Nations Development Co-operation Forum). Further refinements to the criteria and methodology underpinning this indicator have been introduced to better capture the extent of involvement of stakeholders going beyond governments to include civil society stakeholders and parliamentarians, for example. A country is considered to have a mutual assessment of progress in place for the purpose of measuring this indicator when at least four of the five proposed criteria are met, providing a graduated assessment of progress.

QUESTIONS TO BE INTEGRATED IN COUNTRY-LEVEL DATA COLLECTION PROCESS Questions Qg6, Qg7, Qg8, Qg9 and Qg10 below are drawn from the survey on mutual accountability conducted by UNDESA for the United Nations Development Co-operation Forum (DCF). UNDESA will coordinate a more in-depth survey on mutual accountability in the fourth quarter of 2013 in preparation for the 2014 DCF.

F eedback invited by 31 M arch: Field testing of m ethodology at country level Developing country governments interested in testing the refined definitions are invited to discuss the findings with country stakeholders and to provide feedback to the UNDP/OECD joint support team, which will liaise with UNDESA to finalise the approach. Feedback will be used to refine and finalise the operational guidance for the monitoring framework of the Global Partnership by mid-April 2013. Â&#x201E; GOVERNMENT Qg6. Is there an aid policy or partnership policy in place defining a countryâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s development co-operation priorities (or elements of such a policy agreed through other instruments)? (Yes/No) Qg7. Are there specific country-level targets for effective development co-operation for both the developing country government and providers of development co-operation? (Yes/No) Qg8. Has an assessment towards these targets been undertaken jointly by the developing country government and providers of development co-operation at senior level in the past two years? (Yes/No) Qg9. Have non-executive stakeholders (i.e. civil society organisations, private sector and parliamentarians) and local governments been actively involved in such reviews? (Yes/No) Qg10. Have comprehensive results of such exercises been made public in a timely manner? (Yes/No)

MEASUREMENT OF INDICATOR At the global level, this indicator is calculated as follows:

37 Guide to the Monitoring Framework of the Global Partnership - Preliminary version for consultation

- 121 -

. ( 6, 7, 8, 9, 10) 7 (% ) = 100 Ă&#x2014; .

DEFINITIONS Aid or partnership policy

A document which sets out agreed approaches to the delivery of development co-operation in the developing country, containing agreed principles, processes and/or targets designed to improve its effectiveness. This may take the form of a stand-alone policy or strategy document, or may be addressed within another document (for example, as part of a national development strategy or similar). The document has been the subject of an inclusive consultation between the developing country government, providers of development co-operation and other interested development stakeholders.

Country-level targets for effective development cooperation

Country-level targets for effective development co-operation have been established in line with Paris, Accra and Busan commitments. They may, however, go beyond the Busan Partnership agreement wherever the developing country government and providers of development co-operation agree to do so. Targets exist for both the developing country government and providers of development cooperation, providing the basis for assessing: the developing countryâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s performance in implementing its development strategy; and the performance of providers of development co-operation against agreed commitments to deliver on the quantity, quality and effectiveness of their support.

Mutual reviews

Mutual assessment reviews are exercises that engage at national level both developing country authorities and providers of development co-operation at senior level in a review of mutual performance. These reviews should be conducted through inclusive dialogue involving a broad range of government ministries (including line ministries and relevant departments, at central and local level), providers of development co-operation (bilateral, multilateral and global initiatives) as well as non-executive stakeholders, including parliamentarians, private sector and civil society organisations.

assessment

These assessments are undertaken on a regular basis (e.g. every one to two years) and might be supplemented through independent/impartial reviews. The comprehensive results of such assessments should be made publicly available in a timely manner through appropriate means to ensure transparency. For the purpose of assessing progress against indicator 7, a country is considered to have a mutual assessment review in place when the response to a t least four of the five questions Qg6, Qg7, Qg8, Qg9 and Qg10 is â&#x20AC;&#x153;Yesâ&#x20AC;?.

38 Guide to the Monitoring Framework of the Global Partnership - Preliminary version for consultation

- 122 -

INDICATOR 9B: USE OF PROCUREMENT SYSTEMS

COUNTRY

PUBLIC

FINANCIAL

MANAGEMENT

AND

This indicator combines the Paris Declaration 5a (use of PFM systems) and 5b (use of procurement systems) to offer a single composite indicator. It focuses on the use of developing countries’ public financial management (PFM) and procurement systems when funding from providers of development co-operation is provided to the government sector, without applying safeguard measures. National systems for the management of funds are those established in the general legislation (and related regulations) of the country and implemented by the line management functions of the government. No particular development co-operation modalities automatically qualify as using country PFM and procurement systems. Most modalities including project support can be designed to use country PFM and procurement systems. A set of criteria are presented below to help providers of development co-operation determine when they are, and when they are not, using country PFM and procurement systems.

QUESTIONS TO BE INTEGRATED IN COUNTRY-LEVEL DATA COLLECTION PROCESS PROVIDER OF DEVELOPMENT CO-OPERATION In the reporting year of reference, how much development co-operation funding disbursed for the government sector used… Qp6.

…national budget execution procedures (USD)? ________

Qp7.

…national financial reporting procedures (USD)? ________

Qp8.

…national auditing procedures (USD)? ________

Qp9

… national procurem ent systems (USD)? ________

MEASUREMENT OF INDICATOR At the global level, this indicator is calculated as follows: ( 6 + 7 + 8 + 9) 9 (%) = 100 × ! 2

39 Guide to the Monitoring Framework of the Global Partnership - Preliminary version for consultation

- 123 -

DEFINITIONS Use of national budget execution procedures

Providers of development co-operation use national budget execution procedures when the funds they provide are managed according to the national budgeting procedures established in the general legislation and implemented by government. This means that programmes supported by providers of development co-operation are subject to normal country budgetary execution procedures, namely procedures for authorisation, approval and payment. Providers of development co-operation are invited to review all their development co-operation activities with a view to determining how funding for the government sector meet three o ut of the f our criteria below (anything less does not qualify):

Use of national financial reporting procedures

Are your funds i ncluded in the annual budget approved by country legislature? (Y/N)

Are your funds subject to established country budget execution procedures ? (Y/N)

Are your funds processed (e.g. deposited & disbursed) through the established country treasury system ? (Y/N)

You do NOT require the opening of separate bank accounts for your funds? (Y/N). 4

Legislative frameworks normally provide for specific types of financial reports to be produced as well as periodicity of such reporting. The use of national financial reporting means that providers of development co-operation do not impose additional requirements on governments for financial reporting. In particular providers of development co-operation do NOT require: i) maintenance of a separate accounting system to satisfy the provider of development co-operation’s reporting requirements, and ii) creation of a separate chart of accounts to record the use of funds from the provider of development co-operation. Providers of development co-operation are invited to review all their development activities with a view to determining how much funding for the government sector meet BOTH criteria below (anything less does not qualify):

1. You do NOT require maintenance of a separate accounting system to satisfy your own reporting requirements? (Y/N) 5

2. You ONLY require financial reports prepared using country’s established financial reporting arrangem ents ? (Y/N)

Budget execution — Yes: you do not require opening separate accounts. No: you do require opening separate accounts.

Financial reporting — Yes: you do not require a separate accounting system. No: you do require a separate accounting system.

40 Guide to the Monitoring Framework of the Global Partnership - Preliminary version for consultation

- 124 -

Providers of development co-operation rely on the audit opinions, issued by the country's supreme audit institution, on the government's normal financial reports/statements as defined above. The use of national auditing procedures means that providers of development co-operation do not make additional requirements on governments for auditing. Providers of development co-operation are invited to review all their development activities with a view to determining how much development co-operation funding for the government sector meet B OTH criteria below 6 : Use of national auditing procedures

Are your funds subject to audit carried out under the responsibility of the Suprem e Audit Institution ? (Y/N)

You do N OT under normal circumstances request additional audit arrangem ents 7? (Y/N) 8

AN D at least one of the tw o criteria below:

Use of national procurement systems

You do NOT require audit standards different from those adopted by the Supreme Audit Institution? (Y/N) 9

You do NOT require the Supreme Audit Institution to change its audit cycle to audit your funds? (Y/N) 10

Providers of development co-operation use national procurement systems when the funds they provide for the implementation of projects and programmes are managed according to the national procurement procedures as they were established in the general legislation and implemented by government. The use of national procurement procedures means that providers of development cooperation do not make additional, or special, requirements on governments for the procurement of works, goods and services. (Where weaknesses in national procurement systems have been identified, providers of development co-operation may work with developing countries in order to improve the efficiency, economy, and transparency of their implementation).

Note: where development co-operation funding is provided to parastatal entities (for example, public enterprises) and these entities are not subject to audit by the Supreme Audit Institution, the following criteria should be considered:

Providers of development co-operation are invited to review all their development activities with a view to determining how much development co-operation funding for the government sector meet BOTH criteria below: 1. Are your funds subject to audit carried out under the regular audit procedures established for the audit of parastatal entities? (Y/N) 2. You do NOT under normal circumstances request additional audit arrangements? (Y/N) AND at least one of the two criteria below: 3. You do NOT require audit standards different from those adopted by the partner country for the audit of parastatal entities? (Y/N) 4. You do NOT require a change in the audit cycle of the parastatal entity to audit your funds? (Y/N) 7

Reserving the right to make an exceptional audit (e.g. when fraud or corruption is discovered) does not count against this criteria.

Yes: providers do not require additional audits. No: providers do require additional audits.

Yes: providers do not require different audit standards. No: providers do require different audit standards.

Yes: providers do not require to change the audit cycle. No: providers do require change to the audit cycle.

41 Guide to the Monitoring Framework of the Global Partnership - Preliminary version for consultation

- 125 -

INDICATORS

TARGETS FOR 2015

1. Development co-operation is focused on results that meet developing countries’ priorities Extent of use of country results frameworks All providers of development co-operation use country results frameworks by co-operation providers 2. Civil society operates within an environment which maximises its engagement in and contribution to development A subset of measures from the Enabling Environment Index

Continued progress over time

3. Engagement and contribution of the private sector to development Measure of the quality of public-private dialogue

Continued progress over time

4. Transparency: information on development co-operation is publicly available Measure of state of implementation of the common standard by co-operation providers

5. Development co-operation is more predictable (a) annual: proportion of development cooperation funding disbursed within the fiscal year within which it was scheduled by co-operation providers; and (b) medium-term: proportion of development cooperation funding covered by indicative forward spending plans provided at country level

Halve the gap – halve the proportion of aid not disbursed within the fiscal year for which it was scheduled (Baseline year 2010) Halve the gap – halve the proportion of development cooperation funding not covered by indicative forward spending plans provided at country level

6. Aid is on budgets which are subject to parliamentary scrutiny % of development cooperation funding scheduled for disbursement that is recorded in the annual budgets approved by the legislatures of developing countries

Halve the gap – halve the proportion of development cooperation flows to the government sector not reported on government’s budget(s) (with at least 85% reported on budget) (Baseline year 2010)

7. Mutual accountability among development co-operation actors is strengthened through inclusive reviews % of countries that undertake inclusive mutual assessments of progress in implementing agreed commitments

All developing countries have inclusive mutual assessment reviews in place (Baseline year 2010)

8. Gender equality and women’s empowerment % of countries with systems that track and make public allocations for gender equality and women’s empowerment

All developing countries have systems that track and make public resource allocations for gender equality and women’s empowerment

9. Effective institutions: developing countries’ systems are strengthened and used (a) Quality of developing country PFM systems; and

Half of developing countries move up at least one measure (i.e. 0.5 points) on the PFM/CPIA scale of performance (Baseline year 2010)

(b) Use of country PFM and procurement systems

Reduce the gap. [use the same logic as in Paris – close the gap by two-thirds where CPIA score is >=5; or by one-third where between 3.5 and 4.5] (Baseline year 2010)

10. Aid is untied % of aid that is fully untied

Continued progress over time (Baseline year 2010)

- 127 -

A CALL FOR A GLOBAL PARTNERSHIP FOR JUST AND TRANSFORMATIVE DEVELOPMENT IN THE POST-2015 ERA " ( # ' #" # ( AC ( '' #" # ( " & '' ! - #" ( # #+3)$ (# ( #)( #! # ( "" )! )!! ( ( &(" &' $ #& * #$! "( ( * " '' 7 8 < ' #& # &(" &' $ ( ( + * " )'( " (& "' #&! ( * * #$! "( " " ( #'(3=;<@ & 2

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

&(" &' $ #& * #$! "( ( * " '' 7 8 ' " #$ " $ ( #&! # ') 3& #" / & #" " ' (#& 5! #& &#)$' #"'( () " ' ( ( " #&' ( )&& "( & ( #"2 - # " '#/ ( ' #"'( () " ' #!! ( (# " " ( * - #" ( * #$! "( ( * " '' " ' #( " ( &!' # *# - " $# - * #$! "(2 #"'( () " - ' #& " . " (' #+" & ( " & $& ' "(' (' ( ' 7') 3& #"'/ " ( #" / ') ' (#&'8 #& " (# (' #+" #"'( () " - ' (3)$2 ( ' $ &(- (# " ' (' " ( ( & " #!! (( # ( # &(" &' $ #& ( * * #$! "( ##$ & ( #" 7 82 (($155 '#$ &(" &' $2#&

- 129 -

=8 " " $ &( ) & (& ( #" - ! & " ' #!!)" ( '1 ')'( " * #$! "( $# '/ $ "" " " ( #"' ' #) &#)" " ( & ('/ ,$& '' $& #& ( ' " # "#+ # ( $ #$ '2 $ &( $ ( #" # (& ( #" - ! & " ' ' (#&' " ' ( ( +#& + ( ( ! ' - (# "')& " ( " ' " ) " - ( #' ( "( " ' (# " (2 - (# !$#+ & " $ &( $ ( #" ' ( $&#!#( #" # " " " "* &#"! "( #& * '# (-2

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

"( &/ <<? !# * ") ) .#" (-/ <<;> $$ " ' $ #" EA>= D=BB;A;3A= # 2 =;? ' & ( & (: '#$ &(" &' $2#&

- 130 -

GLOBAL PARTNERSHIP FOR EFFECTIVE DEVELOPMENT CO-OPERATION

First Meeting of the Steering Committee London, 5-6 December 2012 Summary

Contacts: Mr. Derek Kilner (derek.kilner@undp.org) Ms. Hanna-Mari Kilpel채inen (hanna-mari.kilpelainen@oecd.org)

- 131 -

GLOBAL PARTNERSHIP FOR EFFECTIVE DEVELOPMENT CO-OPERATION FIRST MEETING OF THE STEERING COMMITTEE LONDON, 5-6 DECEMBER 2012 SUMMARY

5 December Introductory remarks 1. Ministers Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala (Nigeria), Armida Alisjahbana (Indonesia) and Justine Greening (United Kingdom) welcomed participants to the first meeting of the Global Partnership Steering Committee. In doing so, they expressed their gratitude to the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) for providing a venue for the meeting. 2. In her introductory remarks, Ms. Okonjo-Iweala pointed to the global backdrop of economic uncertainty and fragile recovery against which the Global Partnership came into being, noting that as assistance to developing countries remains uncertain, there is a need to work together and look at how resource mobilisation efforts can be shaped to enable developing countries to do better for themselves. She went on to set out her vision for a Global Partnership that delivers something different for both developed and developing countries, signaling her ambition that the work of the Global Partnership might contribute to international efforts on a post-2015 development agenda, and within it, a potential successor to MDG8. Ms. Okonjo-Iweala expressed her interest in exploring linkages with, for example, work on asset recovery and tax evasion, as well as knowledge-sharing on aspects of domestic resource mobilisation and statistics. 3. Ms. Alisjahbana introduced the complex and dynamic global development landscape, pointing to shifting roles among stakeholders and the increased participation of actors such as the private sector in discussions on development. She suggested that the Global Partnership offers a platform within which to set out a vision for effective co-operation, expressing her hope that it could inform the post-2015 development agenda through the work of the UN High Level Panel. Ms. Alisjahbana emphasised the importance of linkages with other forums and processes, including the UN Development Co-operation Forum (DCF), indicating her desire to see the Global Partnership facilitate the involvement of a wider group of stakeholders in co-operation processes and in turn leverage a broader set of resources for development. Ms. Alisjahbana emphasised the importance of inclusive approaches in the work of the Global Partnership, identifying knowledge sharing as one set of functions that could support this. 4. In welcoming participants to London, Ms. Greening noted that the Global Partnership offers an opportunity to change development co-operation. She pointed to the need for both ambition and prioritisation in the work of the Steering Committee. From a “donor” perspective, Ms. Greening reminded participants that development co-operation involves the use of taxpayers’ resources, and that governments have a duty to ensure that “spending” on development is in fact an “investment” in development. Ms. Greening invited participants to consider how a few key 1

- 132 -

development themes might be grouped together so as to provide a focus for the early phases of the Global Partnership’s work. Examples cited included collaboration to address tax evasion; situations of conflict and fragility; and middle income countries. Better statistics and improved transparency were cited as critical elements going forward, with Ms. Greening also placing an emphasis on the need to avoid duplication of international efforts. Agenda Item 1: Vision and substantive priorities for the Global Partnership: an initial discussion (chaired by Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, Nigeria) 5. The Chair invited the reactions and ideas of Steering Committee members in response to the introductory remarks made, and the framing paper for this session (Document 1). The summary that follows clusters the main points by theme. 6. Several participants offered views on the purpose and functioning of the Global Partnership, highlighting its potential as a “partnership of partnerships” (US); the need for evidence-based, country-based and innovative approaches (BetterAid, UNDP); and the desire to create a “comfortable” space for dialogue among all actors, including emerging economies (Korea, OECD/DAC). 7. The discussion emphasised the need to move beyond an “aid”/ODA-centric discussion and a North-South dichotomy to explore development financing, policy and co-operation issues in a more holistic manner (EU, Peru, BetterAid), finding ways of both building on the new agenda set out in Busan and promoting the implementation of aid effectiveness commitments made in Paris and Accra. Participants took note of relevant efforts to generate evidence at the country level (Timor-Leste) and the desire that such evidence should be brought to a global stage in a systematic way to inform regular dialogue (OECD/DAC). 8. The role of civil society in development and development co-operation was highlighted, as were the particular challenges presented by limitations to the space within which CSOs operate (OECD/DAC, US). Respect for human rights was highlighted as a priority (BetterAid), as were efforts to address the challenges faced by marginalised groups and populations (US). 9. Several members emphasised the importance of the private sector dimension which is new to the work of the Global Partnership, with the private sector representative drawing attention to progress made to date in the context of the Joint Statement on Expanding and Enhancing Public and Private Co-operation endorsed in Busan (CIPE). Others expressed an interest in looking specifically at how private resources might be better leveraged to support development (OECD/DAC, US). 10. Commitments focused on “aid effectiveness” were identified as an important element of the Global Partnership’s work (US), as was the potential for the Global Partnership to offer a platform for addressing “aid architecture” issues and the challenges presented by the fragmentation and proliferation of international development co-operation efforts (OECD/DAC). 11. The status and role of middle income countries in international development cooperation efforts was flagged, as were the specific challenges faced by these countries and their potential to contribute to development and poverty reduction both at home and in all countries (Peru). The importance of common goals and differential commitments was also reaffirmed (Korea).

- 133 -

12. Support was expressed for the knowledge-sharing aspects of the partnership (Korea), while the need for greater clarity on the substantive focus of such knowledge-sharing efforts was also highlighted (World Bank). 13. Participants flagged both opportunities and potential challenges relating to the positioning of the Global Partnership relative to other international efforts. Some stakeholders emphasised the need to capitalise on the comparative advantage of the Global Partnership in terms of, for example, its global reach and multi-stakeholder nature (US, World Bank). At the same time, a degree of prioritisation will be important, if duplication with the work of other international fora is to be avoided and synergies are to be promoted (UNDP). Several participants concurred with the desire expressed by the Co-Chairs to ensure linkages with – and a meaningful contribution to – a global partnership for the post-2015 development agenda. 14. In summing up the discussion, the Chair took note of the range of themes and interest identified by participants, as well as the need for continued reflection on issues of international process and collaboration. The Chair suggested that some of the key issues identified over the course of this discussion be clustered together into a limited number of work strands that would feed the first ministerial meeting. (Note: this discussion was continued under Session 4 – see paragraphs 43-50 below). Agenda Item 2: Towards a first ministerial-level meeting: roadmap, partnerships and synergies (chaired by Justine Greening, UK) 15. The Chair introduced the key upcoming events for which a date and venue would need to be decided: i) a second meeting of the Steering Committee; ii) a third meeting of the Steering Committee; and iii) the first ministerial-level meeting. The Chair also raised the need to clarify how the work of the Global Partnership can best feed into the chronology of related processes and requested a concept note mapping the relationship of the Global Partnership to other forums and processes. 16. The Chair proposed holding the second meeting of the Steering Committee in March in Bali, Indonesia, back-to-back with the meeting of the High Level Panel on the Post-2015 Development Agenda. Ms. Alisjahbana, Ms. Okonjo-Iweala, and several members (EU, Korea, US) also expressed support for this option. Ms. Okonjo-Iweala noted that the priority strands of work for the Global Partnership would need to be articulated in advance of the second Steering Committee, as it will be a last chance to feed these into the work of the High Level Panel, which will complete its report in May 2013. 17. The Chair proposed holding the third meeting of the Steering Committee during the second half of June or the first half of July. Several members expressed interest in holding it in a developing country – and particularly in Africa (Ms. Okonjo-Iweala, EU, Korea, US). While the African Union annual meeting in May was viewed as too early in the year, there was interest in holding the meeting in Addis Ababa – in connection with the African Union, or back-to-back with the June symposium of the UN DCF - or in Abuja, Nigeria. UNDP also raised the possibility of having a smaller event during the meeting of the UN Economic and Social Council in Geneva in July. 18. In presenting the options for the ministerial-level meeting, the Chair noted that it could be organised back-to-back with the UN General Assembly High Level Meeting on the MDGs in New York in September, or back-to-back with the annual meetings of the World Bank and IMF in Washington in October. The chair noted that holding the meeting in September would better 3

- 134 -

maintain momentum; while a meeting in October would allow more time to reflect the conclusions of the High Level Meeting in the Global Partnership’s discussions. 19. Ms. Okonjo-Iweala expressed a preference for an October meeting, noting that the ministerial-level meeting could lose visibility if held alongside the UNGA, which already features a number of high-profile events, and which could also present logistical challenges for ministers to attend. She further noted that the World Bank / IMF could potentially be invited to support an October meeting. The World Bank confirmed that it would be willing to help if this option was chosen. The US pointed to the need for a balance between the Global Partnership’s desire to engage with the High Level Panel, and the need to explore a wider array of opportunities for engagement. Members also took note of the range of views of UN Member States vis-à-vis the Global Partnership. Ms. Okonjo-Iweala also raised the possibility of holding the ministerial-level meeting in October, in a location relatively close to Washington (to facilitate travel) but in another country, possibly in Latin America. 20. Some members also expressed support for holding the ministerial-level meeting in September, during the UNGA (Korea); or back-to-back with the DCF Symposium in Switzerland in October (BetterAid).While several members raised the logistical benefits of scheduling a meeting alongside an event where several ministers will already attend, there was some interest in holding the meeting in a developing country (UNDP), or an emerging economy (EU), to emphasise broad participation in the Global Partnership; and in holding the meeting in a standalone location to avoid having the meeting compete for visibility with another major event. 21. Members expressed interest in aligning the substantive discussions of the ministeriallevel meeting with the priority strands of work identified in Agenda Item 1; and of showcasing progress on building blocks (Korea). Korea suggested that in terms of format, there could be a combination of plenary and breakout sessions; that the meeting could last one and a half days; and that the outcome could be a brief communiqué. 22. Several members underscored that the timeline to the ministerial-level meeting will be very tight, and highlighted the importance of working quickly to ensure adequate inputs for the meeting, and to ensure that stakeholders are adequately informed. Some members also raised the importance of prioritising refining the substantive focus of the ministerial-level meeting over discussions of timing (CIPE, EU, US). 23. The Chair summarised by proposing that the second meeting of the Steering Committee be held in March in Bali; that the second Steering Committee meeting be held in the second half of June or the first half of July in an African country; and that it would be desirable to hold a ministerial-level meeting in October, either back-to-back with the World Bank/IMF meetings or in a non-OECD/DAC country, possibly in Latin America. 24. By the end of the year, Steering Committee members will share their plans to engage with different constituencies. Concept notes should be circulated on the priority work streams (see Sessions 1 and 4), with individual volunteers preparing initial drafts for discussion. 25. An overview of inputs for the ministerial-level meeting, with an extended timeline; and a concept note mapping the relationship of the Global Partnership to other relevant international and multi-stakeholder fora and processes will also be prepared and circulated.

- 135 -

Agenda Item 3: Progress and challenges in the implementation of Busan commitments, including Knowledge Sharing Platform (chaired by Armida Alisjahbana, Indonesia) a) Membersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; reporting on relevant efforts and initiatives 26. The Chair opened the session by highlighting the varying nature of commitments between different stakeholders party to the Busan agreement and drawing membersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; attention to two essential questions: i) how far have we progressed since Busan; and ii) how do we move forward, including by promoting knowledge sharing and multi-stakeholder initiatives? 27. Members showcased several examples of country level progress in implementing the commitments made in Busan one year ago. Representing the g7+ group of fragile and conflict affected states, Timor Leste provided an update on ongoing implementation of the New Deal in pilot countries, emphasising that several countries (including Timor Leste, South-Sudan, Liberia, Central African Republic and Haiti) have secured support from the highest political leadership for driving implementation forward. The work on peacebuilding and statebuilding goals (PSGs) is ongoing, with a view to informing the post-2015 agenda. The International Dialogue will meet in Juba mid-December to discuss New Deal implementation and Timor Leste will organise a regional consultation in Asia-Pacific in February 2013. 28. Korea informed participants on its government-wide taskforce for Busan implementation and ongoing process for elaborating a national plan on Busan implementation, and showcased initiatives by Vietnam in integrating Busan implementation into national strategies. Korea drew attention to the urgent commitments made in Busan with deadlines ranging from 2012 to 2015, and called for progress reports on these issues. 29. Samoa updated participants on the Pacific Islands Forum Compact. Building on peer reviews, regional monitoring and aid effectiveness workshops, the Compact has supported 18 countries in the region in their move from aid-centred approaches to effectively managing all resources available for development. The Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat together with UNDP country offices are planning targeted initiatives to strengthen capacities and country systems. To support monitoring progress, regional data sets are being established, drawing on the global Busan indicators. Samoa highlighted the importance of finalising the global indicators to support this regional work. 30. Bangladesh showcased its joint co-operation strategy as a key co-ordination mechanism including concrete actions and timelines. The revised action plan for 2013-14 aims at providing a common platform for all development actors, including civil society. Consultative dialogue on how to best implement Busan commitments is taking place at sectoral level. Bangladesh is in the process of establishing an aid information management system as well as a national aid policy to strengthen the effectiveness of aid management, and is envisioning a regional meeting on implementing Busan commitments. 31. Guatemala informed the meeting of its consultations with Latin American countries, and highlighted El Salvadorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s recent aid effectiveness strategy, which was agreed with all development partners, as an example of translating Busan commitments into country level action. 32. In addition to progress at the level of individual countries, the meeting showcased examples of collective efforts to implement Busan commitments. The OECD/DAC informed 5

- 136 -

members that the DAC has developed â&#x20AC;&#x201C; in consultation with other stakeholders â&#x20AC;&#x201C; a set of guidelines to limit the proliferation of multilateral channels, and stands ready to work with the Global Partnership to assess whether these could be utilised more broadly to ensure collective progress on this important commitment. The framework for a common transparency standard was adopted in June 2012, joining together the creditor reporting system and forward spending surveys of the OECD/DAC as well as the International Aid Transparency Initiative (IATI). The OECD/DAC informed participants that the OECD is exploring possibilities for hosting IATI, and emphasised that efforts around transparency now require translating the common standard into something practically useful to partner countries. While progress has been made on some urgent time-bound commitments, the OECD/DAC noted that others such as predictability and untying involve challenges of a political nature. The OECD/DAC highlighted the potential of the Global Partnership to drive progress at the political level around these challenging commitments and called for continued peer pressure from stakeholders in the Global Partnership to drive reform efforts of providers of development co-operation. 33. BetterAid updated participants on the transition process of civil society actors to organise around a new platform, stating that the CSO Partnership for Development Effectiveness would be launched in Nairobi the following week. In supporting implementation of Busan commitments, BetterAid emphasised the need for clear lines of accountability, both globally and at country level, stressing the importance of human rights, democratic ownership and accountability, and encouraging the development of an ambitious transparency indicator. Related to arranging the next Steering Committee meeting in Bali, BetterAid flagged that the CSO task force on enabling environment would meet in Bali in March, and that this could provide for further back-to-back synergies. 34. The European Union echoed the remarks by the OECD/DAC in stating that providers of co-operation were making progress despite the budgetary pressures and political challenges related to some of the Busan commitments, including for example progress in aid transparency. The EU announced substantial progress on EU joint programming, which aims to reduce fragmentation and transaction costs and is now taking place in eight countries, with a second wave of pilot countries envisioned shortly. Key elements of the joint programming exercise include synchronisation with national development strategies and aligning the response to these strategies. The EU is opening up the initiative to other actors, and discussions have already taken place with the US on joining the process. 35. There was broad agreement on the importance of continued country level efforts to drive implementation and of identifying and sharing successful initiatives to support further progress. Several participants highlighted the need for further feedback on concrete implementation initiatives to inform the preparations of the ministerial-level meeting, and invited updates on progress from the Busan building blocks (Korea, Timor Leste, US). The US emphasised that different stakeholders are active around different themes and building blocks, and that all actors should strive to feed inputs on progress from those areas into the work of the Global Partnership. The US also called for focus on areas where the global monitoring indicators remain to be finalised. 36. In order to drive progress for implementing Busan commitments, there was consensus on the importance of outreach to stakeholders both within and beyond the Global Partnership. It was recognised that some stakeholders may perceive the Global Partnership as a process driven by provider countries, and that special efforts are needed to reach out to these partners to share information on and find common interests and synergies around the Global Partnership. It was noted that in addition to the Co-Chairsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; outreach efforts and to ensuring consultations and 6

- 137 -

outreach as a committee, all members are well placed as individuals to seize outreach opportunities in bilateral or regional meetings. 37. Before closing the discussion, the Chair invited remarks from the other two Co-Chairs. Ms. Greening emphasised transparency and results as focus areas for the UKâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s implementation efforts and highlighted the importance of learning from peer reviews to accelerate progress. Ms. Okonjo-Iweala welcomed the richness of initiatives and efforts taking place, and called for Steering Committee membersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; support in reaching out to broader stakeholders to mobilise partnerships around the Busan agenda. In concluding the session, the Chair echoed the appeal for members to advise the Co-Chairs on how best to engage with and deliver key messages on progress and lessons to broader partners, including private sector actors, emerging economies and non-executive stakeholders. 6 December Agenda Item 3: Progress and challenges in the implementation of Busan commitments, including Knowledge Sharing Platform [continued from Day 1] (chaired by Wismana Adi Suryabrata, Indonesia) 38. To facilitate discussions around knowledge-sharing, Indonesia presented a background paper on knowledge sharing platforms, highlighting the potential of such platforms for enhancing peer learning, engaging stakeholders beyond traditional providers of co-operation and serving as a vehicle to implement the global development agenda. Drawing links to the meeting document on the communications strategy, Indonesia proposed to establish a Global Partnership web platform for knowledge sharing, and invited Committee members to identify common interests for South-South and triangular co-operation. 39. Indonesiaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s proposal on a knowledge-sharing platform received support (Peru, Korea). Members also posed several questions for clarification, including how to link knowledge-sharing objectives more realistically with the mandate of the Global Partnership and avoid duplication with existing platforms (World Bank); which specific areas of work would knowledge-sharing focus on, bearing in mind the need to focus on under-delivered areas (UNDP); who would produce and disseminate knowledge so as to ensure ownership and inclusiveness (BetterAid); and how the Indonesian experience would relate to knowledge sharing more broadly in the context of the Global Partnership (EU). 40. Indonesia clarified that knowledge sharing, as a complementary mechanism for stronger development cooperation, provides a vehicle for implementing Busan commitments. The Global Partnership should disseminate best practices on different ways of sharing knowledge as a means of engaging with a wider set of stakeholders around development cooperation issues. It was agreed that Indonesia would provide more detailed elaborations on the way forward in a concept note. Overall, there was broad support for building on existing knowledge sharing platforms, coupled with the suggestion to link different country level platforms to the Global Partnership knowledge sharing website (Korea, World Bank). UNDP drew attention to the fact that reaching out to stakeholders and networks and providing consolidated knowledge on Busan implementation will require adequate resources and funding. b) Update on the development of a global monitoring framework 41. The UNDP/OECD support team (Brenda Killen) offered a brief presentation on the state of advancement in the operationalisation of the global indicators and targets for monitoring the 7

- 138 -

implementation of Busan commitments. She explained that work is ongoing to develop and refine measurement methodologies in consultation with developing countries, particularly for those indicators that are new, and that do not build on pre-existing approaches to measuring progress. Operational guidance for developing country stakeholders engaging in the global monitoring process is being drafted by the joint support team, and will be discussed with developing country stakeholders as part of the consultation process prior to finalisation in the first quarter of 2013. This would potentially allow for some data – albeit partial in coverage – to be made available and compiled in time to inform the first ministerial-level meeting of the Global Partnership. 42. Participants welcomed the presentation by the joint support team, noting that distributed as a template for use by Steering Committee members in their own outreach efforts. In the discussion that followed, members noted the willingness of private sector stakeholders to contribute to the development of the indicator on the private sector (CIPE); the need for further consultation among constituencies to offer guidance on the more political and strategic issues relating to the transparency indicator (UK, EU); the need for continued broad consultation on the operationalisation of the indicators (BetterAid), and the particular importance attached by the parliamentary community to the need for indicator 6 to focus on resources that are “subject to parliamentary scrutiny” (IPU). Participants expressed their support for work planned by the joint support team to establish a light helpdesk facility to support stakeholders involved in monitoring efforts at the country level. Agenda Item 4: UK)

Planning for a ministerial-level meeting (chaired by Richard Calvert,

43. The Chair (UK) introduced the session by recapping emerging areas of consensus from Agenda Items 1 and 2 (see summaries above), identifying the following priority strands of work for the Global Partnership leading to the ministerial-level meeting, and noting a need to focus on deliverables: i. What has changed on the ground since Busan, and what more needs to be done? ii. Domestic resource mobilisation iii. Leveraging private sector resources for development and strengthening the regulatory and investment environment iv. Knowledge-sharing 44. Additionally the Chair noted agreement to map out linkages and synergies with other relevant international and multi-stakeholder forums and processes. 45. What has changed on the ground since Busan. This work strand would involve identifying and sharing successful initiatives for driving progress in implementing Busan commitments, including supporting democratic ownership and accountability. It would also include bottom-up feedback on key challenges and areas requiring political focus and accelerated efforts, including in the context of the Busan building blocks. 46. Members suggested that this area could serve as an umbrella, including all Busan commitments and allowing for specific concerns emerging from global monitoring, building blocks, and other sources (EU, World Bank). Some members raised that, based on discussions from Day 1, there should be a separate strand of work built around inclusive development, including issues of civil society, gender, accountability, right to development, results focus, and 8

- 139 -

policy coherence (BetterAid, UNDP, US). The Chair noted that these aspects could be included as part of the work strand on what has changed on the ground since Busan. 47. Domestic resource mobilisation. This work stream would involve supporting countries in domestic resource mobilisation, including addressing tax evasion and the recovery of illegal assets. Members raised that it would be important to further clarify how the Global Partnership should contribute in this area, noting that sharing best practices alone is not sufficient (Korea), and that there is a need to focus on aspects that requires global-level political engagement, such as the link with aid flows (World Bank). Others suggested that this work strand should encompass all forms of financing for development, and that this could contribute to financing for development discussions in the post-2015 development agenda (EU). 48. Private sector. This work stream would focus on leveraging private sector resources for development and strengthening the regulatory and investment environment. Some members suggested that there is a need to focus on areas where the Global Partnership can add value, for example by finding innovative solutions to help leverage ODA to increase investment for development (World Bank). Other members stressed that a key message at Busan was the importance of supporting an institutional framework at country-level, including to address issues of informality (CIPE) and that the focus should go beyond the role of ODA (EU). 49. Knowledge-sharing. This work strand would involve identifying mechanisms for sharing knowledge as a way to engage new partners, drawing on existing partnerships and platforms, promoting inclusiveness, and recognising the differential roles and commitments of different stakeholders. Members raised the need to coordinate this work with that of the G20 Development Working Group (Korea), and that knowledge-sharing could be a tool for other work areas rather (World Bank). The Chair noted that there was a clear indication from the Co-Chairs that knowledge-sharing should be a substantive priority in its own right. 50. As overall comments, members raised that there is a need to clarify what the Global Partnership’s value added will be (UNDP), and to ensure that the focus areas chosen require political action at the global level (World Bank). There was also a suggestion that “policy coherence” – in terms of coordinating the policies of all the different actors involved in the discussion in order to make development cooperation work effectively – could be a theme to tie the work strands together (EU, BetterAid). 51. Members also expressed an interest in providing a concrete plan for how the Global Partnership can relate to discussions on the post-2015 development agenda (BetterAid), and that the Global Partnership should be guided by the substantive vision that emerges from the post2015 process (UNDP). Some members also emphasised the need to include the work of the building blocks in the ministerial-level discussion, including suggestions for an action plan (BetterAid), and for reviewing progress on the various building blocks over the course of the next two Steering Committee meetings (Korea). 52. In terms of outputs for the ministerial-level meeting, members expressed an interest in producing a communiqué that is as light as possible, so as to avoid spending too much time on the specifics of a text (EU). Members also requested a structured proposed agenda for what will be discussed at the ministerial-level meeting (UNDP). 53. In terms of next steps, the Chair proposed that drafts of concept papers be prepared by the end of 2012 on each of the substantive priorities, with a lead author on each: umbrella on Busan commitments (joint support team); domestic resource mobilisation (Nigeria); private sector 9

- 140 -

(CIPE); knowledge-sharing (Indonesia); and inclusive development (BetterAid and US). The joint support team will work with lead authors in each instance. Session 5. Working arrangements and steering committee membership (chaired by Chii Akporji, Nigeria) a) Global Partnership communications and stakeholder engagement strategy 54. The Chair framed the discussion by inviting the joint support team to present the background document on communications and outreach strategy. The support team highlighted the three objectives of the strategy, namely i) communicating to the public at large; ii) reaching out to all members of the Global Partnership; and iii) reaching out to new partners. The Chair invited members to focus discussions particularly on elaborating the independent web-presence and visual identity for the Partnership, agreeing how Steering Committee work should be communicated and on identifying how Steering Committee members will reach out to the broad membership of the Global Partnership. 55. The objectives of the communications strategy received broad support (US, Korea, EU, Bangladesh, UNDP, WB), as did the notion of developing both internal and external websites building on existing tools and platforms, including the UNDP â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Teamworksâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; tool. Members raised the importance of using regional platforms (Bangladesh) and proposed to add links to the building blocks (World Bank). As to the target audience of the strategy, Korea proposed to add G20 to the list, and shared its own experience of organising outreach events in the margins of G20 Development Working Group meetings as a potentially helpful example for the Co-Chairs to draw on in planning their outreach efforts. 56. Regarding the working arrangements of the Steering Committee, inclusiveness was emphasised as a key element of the Global Partnership. Recognising the multi-stakeholder nature of effective development cooperation as well as ensuring inclusive consultations and effective communications in the work of the Global Partnership arose as priorities for the Steering Committee. There was broad agreement on the need for transparent processes, with clear indications to all stakeholders on the timing and mechanisms for consultations, inputs, consolidated positions, decisions and feedback. There was no consensus on the proposal to webcast meetings of the Steering Committee or make full recordings available online, though this had been usual practice for PBIG. It was also noted that political engagement to reach out to new partners will necessitate separate efforts, including through high-level diplomacy. On the question of document translation, there was agreement that careful consideration should be given to cost constraints, with support for translation by Global Partnership members appreciated. A pragmatic approach would be adopted with English, French and Spanish translations of detailed documents, also ensuring that a wider set of languages are catered for in key ministerial documents so as to offer a reasonable degree of accessibility to all audiences, as per pre-Busan practice. b) Steering Committee participation and representation 57. The Chair drew membersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; attention to requests received for seats on the Steering Committee and invited feedback from members. 58. The OECD/DAC reminded participants that in addition to a manageable committee size, representativeness had also featured as a key element in the deliberations of the Post-Busan Interim Group and that the Co-Chairs of the Global Partnership were not expected to represent 10

- 141 -

their constituencies alone, but the broad membership of the partnership. The OECD/DAC voiced support for the request of the African Union and of Trade Unions, also adding that observer status could provide a way to initially engage emerging economies and Arab donors in the work of the Committee. The OECD/DAC also raised the importance of ensuring continuity in the work of the Committee, and of looking at sustainable modes of rotation in this regard. Peru expressed support for the membership request of United Cities and Local Governments as well as for the idea of engaging emerging economies on observer status. 59. The EU acknowledged the legitimacy of all the requests, and was supportive of enabling engagement of emerging economies in Committee work, for example by considering the proposed observer status, and encouraged the Committee to consider ways of ensuring inputs and contributions from all members, including those beyond the Committee membership. 60. Several members emphasised that given the urgency of preparing the ministerial-level meeting, there may be advantages to focusing on substantive work using the existing committee composition (US, Korea, UNDP, UK, Guatemala, IPU). Additional arguments in favor of maintaining the status quo included that the PBIG had already done its best to strike a balance between effectiveness and representativeness (US), that Committee membership should most appropriately be addressed at the ministerial level in connection to succession and rotation arrangements (Korea, UNDP), and that with only two Committee meetings left before the ministerial meeting, practical contributions and engagement of stakeholders in between Steering Committee meetings would be crucial for substantive work and may not require formal participation in the Committee meetings (UK). 61. The African Union Commission (on behalf of Chad) provided some background information related to the AU membership request, informing participants that the AU request was agreed at the 19th AU Summit and that the AU Commission and NEPAD are working jointly to support post-Busan implementation and to consolidate and co-ordinate African views. 62. Overall, members underlined that inclusiveness was about much more than Committee membership. The World Bank called on all Steering Committee members to work in a way that fosters frank, open and inclusive discussions, two-way communication with constituencies as well as effective consultations and communications from the Committee as a whole. Members also proposed that Steering Committee members consider dedicating particular efforts to engaging with certain stakeholder groups (UNDP, Guatemala). BetterAid called for concrete mechanisms for enabling inputs and contributions to the work and decisions of the Committee. 63. In drawing agenda item 5 to a close, the Chair concluded that the communications strategy â&#x20AC;&#x201C; including the three objectives - had been endorsed and that the joint support team would take forward the visual branding, bearing in mind the need for the website to reflect the inclusive and consultative nature of the Global Partnership. Information will be provided on the costing of the communication-related activities and the interest of the US to provide funding was welcomed. Existing tools, including UNDP Teamworks and regional platforms, will be maximised. All Steering Committee members will be expected to exercise active outreach to key constituencies. Regarding Steering Committee membership, the Chair acknowledged the requests received and concluded that inclusiveness will be a key element in the work of the Steering Committee. The question of Steering Committee membership should be revisited at the ministerial level, in conjunction with any discussion on succession/rotation arrangements and also as part of any review of the Global Partnership mandate in the future.

- 142 -

Annex A.

List of participants

Co-Chairs Armida Salsiah ALISJAHBANA Minister of National Development Planning, Indonesia Justine GREENING Secretary of State for International Development, DFID, United Kingdom Ngozi OKONJO-IWEALA Minister of Finance, Federal Ministry of Finance, Nigeria Delegates representing Co-Chairs on Day 2 (plus support staff) Co-chair representing Mr. Wismana Adi SURYABRATA Ms Alisjahbana (Day 2) Deputy Minister for Development Funding Affairs Ms. Teni WIDURIYANTI Deputy Director, National Development Planning Agency of the Republic of Indonesia Mr. Kurniawan (Iwan) ARIADI Deputy Director/Administrative Assistance to the Minister Ms. Masriati PRATAMA Minister Counsellor for Economic Affairs, Embassy of the Republic of Indonesia Mr. Teuku Mohammad Hamzah THAYEB Ambassador to UK, Indonesian Embassy Ms. Silvia MALAU Third Secretary for Economic Affairs, Embassy of the Republic of Indonesia Co-chair representing Ms Greening (Day 2)

Mr. Richard CALVERT Director General, Finance and Corporate Performance Division Department for International Development Mr. Roger HEATH Assistant Private Secretary to the Secretary of State of International Development Department for International Development Ms. Hannah RYDER Team Leader, Global Partnership for Effective Development Co-operation Department for International Development

Co-Chair representing Ms Okonjo-Iweala (Day 2)

Ms. Chii AKPORJI Special Adviser to the CME (Co-ordinating Minister for the Economy) and Hon Minister of Finance Participants

Bangladesh

Mrs. Nurjahan BEGUM Joint Secretary, Coordination and Nordic Wing, Economic Relations Division Ministry of Finance Mohammed EQTIDAR ALAM Assistant Secretary, ERD, Ministry of Finance

Chad

Mr. Amadou CISSĂ&#x2030; Senior Economist, Department of Economic Affairs, African Union Commission

- 143 -

CSO partnership for Development Effectiveness (CPDE)

Ms. Mayra MORO-COCO Development Policy and Advocacy Manager, Policy and Advocacy Manager Association for Women's Rights in Development (AWID) Mr. Antonio TUJAN JR. International Director IBON

Mr. Gustavo MARTIN PRADA Director, EU Development Policy Directorate-General for Development and Cooperation, European Commission Mr. Timo WILKKI Administrator, Aid and development effectiveness and financing Directorate-General for Development and Cooperation, European Commission

Guatemala

Ana MENDEZ CHICAS Under Secretary of International of Cooperation Guatemala Mr. Raul BOLAﾃ前S Executive Director, Subsecretaria de Cooperaciﾃｳn Internacional Secretaria de Planificaciﾃｳn y Programaciﾃｳn de la Presidencia de Guatemala

IPU

Dr. Jeff BALCH Director, Association of European Parlementarians with Africa (AWEPA) Amsterdam, Netherlands

Republic of Korea

Ms. Enna PARK Director-General, Development Cooperation Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade Ms. Soonhee CHOI First Secretary, Development Policy Division, Development Cooperation Bureau Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Korea

OECD/DAC

Mr. Brian ATWOOD DAC Chair, DCD Mr. Erik SOLHEIM DAC Chair-elect

Peru

Mr. Luis OLIVERA Executive Director, Peruvian International Cooperation Agency (APCI). Ms. Ana Marina ALVARADO DIAZ Advisor to the Executive Direction of the APCI, Peru

Center for International M. John SULLIVAN Private Enterprise Executive Director, Center for International Private Enterprise Mr. Jonathan GREENHILL Policy Manager, BIAC Samoa

Ms. Noumea SIMI Assistant CEO, Aid Coordination Unit, Ministry of Finance

Timor Leste

Mr. Helder DA COSTA National Co-ordinator, g7+ Secretariat Aid Effectiveness Directorate, Ministry of Finance Miss Claire LEIGH Overseas Development Institute (ODI)

- 144 -

UN Development Programme (UNDP)

Ms. Sigrid KAAG Assistant Secretary General and Assistant Administrator Bureau for External Relations and Advocacy Ms. Dasa SILOVIC Senior Policy Advisor, Bureau for External Relations and Advocacy

United States

Mr. Donald STEINBERG Deputy Administrator, Office of The Administrator US Agency for International Development Dr. Steven PIERCE US Representative to the DAC

World Bank

Ms. Sophie SIRTAINE Director, Corporate Reform and Strategy Operations Policy and Country Services Mr. Yoichiro ISHIHARA Senior Economist, Aid Effectiveness Unit Secretariat

OECD

Mr. Jon Lomoy Director, Development Cooperation Directorate Ms. Brenda KILLEN Head of Division, Global Partnerships and Policies, Development Cooperation Directorate Mr. Robin OGILVY Policy Analyst, Global Partnerships and Policies, Development Cooperation Directorate Ms. Hanna-Mari KILPELAINEN Policy Analyst, Global Partnerships and Policies, Development Cooperation Directorate Miss Claire CONDON Assistant to the Division, Global Partnerships and Policies, Development Cooperation Directorate

UNDP

Ms. Bettina WOLL Aid Modalities Specialist - Capacity Development Group Bureau for Development Policy Mr. Derek KILNER Intergovernmental Affairs Officer, BERA Bureau of External Relations and Advocacy

- 145 -

Second meeting of the Steering Committee Summary

Second meeting of the Global Partnership Steering Committee Bali, Indonesia, 23-24 March 2013

This summary is released for information. An earlier draft of this summary was shared with Steering Committee members for review. Comments were submitted by the World Bank before the deadline of 19 April 2013, and are reflected in this final version.

Contacts: Mr. Derek Kilner, tel. +1-212-906-5742, email: derek.kilner@undp.org Mr. Robin Ogilvy, tel. +33 1 45 24 94 48, email: robin.ogilvy@oecd.org Ms. Marjolaine Nicod, tel. +33 1 45 24 87 67, email: marjolaine.nicod@oecd.org

- 146 -

GLOBAL PARTNERSHIP FOR EFFECTIVE DEVELOPMENT CO-OPERATION SECOND MEETING OF THE STEERING COMMITTEE BALI, INDONESIA, 23-24 MARCH 2013 SUMMARY

Session 1: Introductory remarks 1. Ministers Armida Alisjahbana (Indonesia), Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala (Nigeria) and Justine Greening (United Kingdom) welcomed participants to the second meeting of the Global Partnership Steering Committee. In their introductory remarks, the three co-chairs emphasised the importance of the meeting in identifying concrete ways for the Global Partnership to contribute to the post-2015 global development framework. 2. Opening the meeting, Ms Alisjahbana emphasised the importance of linking development co-operation as the “how” of achieving development goals in the context of the discussions of the UN High Level Panel on the post-2015 development agenda in relation to a possible successor to MDG8, building on Busan commitments as well as those made in Paris and Accra. She highlighted how the Global Partnership could help to reduce aid dependency through its focus on development effectiveness. In this context, the focus on domestic resource mobilisation and knowledge sharing was particularly relevant. Ms Alisjahbana identified the ministerial-level meeting as instrumental in showing concrete deliverables on, for example, inclusiveness, governance (including monitoring and knowledge sharing) and financing (including the leveraging of private sector resources). Ms Alisjahbana also emphasised the need to continue outreach efforts, particularly with emerging economies. 3. Ms. Okonjo-Iweala pointed the unique opportunity presented by the final meeting of the UN High Level Panel to make concrete suggestions on how the Global Partnership can add value. She offered several areas for consideration: domestic resource mobilisation, including through effective tax policies and stronger tax administration, addressing illicit flows and other “leakages”, strengthening institutions and systems to help prevent corruption, as well as prosecuting cases of corruption; ensuring that development co-operation contributes to the creation of a better environment for private sector activity, and providing the metrics for “SMARTER” global partnerships in the post-2015 framework. 4. Ms. Greening shared her vision for the Global Partnership becoming the forum for global action on development effectiveness, focusing on the “how” of the post-2015 global development framework. She called for more effective communication around the work of the Global Partnership and its potential. In shaping the agenda for the first ministerial-level meeting of the Partnership, she suggested a focus on transparency and accountability, looking at progress made and identifying gaps. Ms Greening also spoke of the importance of domestic resources for development, pointing to the relevance of more effective collaboration with the private sector, including through the removal of trade barriers, the provision of a climate conducive to investment, and the promotion of responsible private sector development in emerging markets. 5. In the interventions that followed, several participants echoed the Co-Chairs’ desire to establish strong linkages with the discussions of the UN High Level Panel. The United States emphasised the need for an ambitious and aspirational vision framed around the eradication of 1

Second meeting of the Steering Committee, Bali, Indonesia, 23-24 March 2013

- 147 -

extreme poverty. Korea pointed to the strength of the Global Partnership in sustaining political momentum for effective development co-operation. UNDP noted the potential of the Global Partnership as an enabler, and as the “glue” holding together the various fora on different aspects of development co-operation. It suggested that the Global Partnership could be used to push new agendas and provide space to discuss sensitive issues that would be challenging to raise in other settings. The World Bank shared feedback from the multilateral development banks (MDBs), which it represents at the Steering Committee, that the Global Partnership’s comparative advantages include monitoring aid effectiveness, outreach to all stakeholders and knowledge sharing. Civil society (CPDE) recommended that an emphasis on rights in the branding / vision of the Global Partnership, citing domestic resource mobilisation, transparency, accountability and the fight against corruption and impunity as being central to advancing rights in development. Session 2: Implementation of Busan commitments: what’s happening in practice? (Chaired by Armida Alisjahbana, Indonesia). 6. Emilia Pires, Timor Leste’s Minister of Finance, offered insights into the efforts under way to implement Busan commitments in her country. Ms Pires spoke of the importance of the Global Partnership as a space where the voice of developing countries can be strengthened by joining forces and engaging in an open and frank dialogue with development partners. She went on to speak of the importance of ensuring that development co-operation is fit for purpose, particularly in fragile states, noting that advances in this area will be important for the credibility of the Global Partnership. Ms Pires spoke of the New Deal for fragile states, and called on developing countries to assume ownership for their problems as on step to identifying owned diagnostics and solutions. Transparency was cited as an important principle, with Ms Pires noting that fragile states are rich in resources but need to have a better understanding of the tools available to manage their resources and address leakages. The Global Partnership can play a useful role in supporting greater transparency and better measurement. In this context, Ms Pires emphasised the importance of measuring the right thing in a context-sensitive way: in fragile states, one might prioritise the existence of a tax system over the measurement of users’ perceptions of it, for example – recognising that state- and institution-building efforts take time. 7. Don Steinberg (United States) offered insights on Busan implementation from the perspective of the US government. He noted that the US Congress had agreed an increased foreign assistance budget, and pointed to the pressure that this would place on the administration to the efficient and effective use of resources. Mr Steinberg went on to speak of the progress made by the United States in untying aid, and in promoting greater transparency and predictability of aid. The United States plans to increase the use of national institutions (including governments and civil society organisations), with the aim of channelling an additional USD 1.4 billion through these channels. Mr Steinberg went on to stress that development is no longer a state monopoly: in the context of Rio+20, 450 American multinational companies committed collectively to eliminate net deforestation throughout their supply chains by 2020. The G8 alliance on food security has led 70 companies to raise USD 3.7 billion to finance innovative approaches to supporting market-oriented reforms in developing countries. Mr Steinberg pointed to the importance of defining a new role for aid and identifying ways of reducing the risks faced by private sector actors. 8. Luis Olivera (Peru) outlined how the Paris, Accra and Busan agreements have been embedded in Peru's national development policies and practices through Peru’s new national policy for international development, which includes action both within and outside the country. The focus of Peru’s efforts has been on strengthening national ownership of effective development with greater inclusion of social actors in the design and implementation of policies. Mr Olivera pointed to transparency, inclusion and accountability as key principles to maximise the impact of local and international resources for development. 2

Second meeting of the Steering Committee, Bali, Indonesia, 23-24 March 2013

- 148 -

9. In the discussion that followed, participants reacted to the initial presentations offered by Timor-Leste, the United States and Peru, and shared their experiences in implementing Busan commitments. Bangladesh reported that it was finalising its Busan implementation plan which integrates global indicators and foresees the collection of monitoring data through the national aid information management system. The European Union (EU) pointed to progress made by its member states in promoting transparency, noting that all member states had finalised implementation schedules for the common transparency standard foreseen in Busan by 2015. The EU also reported on its steps to increase joint programming in approximately 40 countries. 10. The International Business Leaders Forum (IBLF) suggested that Global Partnershipâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s interest in the private sector development should not be limited only to leveraging resources for development and promoting an enabling environment for business. It pointed to the role for business as a partner in development through, for example, public-private partnerships, healthy workers, sustainable supply chains and more sustainable products. IBLF reported on an initiative supported by the building block on public-private co-operation to establish hubs for private sector engagement in Zambia and Colombia. 11. Korea outlined its efforts to implement Busan commitments and cited collaboration with Myanmar on its development strategy which resulted with the adoption of the Naypidaw accord. In its intervention, the OECD/DAC cited Korea as a success story and emphasised the importance of domestic resource mobilisation and sound policy choices. While acknowledging that aid is not the only source of funding for development, the OECD/DAC noted the need for developed nations to fulfil commitments on aid and change behaviour. It updated the Steering Committee on DAC efforts to engage others and open its work to new members. 12. UNDP reported on feedback collected from staff in 88 of its programme countries, indicating that developing countries are leading efforts at the country level to advance the implementation of key Busan commitments. Evidence pointed to stronger linkages between national development strategies, budgets, and efforts to promote transparency and accountability, notably through aid information management systems. It pointed to the importance of multi-stakeholder dialogue, particularly at the sub-national level. It also noted that Paris and Accra commitments remain highly relevant in many of its programme countries and pointed to the need to invest in national systems to support effective delivery. 13. The Association of European Parliamentarians with Africa (AWEPA) noted the relevance of the work being undertaken by the Effective Institutions Platform for domestic resource mobilisation, and also in the context of efforts to strengthen the capacities of supreme audit institutions alongside parliaments as a means of strengthening accountability. CPDE welcomed the positive feedback on progress made by some stakeholders in implementing Busan commitments but cautioned against overstating achievements. It reported on work underway to advance the Istanbul principles for CSO effectiveness and develop measures of the enabling environment for CSOs. It also pointed to the importance of the global post-Busan monitoring framework for tracking progress. 14. Guatemala reported on ongoing dialogue among Central American countries and plans to organise regional workshops to foster common positions and encourage engagement in monitoring efforts. Challenges in the region include finding ways to promote more strategic use of aid to help middle income countries address inequality, as well as engagement with the private sector. 15. Ms Justine Greening pointed to the importance of developing a better understanding of progress at the country level and emphases the need to translate lessons into actions. Ms Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala welcomed feedback on the impact of the New Deal while cautioning that emerging successes in peace-building and state-building efforts were not sufficient for sustainable 3

Second meeting of the Steering Committee, Bali, Indonesia, 23-24 March 2013

- 149 -

development outcomes. The session chair, Ms Alisjahbana, concluded that a paradigm shift from aid to development effectiveness requires a greater focus on capacity development, as well as efforts in the areas of monitoring and evaluation. Session 3. Vision for the 2013 ministerial-level meeting of the Global Partnership (chaired by Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, Nigeria) 16. The Chair invited discussion on the overall storyline of the first ministerial-level meeting of the Global Partnership, inviting participants to focus on the relevance and added value of the Global Partnership. 17. The OECD/DAC pointed to the added value of the Global Partnership and its first ministerial in bringing political will to efforts to tackle extreme poverty through development cooperation. The United States questioned the extent to which political will had been sustained since Busan, and pointed to the need for the first ministerial-level meeting to generate longerterm momentum and commitment in ways similar to the MDG commitments and targets. 18. Bangladesh emphasised the role that the first ministerial could play in promoting knowledge sharing. Chad spoke of the opportunity presented by the first ministerial to generate political will which was lacking around MDG8, stressing the need for the Co-Chairs to play their role in attracting political attention. 19. The EU noted that the substance of the first ministerial should be prioritised over its timing, and cited several areas in which the ministerial would be of particular relevance: monitoring the commitments made in Busan; showcasing progress made in “new” areas such as co-operation with the private sector and South-South partners, and demonstrating the added value of the Global Partnership vis-à-vis the MDGs and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) processes. It called for more ambitious deliverables with a less technical focus. 20. UNDP stressed the importance of a political vision around the first ministerial, and noted that the eradication of extreme poverty could be part of this. It spoke of the opportunity presented by the ministerial to listen to the priorities of developing countries and engage in a frank discussion on behaviour change. 21. CPDE suggested that the ministerial should have a particular emphasis on “unfinished business”, also stressing local-global linkages. IBLF proposed that the ministerial offers an opportunity to institutionalise public-private co-operation, perhaps leading to a shared roadmap including the private sector – towards a “collaborative society”. It wishes to see the level of ambition raised so as to create a genuine partnership for development. 22. Timor-Leste informed participants that the g7+ group of countries wishes to see real results at the country level, and that the ministerial could emphasise evidence of progress and challenges in the implementation of commitments. It also noted mixed reactions towards the Global Partnership among UN member states, and informed members of its efforts to brief developing countries on the opportunities presented by the Global Partnership. Ministers from g7+ countries are excited by plans for the first ministerial-level meeting. 23. Korea pointed to the importance of balancing an emphasis on monitoring and accountability with the need and desire for the Global Partnership to examine and address emerging issues in development co-operation. 24. The World Bank suggested that a vision emphasising the eradication of poverty should also include a focus on shared prosperity to address the concerns of middle-income countries. In addition, the World Bank responded positively to the question from the chair to look into 4

Second meeting of the Steering Committee, Bali, Indonesia, 23-24 March 2013

- 150 -

possibilities to make the World Bank’s experiences with triangular knowledge sharing available to the Global Partnership. In terms of content, it suggested that the first ministerial should place emphasis on a solid stock-take of progress against commitments. It noted that the MDBs do not necessarily see the comparative advantage of the Global Partnership in domestic resource mobilization and innovative financing mechanisms, as these themes are also being addressed by other fora, including the UN High Level Panel. 25. Peru suggested that the Global Partnership should have social inclusion within its vision. It noted that the Global Partnership could play a role in helping to overcome scepticism on partnership with the private sector. Peru informed members that it had shared the consultation papers with other countries in the Latin America region, some of which expressed an interest in examining indicators in greater detail. 26. Samoa noted that countries in the Pacific region are partnering among themselves to support implementation of Busan commitments and share good practices at the regional level. 27. Summarising the discussion on the vision for the ministerial, Ms Okonjo-Iweala pointed to the value added presented by the first ministerial in helping the Global Partnership to become “the go-to partnership” that will support implementation of a vision centred on poverty eradication, wealth creation and inclusion. Along with her Co-Chairs, she went on to conclude that the meeting would both take stock of progress, and would explore “newer” areas of the Busan agreement, e.g. tax and development co-operation. 28. A range of views were expressed on arrangements for hosting the meeting, its timing, and participation. There was agreement to prioritise: x Holding the meeting in the fourth quarter of 2013 – two years after Busan; x Organising the meeting as a stand-alone event, rather than back-to-back with others, recognising that this will offer greater visibility; x Confirming the willingness of a government or organisation to host the meeting and play a lead role in attracting a high level of participation; x Pursuing the participation of a limited number of heads of state, the UN SecretaryGeneral, the World Bank President, the OECD Secretary-General, high-level representatives from countries at all levels of development, and prominent leaders from business and the non-state sector; x A high-profile, modern event making use of technology, and encouraging interactive debate. Session 4. Exploring substantive deliverables for the 2013 ministerial-level meeting (chaired by Justine Greening, United Kingdom) 29. Introducing the discussion on specific thematic deliverables for the ministerial, Ms Greening shared some initial views on opportunities within each of the four thematic areas identified at the previous meeting of the Steering Committee. She suggested that deliverables on tax and domestic resource mobilisation might include a mix of international reforms, national reforms, and co-operation measures; the discussion on knowledge sharing could be a means of having a discussion among a range of stakeholders, including those engaged in South-South cooperation, and that this would need more work to identify concrete deliverables. Ms Greening suggested that re-framing the discussion on inclusive development to place a greater emphasis

Second meeting of the Steering Committee, Bali, Indonesia, 23-24 March 2013

- 151 -

on transparency could make for an agenda around which more countries would feel comfortable engaging. 30. Ms Alisjahbana (Indonesia) gave a brief presentation on knowledge sharing, in which she proposed that the ministerial could aim to address the brokering of knowledge sharing, as well as its facilitation and funding. In the discussion that followed, participants concurred on the need for ways of brokering the sharing of knowledge, as well as the potential role of pilots and the opportunity presented by the ministerial to share success stories on knowledge sharing or case studies. Reference was made to the need for Indonesia’s concept to be advanced through existing knowledge sharing hubs and platforms. Civil society noted that the ministerial might look at knowledge sharing across boundaries – e.g. civil society – governments – private sector. AWEPA noted that parliaments could be engaged more in knowledge sharing efforts. A particular focus on the sharing of knowledge on how countries have implemented Busan commitments was identified by some as interesting. 31. Participants expressed a range of views on the theme of inclusive development, with some participants expressing concern that some of the issues proposed in the initial concept by the United States and CPDE (e.g. LGBT rights – in the context of a discussion of marginalised groups) could undermine efforts to build consensus among a broad range of stakeholders (EU, Nigeria), and suggesting that the ministerial should not aim to go beyond what was agreed through a lengthy process of negotiation in Busan (Korea). UNDP/UNDG suggested that the Global Partnership should not actively avoid sensitive issues. It also noted the suggestion by the United Kingdom to discuss transparency, and identified the International Aid Transparency Initiative as an example of efforts that may be of interest. 32. While participants did not discuss the issues of tax and domestic resource mobilisation in detail during this session, Ms Okonjo-Iweala suggested that the added value of the Global Partnership in this area could be in tasking the G8, G20 and other bodies to push for reforms on taxation, illicit flows and transfer pricing to get countries’ “own houses in order” in ways that support developing countries’ resource mobilisation efforts. 33. Summarising the discussion, Ms Greening noted that there was broad agreement that deliverables for the ministerial should remain broadly focused on existing commitments, emphasising how these could be implemented. She noted that “compacts” or guidelines might be adopted to help advance implementation in selected areas on a voluntary basis. Ms Greening also suggested that the ministerial might offer scope to examine issues relating to institutions in development, but suggested that care be taken to avoid duplicating the efforts of other initiatives and organisations. Session 5 (a): Recap from Day 1 and Roadmap for 2013 (chaired by Anthony Smith, UK) 34. The Chair began the session by outlining the Co-Chairs’ interpretation of what had been broadly agreed from the first day’s sessions: x Vision: a Global Partnership with a clear role in helping to achieve the MDGs and implement a successor development framework; making development cooperation more effective to eradicate extreme poverty, create wealth and promote inclusion; offer a safe and inclusive space to discuss development co-operation. x Linkages with the High Level Panel on post-2015: agreement that the Co-Chairs would write to the Panel to share ideas emerging from the Steering Committee’s consultations; idea of the Global Partnership becoming the open, inclusive “go to” partnership where stakeholders come together to help implement the vision set out in a post-2015 development framework. 6

Second meeting of the Steering Committee, Bali, Indonesia, 23-24 March 2013

- 152 -

x First ministerial-level meeting: broad agreement to aim for a two-day event in the fourth quarter of 2013; emphasis on a limited number of themes aiming to sustain momentum from Busan; Steering Committee members themselves will lead in the preparation of different elements / sessions for the meeting. Flexibility will be needed in grouping together / prioritising themes within a tight agenda. x Next steps proposed: identifying a host; agreeing on the scope and deliverables for each session; identifying facilitators within the Steering Committee to take the work forward on each session; and agreeing resourcing and organisational arrangements for delivering the meeting. 35. The discussion that followed centred on the substantive focus and agenda of the ministerial-level meeting. Some members expressed interest in putting greater emphasis during the ministerial on the broader vision, including the focus on eliminating poverty, increasing wealth, and promoting inclusiveness (EU, OECD/DAC, Timor-Leste, United States). There was broad support for highlighting the link between the “what” of the post-2015 development framework and the Global Partnership’s contribution to the “how.” The Global Partnership can in particular contribute to implementing Busan commitments; to help increase and improve development finance (including domestic resources and private flows), and by improving knowledge sharing. These contributions could be in support of a potential successor to MDG8, and should also be pursued in their own right. Some members added that discussion of development finance in this context should ensure reference to the continued importance of ODA – including its catalytic role (Chad, Korea, UNDP). 36. There was some interest in having the ministerial review discussions on the post-2015 agenda that will have taken place during the UN General Assembly (Korea), but also recognition that the Partnership should contribute primarily to the “how,” rather than the elaboration of the framework itself. Some members noted that the agenda should be more political in nature so as to attract sufficient interest from ministers (Korea, OECD/DAC, United Kingdom), and some noted that a heavy emphasis on Busan commitments may be too technical (OECD/DAC). Others suggested that technical discussions could be conducted in sessions prior to the full meeting (Korea). Civil society stressed the importance of a strong focus on implementing the “unfinished business” relating to commitments made in Paris and Accra during the session on implementing Busan commitments (CPDE). Others emphasised the importance of ensuring adequate collection of evidence for this session (UNDP). 37. While some members suggested that the work stream on inclusive development could be integrated by focusing on inclusivity throughout the other substantive sessions, others stressed the importance of having a session devoted to seeing that development cooperation promotes inclusion (CPDE, United States). 38. There was a recognition that the private sector workstream is not only about private finance, but about how to engage the private sector more broadly. 39. Some members raised the possibility of including the showcasing the work of the voluntary Building Blocks that emerged from the Busan High Level Forum on the agenda (TimorLeste). 40. There was strong interest in ensuring the engagement of all key development actors in each of the sessions. Some stressed the importance of including emerging economies and South-South co-operation actors (e.g. the BRICS) if the ministerial is to result in innovative discussions (Korea, Timor-Leste). UNDP stressed the importance of emphasising that the Global Partnership offers an open environment for discussion.

Second meeting of the Steering Committee, Bali, Indonesia, 23-24 March 2013

- 153 -

41. Some members urged a more innovative and aspirational approach to the substantive discussion, including a greater focus on bringing together all actors in society – including the private sector and civil society – to achieve development results; promoting the use of ODA in ways that are catalytic (IBLF, United States). 42. Participants discussed the need for a format for the ministerial that balances creative approaches (e.g. “TED Talk”-style interventions) with inclusive discussions that support actions and accountability. Members agreed that some form of statement or communiqué would be needed, but that it should not be a long text setting out new ambitions (already achieved in Busan), and that it must include agreement to take specific actions. 43. In summarising discussions, the Chair noted that there was a clear steer from the CoChairs to focus on the four substantive work areas that have been identified; that there is a need to set a vision that will endure through future meetings; and that while none of the four themes will be abandoned, there will be a need for further prioritisation when the committee moves to a discussion of sessions within an agenda for the ministerial. 44. In order to further elaborate how the substantive focus of the work streams and how they can be taken up in sessions at the ministerial-level meeting, the Chair suggested that members of the Steering Committee volunteer to work together on each of the four topics, paying particular attention to: 1) which other members of the Global Partnership should be involved; 2) who key speakers might be; 3) who key partners from institutions with substantive and financial resources might be; and 4) what deliverables could look like. 45.

Volunteers for the topics were (to be confirmed following the meeting): a.

Domestic resource mobilisation: IPU/AWEPA, EU, Nigeria, OECD/DAC, Timor-Leste, UNDP

Private sector: CPDE, IBLF (Private Sector), UK, US, UNDP, World Bank

Inclusive development: CPDE, IPU/AWEPA, Peru, Samoa, US

Knowledge-sharing: Bangladesh, Chad, Indonesia, Korea, Peru, Samoa, UNDP, World Bank

46. The Chair indicated that the Co-Chairs would in parallel think about how the work streams could be integrated into a concise agenda. The goal would be to have a draft agenda, including substantive focus of sessions, in advance of the June/July Steering Committee meeting. Groups of countries or organisations – including those beyond Steering Committee members – would then take forward preparations for each agenda item. 47. Several Steering Committee members raised the value of holding the next meeting back-to-back to the UN Development Cooperation Forum in Ethiopia in early June (AWEPA, EU, Korea, UNDP). 48. The Chair noted that additional resources would be needed to organise the ministerial level meeting. The importance of holding workshops to offer consultations on agenda items at the regional level was also noted. UNDP expressed its readiness to support such activities, dependent on funding. Session 5 (b). Update on monitoring (chaired by Anthony Smith, UK)

Second meeting of the Steering Committee, Bali, Indonesia, 23-24 March 2013

- 154 -

49. The joint support team presented an update on the global monitoring framework, noting that a draft guide to the framework of ten global indicators had been issued, and that the framework draws on a mix of indicators sourced from developing countries and from existing international sources. A tentative timeline for monitoring in 2013 was presented. Steering Committee members were reminded of opportunities to provide strategic guidance to monitoring efforts, promote active and inclusive engagement in monitoring efforts at the country level, and draw lessons on the implementation of MDG8 from some of the evidence that will be gathered through this global process. 50. In terms of timeline, the joint team noted by the time of the next Steering Committee meeting, information on the number of countries participating in the monitoring might be available, as well as some initial evidence from some of the indicators relying on global data collection processes. Steering Committee members pointed to the importance of a dynamic report presented in an informative way, and with a strong narrative on country experiences. 51. Discussions took note of incomplete work on indicators on results and transparency, with the joint support team advising members that they may consider providing political steer through the processes that are informing the development of these indicators. For example, on the transparency indicator, members could offer the necessary political guidance to the ad hoc group on the common open standard so as to enable it to propose appropriate technical solutions. 52. The possibility of including information on additional commitment areas â&#x20AC;&#x201C; such as aid fragmentation â&#x20AC;&#x201C; was raised (EU). The joint team noted that the ten areas for monitoring were the result of a lengthy process of consultation and prioritisation by the Post-Busan Interim Group. Gathering evidence on areas beyond this would require a decision by the Steering Committee, and may require additional efforts and resources. 53. Some members called on others to provide financial resources to UNDP to enable it to facilitate regional workshops to support the monitoring process (Chad, Samoa). UNDP expressed its willingness to support in this way, subject to the provision of funding. Session 6. Engagement and outreach efforts (chaired by Wismana Suryabrata, Indonesia) 54. The Chair opened the session by reporting on the recent Asian Development Forum which was organised this year in Indonesia with Korea and Japan, and emphasised the role of the Global Partnership in promoting the involvement of a broad range of stakeholders, particularly emerging economies, to foster inclusive development. Discussions also pointed to the increasing contribution from the international community to development, not only through financial resources but through support to capacity development. 55. Chad pointed to the relevance of existing activities supported by the African Union, such as the African Peer Review Mechanism and regional events. In the future, it would be important to use all opportunities provided by regular meetings of the African Union to engage African countries in the work of the Global Partnership. 56. Timor-Leste mentioned a range of engagement activities that the g7+ group of fragile and conflict-affected states has organised to promote the New Deal. A high-level side event organised during the UN General Assembly in 2012 was instrumental in providing political impetus with the mobilisation of the Heads of State of Indonesia and Liberia and several ministers. The next opportunity for outreach will be during the third International Dialogue on Peacebuilding and Statebuilding, which will be held in Washington D.C. in April 2013.

Second meeting of the Steering Committee, Bali, Indonesia, 23-24 March 2013

- 155 -

57. The United Kingdom reported on contacts to date with Arab funds and donors, particularly the OPEC Fund for International Development. The OECD/DAC noted that the DAC will have its senior-level meeting on 4-5 April in Paris, during which a session on the Global Partnership has been scheduled. 58. Nigeria listed events during which it has brought the Global Partnership to the fore in Africa, including ministerial-level meetings in the context of the African Union, the Monrovia meeting of the UN High Level Panel, and discussions with private actors. 59. EU outreach opportunities included consultation among member states on the Steering Committee agenda and documentation. The EU has also discussion the Global Partnership in regular discussions with European civil society organisations. 60. UNDP indicated its efforts to support outreach at the country level, promoting the Global Partnership in bilateral discussions. It also consults with UN Development Group agencies via the UNDG advisory group, and will convene working-level meetings on an ad-hoc basis. 61. The World Bank cited its efforts to support consultation among MDBs before and after each meeting of the Steering Committee. The World Bank reported on the plan of MDBs to hold informal MDB coordination meetings on the Global Partnership with the first meeting expected to take place before the next Steering Committee meeting. 62. Samoa is hosting the third SIDS Conference in 2013, and will consult other SIDS on the Global Partnership and the post-2015 agenda. This will be done through country preparations and a regional preparatory meeting. Outreach will also take place through other events, including the Pacific Islands Forum. Samoa also reported back the messages for the Global Partnership that emerged from a technical workshop for the Asia-Pacific region held on 22 March in Bali, supported by the Capacity Development for Development Effectiveness (CDDE) facility. 63. Civil society organisations have merged the previous BetterAid and Open Forum platforms into a new network â&#x20AC;&#x201C; CPDE. CPDE also closely engages with the DCF. Within Africa, civil society works with the African Platform for Development Effectiveness, organised under the auspices of the African Union. Engagement at country level includes both outreach to governments on Busan commitments, as well as CSOsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; own effectiveness efforts, building on the Istanbul principles. 64. AWEPA has established a virtual parliamentary platform on development effectiveness and the post-2015 development agenda, along with the Inter-Parliamentary Union, and has engaged other parliamentary groupings. 65. The United States conducts outreach to OECD countries, as well as to the business community in the United States, and to civil society. For the latter, the United States works through InterAction, whose 160 members collectively provide more development assistance than does the US government, and through foundations. The United States also noted the importance of the stakeholder survey organised by the joint support team, which also highlighted the great amount of work that needs to be done. 66. Korea raised the importance of engaging with the G20 Development Working Group which will hold three meetings in the coming year, noting that the Global Partnership can offer G20 members a way to engage in dialogue with developing countries, and for Global Partnership members to engage in dialogue with some of the emerging economies not currently participating actively in the work of the Global Partnership steering committee. 67. Peru informed the steering committee of its efforts to keep countries in its region updated on and engaged in the work of the committee. It noted that the Peruvian co-operation 10

Second meeting of the Steering Committee, Bali, Indonesia, 23-24 March 2013

- 156 -

agency, APCI, is working with Germany to organise the Global Dialogue of Agencies and Ministries for International Cooperation and Development, which will be held in Lima on 11-12 April, and that this will offer an additional opportunity to engage and consult others on the work of the Global Partnership. 68. The United Kingdom pointed to the different types of engagement activities that Steering Committee members should co-ordinate: (i) agenda-based engagement – having targeted discussions with stakeholders to plan the ministerial; (ii) regional engagement efforts; (iii) engagement efforts vis-à-vis those stakeholders who may not yet be fully involved in the work of the Partnership, and (iv) individual member efforts to communicate more widely (including online and through social media). 69. Several Members (EU, IBLF, Korea, World Bank) raised the importance of outreach and collaboration by the Steering Committee with the various “building blocks”, so that substantive work done by the latter can inform the work of the Global Partnership and the preparation of the ministerial-level meeting. 70. In summing up, the Chair suggested that common messages could be developed to assist steering committee members in reaching out and engaging with others in advance of the ministerial. Members were encouraged to make use of the new Global Partnership web site (www.effectivecooperation.org) and social media tools. The Chair suggested that once substantive deliverables were identified, individual members could then reach out to selected countries and organisations that have yet to get involved based on themes that are likely to be of interest to them. The involvement of individual Steering Committee members from the United Kingdom and Korea in the G20 Development Working Group was highlighted as a specific opportunity to strengthen the link with the G20. 71. The joint support team offered a brief update on its support to communication activities. This includes the recent launch of the Global Partnership web site (www.effectivecooperation.org) and the launch of social media channels (twitter, facebook). It noted that the size and reach of the joint support team is such that mass communication efforts will need to be a collaborative effort involving members and the communications apparatus of their respective organisations and agencies. Targeted articles and op-eds also present opportunities for members to raise the profile of the Global Partnership and their involvement in it. Participants were also informed of the recent launch of the Global Partnership community space, which has built as part of the UN TeamWorks platform (contact community@effectivecooperation.org for access), as well as regular email newsletters. 72. The United Kingdom, Nigeria, Indonesia, Korea, the EU, the United States and UNDP agreed to work in close collaboration to support high-level outreach and engagement efforts on a bilateral basis. Session 7. Next steps (chaired by Chii Akporji, Nigeria) 73. The Chair summarised the main areas of agreement from the meeting and immediate next steps. She noted that there was a strong interest in linking the Global Partnership to discussion on the post-2015 development agenda, with former offering value in terms of how to achieve the development aims that are agreed. 74.

The chair noted the agreement to pursue work around four main themes: a.

Domestic resource mobilisation, including issues of tax, illicit flows, natural resource management and institutions;

Second meeting of the Steering Committee, Bali, Indonesia, 23-24 March 2013

- 157 -

Private sector, including how ODA can leverage private resources, and how an enabling environment for private sector investment can be achieved;

Knowledge-sharing, including work on mapping efforts underway and piloting work within the framework of the Global Partnership;

Inclusive and transparent development, including the role of civil society and other actors, and innovative forms of inclusiveness.

75. The Chair noted strong interest in raising the political nature of the agenda, in order to make it more attractive to ministers; and in making the agenda exciting. It was noted that, given the limited time available, and the desire to be innovative in the organisation of sessions, the thematic areas identified are unlikely to map onto agenda items on a one-to-one basis. Teams will take forward the clarification of the themes in the coming days, with the aim of reaching a political level of discussion, determining key partners, suggesting outcomes, and identifying potential lead speakers. 76. The Chair noted the desire to hold the meeting in late November and that a host would be determined as a priority. 77. The next Steering Committee will take place either in early June in Addis Ababa, backto-back to the DCF; or alternatively in July. Depending on the status of work, there may be need for a fourth Steering Committee meeting, possibly around the UN General Assembly. Members suggested that the Co-Chairs need not always be represented at ministerial-level in Steering Committee meetings. *****

Second meeting of the Steering Committee, Bali, Indonesia, 23-24 March 2013

- 158 -

Annex 1. List of Participants Co-chairs Indonesia

Hon. Armida ALISJAHBANA Minister of National Development Planning National Development Planning Agency

Nigeria

Hon. Ngozi OKONJO-IWEALA Minister of Finance

United Kingdom

Hon. Justine GREENING Secretary of State for International Development Department for International Development Steering Committee Members

Bangladesh

Chad

Civil Society representative

Mr. Abul AZAD Secretary, Economic Relations Division Ministry of Finance

+880-2-9113743 secretary@erd.gov.bd

Mr. Mohammad Jashim UDDIN Senior Assistant Secretary, Economic Relations Division, Ministry of Finance

+88 029 110 219 jimjashim@gmail.com

Dr. Brahim Adoum BACHAR General Secretary Ministry of Economics & Planning

+235 22 51 71 53 bachar_brahim07@yahoo.fr

Ms. Vera Brenda NGOSI Head, NEPAD Coordination Unit African Union Commission

+251 11 518 2311 brendangosi@ymail.com

Mr. Richard SSEWAKIRYANGA Executive Director, Uganda National NGO Forum

+256 414 510 272 R.Ssewakiryanga@ngoforum.or.ug

Mr. Matt SIMONDS Liaison Officer/Policy Advisor Trade Union Advisory Committee (TUAC)

+33 1 55 3737 34 simonds@tuac.org

Mr. Gustavo MARTIN PRADA +32498956300 Director, EU Development Policy Directorate Gustavo.Martin-Prada@ec.europa.eu Mr. Vincent GRIMAUD Head of Unit, Aid and Development Effectiveness and Financing, European Commission

+322 296 33 20 Vincent.GRIMAUD@ec.europa.eu

Guatemala

Ms. Ana MENDEZ CHICAS Under Secretary of International Cooperation Secretariat of Planning and Programming SEGEPLAN

+(502) 2232 6212 Ext. 353 ana.mendezchicas@segeplan.gob.gt

Indonesia

Mr. Wismana Adi SURYABRATA Deputy Minister for Development Funding Affairs Allocation of Development Funding Ministry of National Development Planning

+62 (21) 31903106 wismana@bappenas.go.id

Mr. Tubagus CHOESNI Director for International Development Ministry of National Development Planning

+62217991025 x213 choesni@bappenas.go.id

Second meeting of the Steering Committee, Bali, Indonesia, 23-24 March 2013

- 159 -

Ms. Teni WIDURIYANTI Deputy Director Ministry of National Development Planning

+62 812 8603 944 twiduriyanti@bappenas.go.id

Mr. Kurniawan (Iwan) ARIADI kariadi@bappenas.go.id Deputy Director/Administrative Assistance to the Minister Ministry of National Development Planning Indonesia Korea

Nigeria

Ms. Enna PARK +82 2 2100 8339 Director-General, Development Cooperation epark85@mofat.go.kr Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade Ms. Jinjoo KIM Second Secretary, Development Policy Division Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade

+82 2 2100 8339 jijkim10@mofat.go.kr

Ms. Chii AKPORJI Special Adviser to the CME (Co-ordinating Minister for the Economy) and to the Minister of Finance Ministry of Finance

+234 706 428 8021 cakporji@gmail.com

Ms. Ada IHECHUCKWU MADUBUIKE Deputy Director, Ministry of Finance Mr. Philip OSAFO-KWAAKWO Advisor on Post 2015 MDGs program OECD/DAC

Mr. Erik SOLHEIM DAC Chair, DCD, OECD

+(33-1) 45 24 90 70 Erik.SOLHEIM@oecd.org

Mr. Jon LOMOY Director, Development Co-operation Directorate

+(33-1) 45 24 90 00 Jon.LOMOY@oecd.org

Parlementarian representative

Dr. Jeff BALCH Director, Association of European Parlementarians with Africa (AWEPA)

+31(20)5245678 J.Balch@awepa.org

Private Sector representative

Dr. Darian STIBBE Executive Director, The Partnering Initiative International Business Leaders Forum

+44 20 7467 3600 Darian.Stibbe@iblf.org

Peru

Mr. Luis OLIVERA Executive Director Peruvian International Cooperation Agency (APCI).

+51 (1) 319 3608 luis.olivera@apci.gob.pe

Samoa

Ms. Noumea SIMI Assistant CEO, Aid Coordination Unit Ministry of Finance

+00685 22042 noumea.simi@mof.gov.ws

Mr. Alfred SCHUSTER Development Cooperation Advisor Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat

+679 331 2600 ext 295 alfreds@forumsec.org.fj

Hon. Emilia PIRES Minister of Finance, Ministry of Finance

+61 425 745 051 epires@mof.gov.tl

Mr. Helder DA COSTA Head of g7+ Secretariat, Aid Effectiveness Directorate Ministry of Finance

+ 670 331 0128 hdacosta@mof.gov.tl

Timor-Leste

Second meeting of the Steering Committee, Bali, Indonesia, 23-24 March 2013

- 160 -

United Kingdom

UN Development Programme (UNDP)

United States

World Bank

Mr. Habib ur Rehman MAYAR Senior Policy Specialist, g7+ Secretariat

+(670)331 0126 habiburrehman.mayar@gmail.com

Mr. Anthony SMITH Director, International Relations Division Department for International Development (DFID)

+44 789 987 5956 A-Smith@dfid.gov.uk

Ms. Hannah RYDER Team Leader Global Partnership for Effective Development Co-operation Department for International Development

+44 (0)1355 843753 h-ryder@dfid.gov.uk

Ms. Sian DIXON Assistant Private Secretary to SofS Department for International Development (DFID)

s-dixon@dfid.gov.uk

Mr. Vel GNANENDRAN Principle Private Secretary to the SofS Department for International Development (DFID)

v-Gnanendran@dfid.gov.uk

Mr. Guy LEVIN Special Adviser to Justine Greening Department for International Development

g-levin@dfid.gov.uk

Ms. Sigrid KAAG 1-212-906-5512 Assistant Secretary General and Assistant Sigrid.kaag@undp.org Administrator Bureau for External Relations and Advocacy Ms. Dasa SILOVIC Senior Advisor to UN Assistant Secretary General United Nations - Development Programme (UNDP)

+1 646.346-3204 dasa.silovic@undp.org

Mr. Donald STEINBERG Deputy Administrator US Agency for International Development

+1.202.712-4070 dsteinberg@usaid.gov

Ms. Rosarie TUCCI Deputy Administrator's Special Assistant US Agency for International Development

+1 202 712 4070 rtucci@usaid.gov

Ms. Astrid MANROTH Operations Advisor

+380 44 490 66 70 amanroth@worldbank.org

Ms. Nicole WYRSCH Advisor, External Affairs, Europe

+33 (1) 40 69 30 35 nwyrsch@worldbank.org

UNDP/OECD Joint Support Team OECD

Ms. Brenda KILLEN Head of Division, Global Partnerships and Policies Division

+(33-1) 45 24 83 72 Brenda.KILLEN@oecd.org

Ms. Marjolaine NICOD Senior Policy Advisor

+(33-1) 45 24 87 67 Marjolaine.NICOD@oecd.org

Mr. Robin OGILVY Senior Policy Advisor

+(33-1) 45 24 94 48 Robin.OGILVY@oecd.org

Ms Claire CONDON Coordinator

+(33-1) 45 24 78 10 Claire.CONDON@oecd.org

Second meeting of the Steering Committee, Bali, Indonesia, 23-24 March 2013

- 161 -

UNDP

Ms. Mereseini BOWER +679 3227714 Governance and Development Effectiveness mereseini.bower@undp.org Specialist, UNDP Mr. Derek KILNER Partnerships Development Analyst Bureau of External Relations and Advocacy

+1 212 906 5742 derek.kilner@undp.org

Mr. Matthew TAYLOR +82.10.2754.2814 Public Affairs Specialist, Seoul Policy Centre matthew.taylor@undp.org

Second meeting of the Steering Committee, Bali, Indonesia, 23-24 March 2013

- 162 -

Third meeting of the Steering Committee Final summary

Third meeting of the Global Partnership Steering Committee Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 25-26 July 2013

Contacts: Ms. Farida Bena, tel. +33 1 45 24 90 16, email: farida.tchaitchianbena@oecd.org Mr. Derek Kilner, tel. +1-212-906-5742, email: derek.kilner@undp.org Mr. Robin Ogilvy, tel. +33 1 45 24 94 48, email: robin.ogilvy@oecd.org Ms. Yuko Suzuki Naab, tel. +1-212-906-6509, email: yuko.suzuki@undp.org

6 September 2013

- 163 -

GLOBAL PARTNERSHIP FOR EFFECTIVE DEVELOPMENT CO-OPERATION THIRD MEETING OF THE STEERING COMMITTEE ADDIS ABABA, ETHIOPIA, 25-26 JULY 2013 SUMMARY

Session 1: Welcoming remarks and special session on effective development cooperation in Africa (chaired by Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, Nigeria) 1. The Co-Chairs of the Global Partnership welcomed participants to the meeting. In their introductory remarks, they emphasised the need for participants to strengthen links with the post2015 development agenda and to sharpen the vision and deliverables for the first ministerial-level meeting of the Global Partnership. 2. Minister Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala (Nigeria) welcomed several governments and organizations invited to join the meeting as observers: the African Union (hosting the event); the Arab Donor Coordination Group, Brazil, China, India, South Africa, Turkey, the Rockefeller Foundation and the STARS Foundation. She also recognized new members that have joined the Global Partnership – the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development and Latvia – welcoming their active engagement in the Partnership and encouraging other governments and organizations to consider joining. 3. Minister Okonjo-Iweala noted the relevance of holding the Steering Committee meeting in Africa, where effective development co-operation is a particularly urgent priority. Recalling the four principles of effective development cooperation (country ownership, focus on results, inclusive partnerships, and transparency and accountability), she highlighted how the African continent needs to look at issues like equitable growth, resource management, effective institutions, inclusion, knowledge exchange, the role of the private sector, development in middle income countries, and employment. Ms Okonjo-Iweala expressed gratitude to the African Union for hosting the meeting and for holding a preparatory high level event on domestic resource mobilisation and links to development co-operation in Africa. She underlined the need to maintain a strong link with the post-2015 development agenda and to clarify what concretely needs to happen to ensure the growth of the Global Partnership and the success of the ministerial-level meeting. 4. Minister Armida Alisjahbana (Indonesia) recalled that the Global Partnership provides a platform to discuss the “how” of the post-2015 development agenda. She welcomed the engagement of a wide array of development stakeholders at the meeting and noted their crucial role in promoting the shift from aid to development effectiveness, particularly on issues like domestic resource mobilisation, knowledge sharing and the private sector. She also pointed to their inclusion as being the comparative advantage of the Global Partnership. Ms Alisjahbana went on to highlight the progress made since the last Steering Committee meeting to strengthen links with the post-2015 discussions, most notably through an open letter to the High Level Panel of Eminent Persons on the post-2015 development agenda and the recognition of the important contribution of the Global Partnership in the High Level Panel’s report. 5. Minister Justine Greening (United Kingdom), who could not attend the meeting due to the late change of dates for the meeting, delivered remarks by video, highlighting that the 1

Third meeting of the Steering Committee, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 25-26 July 2013

- 164 -

Partnership was a UK priority, and suggesting three priorities for the ministerial-level meeting: (1) to ensure the consultation process is as inclusive as possible, bringing business, civil society and other groups together and using creative online consultation processes; (2) to enhance linkages to the post-2015 development agenda by showing what the Global Partnership means at country level and by keeping the level of the conversation political; and (3) to clarify ways of working, roles and responsibilities, with the co-Chairs planning to meet more frequently and all members championing specific issues. Minister Greening took the opportunity to announce her intention to champion the role of business in development. 6. The Deputy Chair of the African Union Commission (AUC), Mr. Erastus Mwencha, welcomed participants and recalled the turning point marked by the Busan Partnership in agreeing common goals and differentiated responsibilities. Mr Mwencha underlined the Global Partnership’s role as a forum that can help advance discussions around four priority pillars for Africa: (1) peace and security; (2) governance and shared values; (3) integration; and (4) institutions and capacity building. He emphasised the role of strategic partnerships, particularly with the private sector, to improve African infrastructure. He also highlighted domestic resource mobilisation and effective institutions as key to moving beyond aid dependency. In tackling these issues he encouraged Steering Committee members to keep a regional perspective, and to maintain a consistent approach with the post-2015 agenda. 7. Mexico announced that it would host the first ministerial-level meeting of the Global Partnership in 2014. Mexico noted that the meeting, coming at a major crossroads for development cooperation, will be a major opportunity to showcase concrete actions and progress on the ground. Mexico stressed the need to engage other key global processes, particularly relating to post-2015 development discussions, including the UN Development Cooperation Forum (DCF), the follow- up to the Monterrey Consensus and the Doha Declaration on Financing for Development (FfD), the Rio+20 Conference on Sustainable Development and processes within the UN General Assembly. Mexico also recalled its proactive involvement in discussions on development co-operation architecture over the past decade, building on its comparative advantage as both a recipient and provider of development co-operation. Mexico is in the process of forming a strong team to support preparations for the meeting, which will be led by the Executive Secretary of its development co-operation agency AMEXCID. 8. Ethiopia’s State Minister of Finance and Economic Development, Mr. Alemayehu Gujo, underlined Ethiopia’s active role in advancing development effectiveness since the Paris Declaration in 2005. He noted that Ethiopia has strengthened national capacity for effective aid management, drafted comprehensive national development strategies, integrated public finance management systems, and made advances in procurement. However, he noted remaining challenges, such as aid fragmentation, weak alignment to national policies, and accountability. The adoption of the Busan Partnership agreement, he noted, recognises the value of shared principles, common goals and stronger, differentiated agreements within a broader and more inclusive framework. As a potential middle income country in the future, Ethiopia concluded by signalling its interest in following the discussions on South-South and triangular co-operation, as well as on the participation of the private sector, transparency and results and mutual accountability. 9. The AUC reported back from the high level event on aid as a catalyst for domestic resource mobilisation in Africa, held on 24 July. The AUC discussed how domestic resource mobilisation is important to move beyond aid dependency and consolidate Africa’s ownership and management of its own resources, noting that the issue also features prominently in Africa’s Agenda 2063 and common position on post-2015 development. However, Africa still faces challenges, including weak capacity in revenue collection; fragile tax structures and insufficient tax administration; large tax breaks for multinational companies; a large informal sector that is not captured in the average tax base; an underdeveloped private sector; low domestic savings; and ineffective stock exchanges. Illicit financial flows are also part of the equation, pointing to the 2

Third meeting of the Steering Committee, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 25-26 July 2013

- 165 -

need for technological, not just physical, infrastructure and stronger capacity in technology management. 10. As part of their recommendations to the Steering Committee, participants in the preparatory event had highlighted the need for a robust enabling environment for the private sector, including peace and security. They also suggested supporting domestic resource mobilisation at both technical and political level by welcoming and building on the G8’s work on tax avoidance and evasion, fighting corruption, building stronger tax administration, and higher capacity in managing technology and improving stock exchanges, supervising trade settlements and publishing trade data. On illicit financial flows, there was a call for a coordinated “track it, stop it, get it” approach. The AUC also recommended facilitating remittance inflows, while promoting greater transparency in transaction costs. There was support for civil society and parliaments to play an oversight role on human rights, peace and security, and good governance. Aid should play a catalytic role in addressing the challenges above. In the spirit of the Busan principle of country ownership, it was underlined that while Africa cannot act alone, it should take the lead in scaling up domestic resource mobilization, and play a strong role in developing this agenda item for the Global Partnership’s first ministerial-level meeting. 11. Chad stressed the importance of supporting the economic growth of the African continent and called for providers of development cooperation to firmly engage in domestic resource mobilisation. Chad agreed with the AUC’s ‘track it, stop it, get it’ approach to illicit financial flows, and supported development of the domestic private sector as a way to broaden the tax base. Chad also recommended expanding public-private partnerships and achieving higher transparency in dealing with multinational enterprises from the extractive industry. 12. The World Bank, representing multilateral development banks, noted the relevance of development effectiveness for Africa, which is both the fastest-growing continent and the world’s largest recipient of aid. Multilateral development banks remain committed to priorities like the increased use of country systems, country ownership and higher transparency. The World Bank also recognised the importance of developing new forms of partnerships to sustain the growing collaboration with middle income countries and noted a key role for the Global Partnership in helping forge these partnerships through an inclusive approach at the country level. The World Bank emphasised the importance of building capacity, particularly in fragile states, in implementing the Busan and New Deal commitments and the role the Global Partnership’s knowledge sharing work can play in this context. The World Bank also noted the need for publicprivate partnerships and innovative financing mechanisms to facilitate investment in key areas, such as infrastructure. 13. Bangladesh reminded participants of the forthcoming Asia regional workshop on implementation of the Global Partnership and its linkage to the Post-2015 development agenda, to be held in Dhaka on 25-27 August. 14. The United States stressed the need for a stronger drive to fulfil the Busan commitments in the run-up to 2015, and highlighted that domestic resource mobilisation, transparency and inclusiveness are strongly intertwined. The United States suggested setting targets on domestic resource mobilisation on a country-by-country level as a way to promote concrete progress on the issue. 15. The European Union reaffirmed its prioritization of a focus on domestic resource mobilisation and linked it to the issue of transparency and aid as a catalyst of other forms of development finance. The EU also recalled that it has recently approved binding regulations on the related issue of natural resource management. 16. The Rockefeller Foundation noted its participation in the network NetFWD, and spoke of its focus on equitable growth and resilience building as two main pillars underpinning a variety of 3

Third meeting of the Steering Committee, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 25-26 July 2013

- 166 -

African-led initiatives. The Rockefeller foundation also asked for a permanent seat for foundations in the Steering Committee. 17. Turkey noted that significant differences can be found across the African continent, from transitioning countries in the North, to successfully growing economies, to fragile states, which still heavily dependent on aid. Turkey drew attention to the need to support functional and autonomous state institutions and infrastructure in places like Somalia, where Turkey is leading international efforts. It called for domestic resource mobilisation, the support for public-private partnerships and the sharing of experiences by Southern partners as fresh tools to provide additional resources for development. 18. In closing the session, Ms Okonjo-Iweala encouraged the AU to take into account the specific ideas and comments made by Steering Committee members to advance the discussion on domestic resource mobilisation. She expressed satisfaction at the general support for action on this issue and made clear that this should be an African-led agenda.

Session 2: Preparing for the first ministerial-level meeting of the Global Partnership: Vision and elements of an agenda (Chaired by Armida Alisjahbana, Indonesia) 19. Introducing the session, Ms. Alisjahbana explained that the Co-Chairs had â&#x20AC;&#x201C; on the basis of discussions at the second meeting of the Steering Committee and inputs from Steering Committee members following that meeting â&#x20AC;&#x201C; formulated an initial proposal for the content of the first Ministerial-level meeting of the Partnership. Ms Alisjahbana emphasised her desire to see the ministerial-level meeting bring together a large range of actors, and identified it as an important opportunity to promote linkages with the post-2015 development agenda. 20. The United Kingdom presented the draft agenda for the ministerial developed by the three Co-Chairs, outlining the consultative process led by the Steering Committee to date (see Document 1). In addition to the theme- and session-specific outcomes, a number of overarching political / strategic deliverables were proposed including strong engagement from all constituencies and actors; a set of agreed actions to improve development co-operation; and consensus on the role of the Global Partnership in relation to the post-2015 agenda. 21. Mexico, as the host of the ministerial-level meeting, stressed its desire to see the Partnership serve as a high-level enabler a post-2015 development framework. Mexico expressed its willingness to work with others and invest in a successful event. Mexico took note of the work undertaken by the Co-Chairs and Steering Committee on an initial agenda, and explained its intention that the agenda should be shaped further to: x

place greater emphasis on middle-income countries (MICs), their development challenges, and their role in development partnerships;

explore South-South and triangular co-operation, which extends beyond knowledge sharing;

make the link with the post-2015 framework and the sustainable development agenda in the aftermath of Rio+20;

strengthen civil society participation, and consider how youth and parliamentarians might be engaged more strongly in the agenda.

22. Mexico explained that possible dates for the ministerial in 2014 were being discussed with the Co-Chairs and that a final decision should be announced soon. It stressed its desire to 4

Third meeting of the Steering Committee, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 25-26 July 2013

- 167 -

see strong regional and multi-stakeholder consultations, initiated by members, in the run up to the meeting. 23. In the discussion that followed, several members concurred with the need to identify / clarify / advance linkages between the work of the Global Partnership and the evolving – much broader – post-2015 development agenda (UNDP, EU, World Bank, IPU, OECD/DAC). The Global Partnership could play a role in proposing goals and targets for effective development cooperation in the post-2015 framework, for example (World Bank). 24. Some members also suggested revisiting the name of the “ministerial-level” meeting as some felt it does not adequately capture the inclusive nature of the Global Partnership. Ideas suggested included “Global Development Leaders meeting” (EU). Other participants also questioned whether the name of the Global Partnership itself might be changed to “Busan Global Partnership” for further clarity, though there was no agreement on this. 25. Participants pointed to the need for the meeting to be a political and action focused event, and for an emphasis on demonstrating progress made since Busan (CPDE, Korea, TimorLeste, OECD/DAC). Timor-Leste conveyed the particular importance placed by g7+ countries on using the meeting to showcase progress in the implementation of Busan and New Deal commitments. OECD/DAC emphasised the importance of continued DAC efforts to implement Busan commitments and pointed to the need to showcase success stories at the meeting. There was general agreement on the need for a communiqué, with some suggesting that this should focus on actions to implement commitments, rather than renegotiating commitments made in Busan (CPDE). Several suggested that the format of the sessions should reflect the inclusive, multi-stakeholder nature of the partnership. 26. Inclusive development was identified as important by CPDE and the United States. Both suggested that the theme needs to feature more prominently on the agenda, with CPDE explaining the relevance of this theme to the shared principles agreed in Busan, and the US expressing its concern with the shrinking space for civil society activity globally. IPU made the link with democratic governance and the role of parliamentarians. The Rockefeller Foundation expressed its support for the inclusive development agenda, and asked how the role of foundations might be better reflected in this work. 27. There was broad support for Mexico’s proposal to explore how South-South and triangular co-operation could feature in the agenda. Bangladesh informed participants of its recent participation in a meeting on triangular co-operation hosted by Portugal in May 2013, bringing together 69 participants from 47 countries. The Lisbon meeting identified several ways forward to better track, learn from and promote triangular co-operation, and proposed that findings from this policy dialogue could inform discussions at the Global Partnership ministerial. 28. Several participants expressed broad support for the ideas on tax and domestic resource mobilisation set out in the Co-Chairs’ proposal. Chad made specific reference to the previous day’s discussions, convened by the African Union, identifying tax, domestic resource mobilisation and knowledge-sharing as those elements of the proposal that are most important for Africa. The OECD/DAC welcomed African leadership on the tax/domestic resources agenda, and pointed to its ability to play a role in this area. It also informed participants of on-going DAC work to review key development finance concepts and measures, inviting others to contribute to this work. 29. The UK, OECD/DAC and IBLF pointed to the “Building Blocks” established in Busan as potential sources of inputs and content for the agenda.

Third meeting of the Steering Committee, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 25-26 July 2013

- 168 -

30. South Africa welcomed Mexico’s emphasis on middle-income countries, noting that the partnership offered an opportunity to engage emerging and middle income countries on an international dialogue on development. 31. Brazil expressed its agreement with the emphasis on knowledge-sharing and pointed to the opportunity presented by the Global Partnership to share experiences of development cooperation. 32. OFID introduced the work of the Arab donor co-ordination group and offered an overview of OFID’s own efforts to implement selected Busan commitments (e.g. use of country systems; revisiting policies and approaches to results and transparency). 33. Concluding the session, the Co-Chairs noted that there was broad endorsement of the initial elements proposed in the co-chairs’ agenda for the ministerial-level meeting, and concurred with the need for further scoping work and consultation (e.g. on MICs; inclusive development). There was also broad agreement that any communiqué should stay focused on implementing Busan commitments, rather than re-opening discussions on those commitments or seeking to expand them. Session 3: Preparing for the first Ministerial-level meeting of the Global Partnership: Progress since Busan (chaired by Anthony Smith, United Kingdom) 34. The United Kingdom invited discussion on ways in which political messages can be prepared for this first session of the Ministerial-level meeting, drawing on the on-going global monitoring process as well as complementary evidence that can highlight key progress and challenges in implementation of the Busan commitments. 35. The World Bank suggested that this session should help enable discussions on development effectiveness at the country level including, but not limited to, scaling up the use of country systems and communicate the Global Partnership’s potential contributions to the post2015 agenda in the areas of private sector development, knowledge sharing, development effectiveness and transparent and inclusive development. 36. IPU noted that they are currently looking at developing an indicator to assess how effectively parliaments are tracking development assistance, and may bring some of the evidence from this work to the ministerial-level meeting. 37. Timor Leste on behalf of the G7+ partner countries endorsed the outline of the session as included in the concept note, stressing the need to ensure partner countries’ perspectives in further refinement of the substance of this session. Samoa also noted that dialogue among partner countries from the regional workshops could further inform the key priority issues for this session. 38. Discussion highlighted the importance of strong political messages in this session of the ministerial-level meeting in order to set the tone for further dialogue on development cooperation. Nigeria added that the session needs to bridge the progress made and challenges encountered in implementing the Busan commitments on development effectiveness with a demonstration of the Global Partnership’s value added in light of the emerging post-2015 agenda that reflects a changing development landscape. 39. The United States emphasized that the Global Partnership is a framework to achieve the vision set out in Busan. In this regard, focusing specifically on what diverse groups have accomplished in taking the agenda forward will be a unique asset to contribute to the Post 2015 dialogue. The UK also reinforced in this context the need for this session to be forward-looking in 6

Third meeting of the Steering Committee, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 25-26 July 2013

- 169 -

ensuring that the discussions should not only focus on North-South discussions but also on inclusive dialogue on progress since Busan. 40. CPDE suggested in this context that the session may be divided into two segments, with one segment focused on demonstrating what has been achieved, drawing on monitoring as well as qualitative evidence that can be provided by various partners; and a second segment deepening dialogue on inclusive development, possibly focusing on democratic country ownership as an anchor. There was broad consensus that this session should look at evidence on how inclusive development has been delivered on the ground, in the same way as the other three core principles of development effectiveness would be examined. A preparatory meeting on inclusive development was also proposed ahead of the ministerial-level meeting to allow for adequate discussions. However, the UK and others questioned whether this was the right way to ensure a strong focus on inclusivity – suggesting that the format of all sessions and the meeting overall – should be made as inclusive as possible. 41. Mexico emphasized the critical importance of political messages building on the monitoring process. Mexico also noted broader and deeper engagement of stakeholders is important, and there is a need to push for more countries to participate in the monitoring process. 42. UNDP also emphasized the need to ensure that unfinished aid effectiveness aspects be considered in this session, and that the session could also demonstrate how inclusive partnership is operationalized at country level, and include a strengthened focus on mutual accountability. 43. Overall, the discussion highlighted the political importance of this session in demonstrating progress and challenges since Busan in implementing commitments; and that the session should set the political tone in bridging the follow-up on commitments with future work and challenges in responding to the changing development landscape. There was also interest in clarifying the specific outcomes and deliverables of the session.

Session 4: Advancing focus themes for the ministerial-level meeting (chaired by Anthony Smith, United Kingdom) 44. In this session, Steering Committee members discussed the other three sessions contained in the Co-Chairs’ proposal for the ministerial-level meeting on knowledge-sharing; domestic resource mobilization; and the private sector (see Document 1). Knowledge-sharing 45. Indonesia presented the latest draft of its concept note on knowledge-sharing. Noting that facilitating knowledge exchange and sharing of lessons learned is one of the Global Partnership’s mandates, Indonesia noted that the main objective of its proposal is to strengthen sustainable development results through sharing knowledge of lessons learned and involving broader stakeholders by promoting South-South and triangular cooperation. 46. Major deliverables for the knowledge-sharing session could include 1) launching pilot activities and toolkits to scale up country-led knowledge hubs; and 2) developing a “hybrid knowledge-sharing platform”. These hubs and platform could facilitate knowledge sharing on specific substantive areas (e.g. Busan commitments, domestic resource mobilization, private sector, middle income countries, poverty reduction, disaster response); providing a brokering mechanism; and helping optimize existing funding sources. Indonesia stressed the potential for using this work to contribute to the post-2015 agenda, as well as the need to link with G20 thematic platforms and the DCF. 7

Third meeting of the Steering Committee, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 25-26 July 2013

- 170 -

47. The ministerial-level session could include a panel discussion with sub sessions on presenting the hybrid knowledge hub and presenting country experiences. Indonesia welcomed the interest of Korea and the World Bank in continuing to actively contribute to this work, and noted that other countries and organizations are welcome to contribute as well. 48. Several members raised the importance of clarifying what the outcome and deliverables would be for this session (EU, OECD, UK, UNDP). In terms of policy advice, Nigeria suggested distinguishing between “just-in-time” knowledge required to address an immediate demand, and deeper knowledge on approaching specific sectors, noting that for the former an online system to collect existing methodologies and instruments could be a deliverable. A follow-up event on results in South-South and triangular co-operation was also suggested as a possible deliverable (World Bank). 49. Members also urged further clarity in defining the value-added of the discussion on knowledge-sharing relative to discussions in other fora. Members noted that the proposed knowledge-sharing platform would require financial resources, and that the scope of the proposal should thus be well-defined (Korea, World Bank). 50. Members suggested there could be value in sharing knowledge related to the Busan commitments (Korea); offering case studies and toolkits in the various workstreams for the ministerial-level meeting (World Bank); focusing on South-South co-operation (EU, World Bank); and ensuring that knowledge is also shared by developing/recipient countries, as well as civil society and parliaments (Indonesia, Nigeria, OECD). Members also flagged the importance of making sure that all constituencies have the technical capacity to participate in and make use of the proposed knowledge platform (Samoa). 51. On behalf of multilateral development banks (MDBs), the World Bank summarised the MDBs’ contribution to the knowledge sharing concept note for the Global Partnership, which MDBs submitted to Indonesia before the Steering Committee meeting. MDBs propose a pragmatic approach for the Global Partnership’s knowledge sharing work of networking countryled knowledge hubs; developing practical guidance for results-focused knowledge exchange, including south-south and triangular knowledge exchange; piloting the guidance in the topical areas of the Global Partnership’s work; and mapping existing knowledge sharing hubs and platforms. On behalf of MDBs the World Bank offered MDB support for this work going forward. 52. Some expressed a desire that the knowledge-sharing session contribute to the post2015 development agenda discussions, both through adding knowledge-sharing as an issue to the post-2015 agenda and using it to promote knowledge-sharing around other issues in the post-2015 framework (Indonesia, World Bank). 53. Some members suggested that the proposed agenda item on knowledge-sharing at the ministerial-level meeting could be merged with a proposed discussion of South-South and triangular cooperation. 54. The World Bank offered to host the political and technical side events in the margins of the annual World Bank/IMF meetings, which were flagged as an important milestone for this work area. Domestic resource mobilization 55. Ms. Okonjo-Iweala briefly introduced her background paper on domestic resource mobilization, which was presented at the previous day’s African Union high level event on domestic resource mobilization in Africa. She noted that in a context of declining ODA, opportunities must be identified to draw on domestic resources, flagging important work that has

Third meeting of the Steering Committee, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 25-26 July 2013

- 171 -

been done by the Africa panel on illicit flows chaired by former South African President Thabo Mbeki; by the G8 on transfer pricing; and on natural resource management. 56. Ms. Okonjo-Iweala suggested that preparations for a session at the ministerial-level meeting could be taken forward by a working group including the African Union; 1-2 African countries; and other organizations, including a role for civil society, parliaments, and the private sector. A focused background paper could be prepared, and deliverables should be ambitious by concrete. 57. In terms of the discussion at the ministerial-level meeting, Ms. Okonjo-Iweala proposed a strong link to the post-2015 development agenda discussions, and the work of the High Level Panel. Potential links include possible goals relating to managing natural resource assets governance and effective institutions; and creating a global enabling environment and catalysing long-term finance. 58. The Steering Committee expressed broad support for the Co-Chair’s proposal, particularly on issues of illicit flows; transfer pricing; support for tax administration/reform; and citizen accountability for tax policy. 59. CPDE also stressed the importance of addressing tax avoidance – both at the level of country-level incentives for investors and at the level of international rules; and addressing risks associated with extractive-led growth. 60. Some members suggested that agreeing targets could be an important part of a deliverable, noting their use in norm creation and encouraging positive competition (EU, US). Members urged some clarification of the concept of the catalytic role of ODA. 61. The AUC noted that Africa is preparing a common position on the post-2015 development agenda, with a High Level Committee appointed on the issue. The AU is also preparing Agenda 2063 which includes an ambitious domestic resource mobilization agenda. The AUC also flagged the relevance of discussions at the previous day’s event on domestic resource mobilization in Africa, including case studies from DRC (improving systems for revenue collection) and Rwanda (electronic systems). Private sector 62. IBLF started by pointing out that the proliferation of international processes discussing the contribution of the private sector to development may lead to confusion. In particular, more clarity on the added value of the Global Partnership to this regard would be beneficial. The private sector group is already proactively involved in the Rio+20 process on Sustainable Development, as well as in the establishment of the High-Level Political Forum. 63. IBLF presented the concept note prepared for the meeting. The note included three main elements: (1) promoting an enabling environment for private sector engagement in development; (2) innovative mechanisms to leverage private sector investment; and (3) business as a partner in development, including cooperation between business and the public sector and civil society. 64. Each of the three elements could be promoted as “show case” ideas (Ted-style talks were presented as a possible component of all agenda items in the Co-Chairs proposal). A deliverable could include a roadmap for achieving progress in these three areas, with progress reported at the next ministerial-level meeting. Thought pieces in each area could be prepared in advance. The private sector statement prepared for the Busan High Level Forum could be an important base. IBLF noted that all three elements not need necessarily be included at the ministerial-level meeting; and that there could be a pre-event to cover some ground. 9

Third meeting of the Steering Committee, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 25-26 July 2013

- 172 -

65. Several members suggested the need to narrow the focus of the agenda. At the same time, the discussion highlighted several other areas that could be picked up in this session. Several members raised the importance of the role of the government in developing the private sector in developing countries (Chad, Nigeria, AU, OFID). OECD/DAC argued that it would be important to build discussions on the evidence gathered on the ground. 66. Within the three proposed substantive areas, there was considerable support for focusing on multistakeholder partnerships at the country level involving business, as this takes forward the spirit of the Busan outcome document. There was interest in highlighting specific partnerships that have worked on the ground with a view to scaling up good practices; and focusing on dialogue mechanisms in country (IBLF, UK, UNDP, US). There was also interest in framing discussion in terms of effectiveness, and how government can help business contribute to development and how business can help achieve government development priorities (Mexico). There was also support for strongly linking the work to the post-2015 development agenda, demonstrating ways in which the goal of partnering to achieve the development agenda can be achieved, and possibly contributing to post-2015 indicators (UK, US). 67. The World Bank offered MDB support to the private sector workstream and highlighted the opportunity to formulate recommendations on the contribution of the private sector to the post-2015 development framework. Together with other Steering Committee members, it also suggested that a strong link to strengthening the investment climate would be important to attract the attention of ministers. There was discussion of whether the Global Partnership would be the most appropriate forum for discussions on the enabling environment for business. 68. Other potential areas of focus included the informal sector (Nigeria, AU); small and medium enterprises (CPDE, OECD, AU, OFID); local private sector (OECD); the role of foundations, including impact investing (Rockefeller); human rights and decent work (CPDE); transparency (US); natural resource management (AU); and the important role of policy coherence with trade, investment, and other policies â&#x20AC;&#x201C; especially relevant to middle income countries that are not dependent on aid for financing (Mexico, South Africa). 69. Members encouraged efforts to provide links to other areas of the agenda including domestic resource mobilization, inclusive partnerships, and knowledge-sharing. 70. In terms of deliverables, there was interest in tailoring these to private sector demand, so as to encourage high-level participation from businesses. CPDE suggested the possibility of a compact or document on how different actors can work together, building on the model of the Advisory Group on CSOs and Effectiveness established after the Paris High Level Forum. 71. Members suggested that any declaration might be incorporated into the broader communiquĂŠ from the meeting. 72. In terms of other actors to involve in preparations for the session, the discussion raised the potential roles of the private sector Building Block and of the Global Compact.

Session 5: Update on global monitoring efforts 73. The joint support team presented on progress and next steps in the implementation of the global monitoring framework linked to the Busan Partnership agreement (see Document 2: Overview and status of global monitoring efforts). The consultative process leading to the finalisation of the country monitoring guidance was outlined, as well as initial indications of countriesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; willingness to participate in the global process (over 40 developing countries have confirmed their participation). On-going methodological work on some indicators was 10

Third meeting of the Steering Committee, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 25-26 July 2013

- 173 -

summarised, as were opportunities for stakeholders to support the process more broadly. The team clarified the focus of its report, which is based around the ten indicator areas agreed. Steering Committee members were invited to consider other types of evidence that they might want to bring to ministerial-level discussions, which will not feature in the progress report being prepared by the joint team. 74. In the discussion that followed, several countries pointed to the importance of the global monitoring framework, and mentioned on-going country-level initiatives that would help to feed this (e.g. Samoa and Pacific islands efforts to monitor progress regionally; g7+ monitoring efforts, which are complementary). 75. Participants called for extending the timeline for data submission in view of the timing of the ministerial-level meeting, noting that this could help bring additional countries into the process. Chad confirmed that the African Union was working to raise awareness of the monitoring process in the region and encourage participation by its member countries. 76. Several participants identified the need for advisory support and technical assistance to countries participating in the process (Chad, World Bank, UNDP), with some pointing to UNDPâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s potential to provide support in this area. UNDP noted that its ability to provide such support would depend on voluntary contributions from members to close its significant funding gap linked to Global Partnership support activities. 77. The EU asked for more concerted efforts to complete methodological work on some of the remaining global indicators. The United States noted that expectations in relation to the evidence base for the first ministerial-level meeting would need to be managed carefully, given the challenges associated with some indicators, and the baseline nature of some of the evidence that will be generated. 78. Several countries and organisations noted that they were making efforts to brief country offices and field missions to enable them to play a supportive role in the monitoring process: all EU field missions have been briefed on the process; the World Bank expressed the MDBsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; willingness to inform their country offices and asked that the support team make a standard onepager available for communication purposes. It was proposed that a short standard guidance note for donors be developed with the support of the joint team to facilitate this outreach. 79. Summing up the discussion, the Co-Chairs noted the need to manage expectations in relation to the evidence base carefully. They identified the need for more effort on the part of Steering Committee members to ensure broad participation in the process, and concurred with the suggestion that timelines be revisited to ensure that the broadest evidence base is available in time for the ministerial-level meeting. The Co-Chairs took note of on-going country-led efforts to monitor Busan implementation, and suggested that countries could play a greater role in communicating on such initiatives.

Session 6: Promoting the work of the Global Partnership (chaired by Wismana Adi Suryabrata, Indonesia) 80. The UK reported back from a few global events it had attended since the previous Steering Committee meeting in Bali. The UK noted that the topics discussed within the Global Partnership had consistently been raised in all key fora, such as international taxation at the G8 summit and knowledge sharing at the G20 Development Working Group meeting. The UK and OECD had also jointly organised a workshop on the Global Partnership for its constituency in July.

Third meeting of the Steering Committee, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 25-26 July 2013

- 174 -

81. Nigeria reported back from the DCF High Level Symposium, which took place in Addis Ababa in June. The Global Partnership featured prominently in a well-attended outreach event where a range of development actors had the opportunity to showcase concrete examples of country-level implementation of the Busan commitments. Steering Committee members attending the Symposium also met with the UN Under-Secretary General for Economic and Social Affairs, Mr. Wu Hongbo and agreed that the support team should work with DESA to collaborate further. 82. UNDP reported back from the first-ever conference on Southern providers, which was jointly organised by the government of India and UN DESA in New Delhi in April. A frank and productive discussion highlighted the comparative advantage of South-South development cooperation as being demand-driven, non-conditional, mindful of country ownership, and based on common but differentiated responsibilities. The final recommendations from participants included strengthening the collection of evidence and data analysis to translate good co-operation practices into standards; improving evaluation and quality control; establishing regional and national platforms of common interests to address challenges and identify solutions in Southern development co-operation; and strengthening multilateral and regional support, in particular for capacity building and knowledge sharing. 83. Mexico added that many participants in the Delhi meeting were critical of the Global Partnership, as they perceived it as OECD-driven. The meeting also generated a lively discussion on whether â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;traditionalâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; and Southern providers share the same level of responsibility for providing development co-operation, and there was interest in framing this discussion within the setting of the ministerial-level meeting. 84. Members flagged relevant upcoming events, including the private sector forum on Africa at the next UN General Assembly and the South-South Development Expo in Nairobi. 85. Several participants also raised the issue of the role of observers in future meetings and, more broadly, of the composition of the Steering Committee. In this regard, the private sector noted that it would be challenging to share its Steering Committee seat with philanthropic foundations, given the different roles and agendas of these two groups. 86. The UK proposed establishing a number of working groups to advance the discussion on specific themes envisioned for the ministerial-level meeting. It was agreed that it would be less cumbersome to identify champions for each theme of interest, as described in the summary of Session 7 [see below]. Steering Committee members also agreed to use the community space to organise themselves, share information and consult with all Global Partnership members on themes.

Session 7 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Milestones and division of labour in the lead up to the ministerial level meeting (chaired by Anthony Smith, UK) 87. The Steering Committee discussed key milestones and substantive preparatory work needed in the lead up to the ministerial-level meeting, including further member-led work on agenda preparation and deepening and broadening stakeholder engagement. To this end, the session agreed on seven areas for further elaboration, and identified champions for each area to take the lead in this work. The Co-Chairs noted that not all of these areas would necessarily result in a stand-alone session.

Third meeting of the Steering Committee, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 25-26 July 2013

- 175 -

Themes 1. Implementation of the Busan commitments 2. Domestic resource mobilisation 3. Knowledge sharing 4. Private sector

Champion EU, CPDE Nigeria, AU, EU Indonesia, World Bank, Korea World Bank (MDBs), UK, Private sector Mexico Mexico, Indonesia, Bangladesh US, CPDE

5. Middle Income Countries 6. South-South and triangular cooperation 7. Inclusive development

88. The session also agreed on the following three phases of the preparation and key milestones in the lead up to the first Ministerial Meeting. 89. Between July and October, lead countries or organizations (champions) within the Steering Committee have been tasked with consulting more broadly across Global Partnership members on the areas of focus, reaching out to the Building Blocks and other existing networks, identifying what additional analytical work is required, and developing strengthened proposals on each session or the agenda more broadly (e.g. format). In some cases, an introductory concept note might be required. In others, the starting point would be strengthening the co-chairs proposal for that session. The next Steering Committee meeting (early October) is expected to agree on a final structure for the agenda and a set of deliverables for the ministerial-level meeting. 90. Between October and January a more detailed plan and logistics for each session of the ministerial-level meeting will be prepared. A smaller core-team of the co-chairs, host and support team would need to lead on this. The Steering Committee will then meet early next year to endorse a final detailed agenda and to launch a final phase of consultation, outreach and engagement, including with media. 91. From January until the ministerial-level meeting, the Steering Committee as well as the broader membership of the Global Partnership will work to secure agreement around a set of concrete outcomes and deliverables for the first ministerial-level meeting, including agreeing on a communique and securing high-level political support and media visibility for the expected outcomes. Session 8: Resources and ways of working 92. The OECD/UNDP support team presented its Activity Report, highlighting achievements in its first year in existence and detailing continued challenges, particularly related to a persistent shortfall in resources for the UNDP part of the team, which was affecting its ability to play a strong role (see Document 4). The team flagged the desire expressed at Busan and after to establish a globally light and flexible support facility without establishing new institutional structures. 93. The team presented an overview of the achievements it has supported in its first year, through July 2013, including: the establishment of the Global Partnership; preparation of three Steering Committee meetings; development and rolling out of a monitoring framework; several outreach and consultation efforts; and communications activities including a website, social media, and the Teamworks community space. 94. While demand for support activities will only increase in the run-up to the ministeriallevel meeting, the team noted that it continues to face a major funding shortfall â&#x20AC;&#x201C; particularly on the UNDP side â&#x20AC;&#x201C; and that without sufficient additional resources, support functions will need to be scaled back and ultimately phased out, with country-facing support work likely to be 13

Third meeting of the Steering Committee, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 25-26 July 2013

- 176 -

particularly impacted. The team pointed to the “A” and “B” scenarios presented in the Activity Report. 95. Discussion by Steering Committee members emphasized the importance of securing funding for the full envisioned programme of the support team (Scenario A). Mexico indicated that it will need the full engagement of the support team to successfully prepare the ministeriallevel meetings, and that it will thus be important to ensure the team’s funding. Developing countries also raised the importance of securing funding to enable further country and regional support for the monitoring process and consultations, including through organization of workshops. There was also a suggestion to consider linking provision of resources to some level of engagement in the Global Partnership’s work. 96. The UK indicated it would work with the support team to help mobilize others and understand what additional supporting documentation might be necessary for the team to secure financial support. Session 9: Any other business and next steps (chaired by Chii Akporii, Nigeria) 97. On the issue of relations between the Global Partnership and the Building Blocks, the CSO Platform for Development Effectiveness (CPDE) urged the Steering Committee to maintain strong communications with them in preparation for the ministerial-level meeting, given their expertise and potential contribution to the selected thematic areas. The US supported this proposal. The EU suggested inviting Building Block representatives to the next Steering Committee meeting, and noted that the private sector building block would likely play a strong role in further preparations. UNDP suggested also exploring alternative modalities for consulting such networks efficiently, including through online consultation and webinars. 98. Concerning the governance structure of the Steering Committee and the role of observers, several participants noted how the contribution from non-members had made the discussion richer. Others pointed to the need for rotating both observers and Steering Committee members to ensure a fair and balanced representation. The UK co-Chair recalled that while the final decision on membership should be taken at the ministerial-level meeting, it would be good to continue with the practice of inviting observers to Steering Committee meetings for the time being. Several members also suggested those organizations that had formally requested Steering Committee membership also be invited in future as observers. The Co-Chairs agreed to consider the feedback above in preparing future Steering Committee meetings. 99. Regarding the name of the ministerial-level meeting, the joint support team agreed to propose several options to Global Partnership members by way of an online survey. 100. Turkey announced that it would soon publish its development co-operation strategy and that it hoped that the ministerial-level meeting would provide guidance, particularly on the topic of public-private co-operation. It also noted the relevance of other themes to its agenda, like domestic resource mobilisation and knowledge sharing. 101. The next Steering Committee meeting will be planned for October, potentially back-toback to the World Bank/IMF Annual meetings. A fifth Steering Committee meeting should be held early next year to finalise preparations for the meeting in Mexico.

*****

Third meeting of the Steering Committee, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 25-26 July 2013

- 177 -

Annex 1. List of Participants

List of Participants - Third Steering Committee Meeting Global Partnership for Effective Development Co-operation 25-26 July, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia Co-Chairs Indonesia

Hon. Armida ALISJAHBANA Minister of National Development Planning National Development Planning Agency Mr. Wismana Adi SURYABRATA Deputy Minister for Development Funding Affairs Allocation of Development Funding Ministry of National Development Planning Mr. Tubagus CHOESNI Director for International Development Ministry of National Development Planning Mr. Kurniawan (Iwan) ARIADI Deputy Director/Administrative Assistance to the Minister Ministry of National Development Planning Mr. Mada DAHANA Senior Planner, Directorate for International Development Ministry of National Development Panning

Nigeria

Hon. Ngozi OKONJO-IWEALA Minister of Finance, Federal Ministry of Finance Ms. Chii AKPORJI Special Adviser to the CME (Co-ordinating Minister for the Economy) and Hon Minister of Finance Ministry of Finance Ms. Ada IHECHUCKWU-MADUBUIKE Deputy Director, International Development Fund International Economic Relations Department Ministry of Finance

United Kingdom

Mr. Anthony SMITH (representing Hon. Justine Greening) Director, International Relations Division Department for International Development (DFID) Ms. Hannah RYDER Team Leader Global Partnership for Effective Development Co-operation Department for International Development Ms. Louise THOMAS, UK Embassy in Addis Ababa

Third meeting of the Steering Committee, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 25-26 July 2013

- 178 -

Steering Committee members Bangladesh

Mr. Abul AZAD Secretary, Economic Relations Division Ministry of Finance

Chad

Dr. Brahim Adoum BACHAR General Secretary Ministry of Economics & Planning

CSO Partnership for Development Effectiveness

Mr. Antonio TUJAN JR. Co-chair, CSO Partnership for Development Effectiveness International Director, IBON Foundation, IBON Ms. Mayra MORO-COCO Policy and Advocacy Manager Association for Women's Rights in Development (AWID)

Mr. Vincent GRIMAUD Head of Unit, Aid and Development Effectiveness and Financing, European Commission

Korea

Youngju OH Director General, Development Cooperation Bureau Ministry of Foreign Affairs Ms. Jinjoo KIM Second Secretary, Development Policy Division Ministry of Foreign Affairs

OECD/DAC

Ms. Ana Paula FERNANDES Counsellor, DAC Vice-Chair and DAC Permanent Delegate Permanent Delegation of Portugal to the OECD Ms. Yukiko OKANO Counsellor, DAC Vice-Chair and DAC Delegate Permanent Delegation of Japan to the OECD

Parliamentarian representative

Mr. Martin CHUNGONG Director of Division of Programs, Co-Chair of Aid and Accountability Management Group Inter-Parliamentary Union Aleksandra BLAGOJEVIC Program Officer, International Development Inter-Parliamentary Union

Private Sector representative

Dr. Darian STIBBE Executive Director, The Partnering Initiative, IBLF Mr. Mogese GEBREMARIAM Ethiopian Employersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Federation

Samoa

Ms. Noumea SIMI Assistant CEO, Aid Coordination Unit Ministry of Finance Mr. Alfred SCHUSTER Development Cooperation Advisor Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat

Timor-Leste

Mr. Helder DA COSTA Head of g7+ Secretariat, Aid Effectiveness Directorate Ministry of Finance Ms. Felicia CARVALHO Program and Coordination Officer, g7+ secretariat

Third meeting of the Steering Committee, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 25-26 July 2013

- 179 -

UNDP/UNDG

Ms. Sigrid KAAG Assistant Secretary General and Assistant Administrator Bureau for External Relations and Advocacy Mr. Paolo GALLI Cluster Leader, Multilateral Affairs and UN Coherence Cluster, BERA, UN Development Programme (UNDP)

United States

Alex THIER Assistant Administrator Policy, Planning and Learning U.S. Agency for International Development Mr. Steven PIERCE US Representative to the DAC Permanent Delegation

World Bank

Ms. Astrid MANROTH Operations Adviser, Openness and Aid Effectiveness Ms. Julia NIELSON Acting Director and Special Representative to Europe France, G20, OECD Delegate

Observers African Union Commission (AUC) (Host organisation)

H.E Mr. Erastus Mwencha, Deputy Chairperson, African Union Commission (representing H.E Dr. Nkosazana Dlamini ZUMA, Chairperson of the AU Commission) H.E Dr. Anthony Mothae Maruping, Commissioner for Economic Affairs Mrs. Florence Nazare, Head Capacity Development Division, NEPAD Planning & Coordinating Agency Mr. Jean Yves Adou, Senior Programme Officer â&#x20AC;&#x201C; NEPAD, NEPAD Coordination Unit, Bureau of the Chairperson Mr. Ramatlali Nkhahle Edward, Special Assistant to the Commissioner for Economic affairs, Economic Affairs Department Mr. Amadou Cisse, Senior Policy Officer, Economic Affairs Department Mr. Abia Sunday Udoh, Policy officer, Economic Affairs Department Mrs. Ndinaye Charumbira, Policy Officer, Economic Affairs Department

Arab Donor Coordination Group

Mr. Said AISSI Advisor to Director-General, Operations Management OPEC Fund for International Development

Brazil

Marcelo AdriĂŁo BORGES First Secretary Embassy of Brazil in Addis Ababa

China

Liang ZHEN Office of the Embassy of P.R. China

Ethiopia

Hon. Alemayehu Gujo State Minister of Finance and Economic Development Ministry of Finance and Economic Development

Mexico

Mr. Luis Javier CAMPUZANO Ambassador, Permanent Representative to UNEP Permanent Representative of Mexico to UNEP Embassy of Mexico in Nairobi

Third meeting of the Steering Committee, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 25-26 July 2013

- 180 -

NOEL GONZALEZ Deputy Director General for Policy Making Mexican Agency for International Development Cooperation Mr. Juan Alfredo MIRANDA Ambassador, Ethiopia Rockefeller Foundation

Mr. C.D. GLIN Associate Director, Africa Region ROCKEFELLER FOUNDATION

South Africa

Simon FERREIRA Deputy Director: Social cluster National Treasury

STARS Foundation

Ms. Muna WEHBE CEO, STARS Foundation

Turkey

Dr. Mehmet YILMAZ Head of External Affairs and Partnerships Department Turkish Cooperation and Coordination Agency

Joint Support Team M. Alain AKPADJI Aid Effectiveness Adviser Africa Regional Service Centre, Ethiopia, UNDP Mrs. Farida BENA Policy Analyst, OECD Mr. Gerardo BRACHO Senior Policy Analyst, OECD Ms. Brenda KILLEN Head of Division, Global Partnerships and Policies Division, OECD Mr. Derek KILNER Partnerships Development Analyst Bureau of External Relations and Advocacy, UNDP Mr. Robin OGILVY Senior Policy Advisor, OECD Ms. Yuko SUZUKI Policy Adviser, Effective Development Co-operation/BDP, UNDP Ms. Meron TAMRAT Africa Regional Service Centre, Ethiopia, UNDP Mr. Matthew TAYLOR Public Affairs Specialist, Seoul Policy Centre, UNDP Ms. Elaine VENTER Team Leader, Capacity Development, RSC Johannesburg, South Africa, UNDP

Third meeting of the Steering Committee, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 25-26 July 2013

- 181 -

Fourth meeting of the Steering Committee Draft summary

Fourth meeting of the Global Partnership Steering Committee Washington, DC, 10-11 October 2013

Contacts: Ms. Farida Bena, tel. +33 1 45 24 90 16, email: farida.tchaitchianbena@oecd.org Mr. Derek Kilner, tel. +1-212-906-5742, email: derek.kilner@undp.org

25 October 2013

- 182 -

GLOBAL PARTNERSHIP FOR EFFECTIVE DEVELOPMENT CO-OPERATION FOURTH MEETING OF THE STEERING COMMITTEE WASHINGTON, DC 10-11 OCTOBER 2013 SUMMARY

Opening remarks by the United States, the Co-Chairs and Mexico 1. The United States opened the meeting welcoming the Steering Committee to Washington, D.C. The three Co-Chairs of the Global Partnership, as well as Mexico as host of the 2014 High Level Meeting (HLM), then delivered opening remarks. 2. Minister Justine Greening (UK) stressed the need for the Steering Committee to produce a concrete plan for the agenda for the HLM, with priorities including a focus on how to improve development cooperation and highlighting the link with the post-2015 development framework. For the latter, she noted that if the post-2015 framework provides a new set of development objectives, the Global Partnership can focus on how to mobilize the full range of development actors that need to work collectively to achieve those objectives. 3. Minister Armida Alisjahbana (Indonesia) further highlighted the importance of links to the post-2015 framework, and of building on the report of the High-level Panel on the Post-2015 Development Agenda, as well as the Special Event towards achieving the Millennium Development Goals and the first meeting of the High-Level Political Forum on Sustainable Development, both held during the UN General Assembly in September. She noted that the Global Partnership can help provide a mechanism to support achievement of post-2015 objectives. Ms. Alisjahbana stressed that two major priorities are inclusive partnerships that involve a wide range of stakeholders; and an evidence based approach, recognizing the voluntary nature of commitments and that implementation should proceed according to a countryâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s capacity. Ms Alisjahbana highlighted the value of the technical workshop (9 October) and high-level side event (12 October) on knowledge-sharing â&#x20AC;&#x201C; during the World Bank/IMF Annual Meetings as inputs to the HLM. 4. Minister Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala (Nigeria) raised the importance of the UN General Assembly side event on domestic resource mobilization, hosted by Nigeria, as an important input to the HLM. She noted that work done within the Global Partnership on how effective development cooperation can mobilize domestic resources can be fed into post-2015 discussions, including the work of the Intergovernmental Committee of Experts on Sustainable Development Financing. Ms Okonjo-Iweala also stressed the importance of South-South cooperation and knowledge-sharing as topics for the HLM. She joined the other Co-Chairs in thanking Mexico for agreeing to host the HLM, noting the considerable efforts Mexico has already put into its organization, and raised the need for Steering Committee members to actively contribute to the success of the meeting with both time and financial assistance. 5. Juan Manuel Valle, Executive Director of the Mexican Agency for International Development (AMEXCID) stressed that an efficient and inclusive international development cooperation architecture will be necessary to help deliver the post-2015 agenda. Given that resources available for development are scarce and economic growth expectations are limited in much of the world, there is a need to make effective use of resources. Mr Valle raised the 1

Fourth meeting of the Steering Committee, Washington, DC, USA, 10-11 October 2013

- 183 -

importance of having all partners around the table as new actors continue to play a growing role in development cooperation; and reiterated the need for the Global Partnership to complement discussions on the post-2015 framework. Mr Valle highlighted four priorities for Mexico in hosting the meeting: promoting an enabling international environment for development; making a strong contribution to a holistic, inclusive, and action-oriented post-2015 development agenda; advancing the effective development cooperation agenda; and ensuring an inclusive process for the meeting so the views of all stakeholders are reflected. Session 1: The Global Partnership and the post-2015 development agenda (Chaired by Nigeria) 6. Introducing the session, Ms Okonjo-Iweala highlighted the work of the UN SecretaryGeneral’s High Level Panel on the Post-2015 Development Agenda, noting the relevance of its recommendations for the work of the Global Partnership. At its second meeting in Bali, Indonesia (March 2013), the Steering Committee agreed to position the Global Partnership as part of “the how” of a post-2015 development framework. Ms Okonjo-Iweala suggested it was now time for members to determine in more concrete terms how this will be achieved. 7. Ambassador Noel Sinclair (Deputy Chef de Cabinet, Office of the President of the UN General Assembly) provided an overview of the various strands of intergovernmental work on the post-2015 development agenda that will take place between now and 2015, including the Open Working Group on Sustainable Development Goals and the Intergovernmental Committee of Experts on Financing for Sustainable Development, as well as further discussions convened by the President of the General Assembly. Mr Sinclair stressed the immediate priority of accelerating progress towards the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). 8. Mr Sinclair explained that with the post-2015 discussions now entering the intergovernmental phase, the Global Partnership can be a useful tool to advance deliberations on the role of development cooperation and a means of implementation framework in the post-2015 agenda by bringing together a wide range of development actors that are not present in intergovernmental discussions. He noted that the High Level Dialogue on Financing for Development has pointed to the need for reliable financing – including domestic resources - for the post-2015 agenda, while continued emphasis will be placed on donors meeting their commitments on timely and reliable Official Development Assistance (ODA). He also flagged that the UN Development Cooperation Forum will address these issues in July 2014. 9. Mr Sinclair identified two priority areas where the Global Partnership can contribute to the post-2015 deliberations: the role of partnerships and the role of South-South and triangular cooperation, and invited the members of the Partnership to actively engage in the build-up of these efforts. He also invited greater engagement and coordination by the Partnership’s members with their missions to the United Nations in New York. 10. Ambassador Pertti Majanen (Finland, co-chair of the Intergovernmental Committee of Experts on Sustainable Development Financing) introduced the work of the Committee, which is grounded in the outcomes of the Rio+20 conference. He informed participants that the Committee had held its first meeting and agreed a work programme. He underscored the importance of developing an integrated approach to development finance, working closely with the Open Working Group. 11. In the discussions that followed, several members concurred with the importance of linking the efforts of the Global Partnership with work on development finance post-2015. Some participants pointed to the importance of existing commitments on aid effectiveness and their relevance to post-2015 efforts, and the comparative advantage of the Global Partnership on quality and effectiveness issues. Members highlighted the priority for many developing countries of addressing unmet Paris/Accra commitments on aid effectiveness. Some members suggested 2

Fourth meeting of the Steering Committee, Washington, DC, USA, 10-11 October 2013

- 184 -

that parts of the Global Partnership’s monitoring and accountability mechanisms could feature as part of the post-2015 development framework, and flagged the potential for the Global Partnership to act as a space for innovation, piloting new ideas and identifying concrete solutions to development co-operation challenges. 12. The Committee noted the engagement of private sector actors in post-2015 deliberations and suggested that clearer links between the work of the Global Partnership and the post-2015 UN processes may help to engage business more the work of the Partnership. Members raised the importance of tri-partite discussions; and of looking at private sector engagement in co-operation in fragile states. 13. Summing up the discussion, Co-Chair Justine Greening (UK) suggested that the Steering Committee should map out the ongoing processes in relation to the post-2015 development agenda with a view to identifying the ambition and added value of the Global Partnership in relation to each of them. She noted the relevance of several of the interventions made to the subsequent discussions on the scope and agenda of the first High Level Meeting of the Global Partnership. Session 2: Reporting back from consultations (Chaired by Mexico) 14. The chair introduced the session, noting that the success of the Global Partnership and the HLM depends on efforts by the Co-Chairs and Steering Committee members to reach out to and consult the Partnership’s broader membership. 15. Mexico reported back from a regional consultation held in Mexico City on 26-27 September. Some countries in the region are still grappling with implementation of Paris and Accra commitments on aid effectiveness. Other countries expressed an interest in greater focus on the role of the private sector in development. There was a recognition that further outreach in the Latin America and Caribbean region will be needed. Mexico also held a number of meetings on the Global Partnership during the UN General Assembly. 16. The Arab Donor Coordination Group reported back from workshops organized by OFID in Vienna on 29 September and 1 October, with a focus on implementation of Busan commitments and the global monitoring framework. The Group noted the importance of national ownership for Busan implementation, as well as the need for capacity development in partner countries to facilitate implementation – particularly in low-income countries and fragile states. The 1 October workshop was co-organized with the UK. 17. Indonesia reported back from the technical workshop on knowledge sharing held at the World Bank on 9 October. Indonesia noted that knowledge-sharing can play a role as a bridge between the Global Partnership and the post-2015 process. The workshop raised the importance of engaging non-governmental and private sector stakeholders in addition to governments; the need for scaling up knowledge-sharing; the need for mechanisms to identify knowledge demand; and leveraging existing communities of practice. The UK raised the question of how knowledgesharing mechanisms can be used to prepare for the Mexico City HLM. 18. The World Bank, representing multilateral development banks, reported that the Asian Development Bank organized a high-level seminar in New Delhi on development challenges in Asia, including government, civil society, and private sector partners. The event reaffirmed the potential role of the Global Partnership as part of the “how” of implementing the post-2015 agenda. 19. UCLG/FOGAR, representing local and regional governments, reported back from the annual UCLG Congress held in Rabat, Morocco from 1-4 October. Key issues raised included the need for close links between governments and citizens to promote accountability and the 3

Fourth meeting of the Steering Committee, Washington, DC, USA, 10-11 October 2013

- 185 -

need for local governments to have a greater voice in international fora dealing with the future development agenda. Noting it was the first meeting at which local governments had been invited as observers, UCLG/FOGAR conveyed the constituencyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s interest in continued engagement with the Partnership. 20. The private sector representative reported back from the e-discussion facilitated by DFID, IFC, and UNDP. The discussion produced a number of recommendations, including the need for a roadmap for donors and other partners regarding the role of the private sector in development partnerships. The private sector Building Block also met on 8 October in Washington, DC, discussing the need to promote public-private collaboration for development and a desire to see strong and high-profile business attendance at the Mexico City HLM. 21. The European Union noted that it continues to hold regular consultations with its membership, both in senior-level and working group sessions. The EU noted that a side event on the role of business in development would be organized at the European Development Days in Brussels on 27 November. 22. The AUC/NEPAD noted that a Southern and Eastern Africa regional consultation on effective development cooperation would be held the week of 14 October in Johannesburg. The side event on domestic resource mobilization held during the UN General Assembly also reaffirmed the importance of the issue for the HLM agenda, and as a particular priority for Africa. The AUC/NEPAD also reported on the e-discussion on domestic resource mobilization. Suggestions emerging from the discussion included a desire for indicators and regular reporting on illicit financial flows, as well as concrete actions for addressing the issue; support for developing an international accounting standard; and the need for regional-level transparency. 23. CPDE, representing civil society, reported back from the e-discussion on inclusive development, noting that a number of contributors had participated from CSOs, parliaments, and development agencies. There was support for exploring the idea of a global indicator on inclusive development and the need to build capacity at local level to think about its inclusiveness. CPDE stressed the importance of inclusive development and a multistakeholder approach as a cornerstone of the Busan Partnership agreement, suggesting it should be prioritized at the HLM. CPDE also flagged the importance of complementing online discussions with face-to-face meetings. 24. Stars Foundation, representing foundations, reported back from a side event for foundations at the UN General Assembly, organized together with the Ford Foundation, NetFwd, the Rockefeller Foundation, UNDP, and WINGS. The meeting looked at the possibility of developing principles for foundationsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; engagement in development cooperation. Particular areas of interest for foundations include financial inclusion, support for entrepreneurship, impact investing, the regulatory environment for philanthropy, and capacity development. Foundations will aim to present such principles at the Mexico City HLM. 25. IPU, representing parliamentarians, noted that a draft guidance note has been developed for parliamentarians for moving towards an agreed framework for effective development cooperation, including principles on aid policy, and accountability. 26. Peru noted that at a discussion with Southern providers of development cooperation in Lima in May, there was considerable discussion on triangular cooperation as an important topic for discussion within the Global Partnership. The week of 14 October, a meeting will be held in Lima on progress between Busan and Mexico City, including government, private sector, civil society and local government actors, with support from UNDP and Spain. 27. Samoa reported that a donor workshop was held in Fiji and noted the importance for the Pacific Island countries of looking at issues of effective development cooperation with a view to 4

Fourth meeting of the Steering Committee, Washington, DC, USA, 10-11 October 2013

- 186 -

transition to middle income status. Pacific governments will be interested in holding a side event during the HLM with a focus on knowledge-sharing and South-South cooperation. 28. Bangladesh reported back on a workshop on Busan implementation held in Dhaka. Discussions raised the need to strengthen and operationalize country development results frameworks; to situate ODA in the broader development finance landscape, including developing medium-term financing strategies; and to upscale successful examples of South-South and triangular cooperation. There was a request to re-establish the Partner Country Caucus ahead of the HLM. The meeting’s participants welcomed Mexico’s vision to focus on inclusiveness as well as middle income countries. Session 3: Vision and narrative for the First High-Level Meeting (Chaired by Indonesia) 29. The chair introduced the session, noting the need to further advance the vision for the Mexico City HLM, building on the potential for the Global Partnership to contribute to the “how” of achieving the post-2015 development agenda, and the Partnership’s comparative advantage of its inclusivity and results-focused approach. The chair noted that a communiqué from the HLM might include elements relating to the Partnership’s vision, its governance structure, reporting on progress on commitments, and specific deliverables. In addition to the specific agenda items for the meeting, there should be an overall focus on inclusivity and country ownership, as well as a high-profile civil society preparatory/side event. 30. Mexico stressed the importance of combining a review of progress on commitments made at Busan with new issues relating to development cooperation. Mexico also flagged the need to address the concerns of stakeholders who have been hesitant to engage more actively with the Partnership, including by exploring alternative ways of framing discussions. 31. The United Kingdom emphasized the importance of identifying what should concretely change as a result of the HLM in each area of the agenda, including in the area of inclusive development, noting that the content of the communiqué should follow from the substantive preparations. 32. In the discussions that followed, the Steering Committee suggested the communiqué be well-targeted and concise, with something tangible to communicate to post-2015 discussions. Participants are keen to see tangible actions and deliverables. There were suggestions that the HLM be innovative, creative and involve bold ideas and inspiring success stories. 33. Some members suggested that key aspects of the narrative for the HLM could be “development done better” – improving the way in which development activities are carried out; and how development partners mobilize to collectively achieve goals including the eradication of extreme poverty and the achievement of post-2015 development objectives. Several members stressed the importance of inclusive development as a key aspect of the meeting as well as the need to ensure that both the identity and the outcome of the meeting capture this inclusivity. 34. Members reaffirmed the desire to use the meeting to feed into discussions on the post2015 development framework. Some suggested that the Partnership should see opportunity in its character as a forum that can tap into excitement around the post-2015 discussions without being constrained by the formal intergovernmental process. 35. Members also highlighted the importance of a strong focus on the implementation of Busan commitments, given that it will be the first full gathering of the Partnership since the Busan High Level Forum. 36. On the topic of progress of Busan, members raised a desire for a deliverable relating to a civil society enabling environment and how inclusive development partnerships work in 5

Fourth meeting of the Steering Committee, Washington, DC, USA, 10-11 October 2013

- 187 -

practice; the need to keep a strong focus on the unfinished business of commitments on aid effectiveness; and an interest in a particular focus on the lessons from fragile states and the New Deal process. There was a suggestion that voluntary actions could be added. Members also raised the need to identify gaps in the evidence base and to work quickly to fill such gaps. 37. On the topic of domestic resource mobilization, there was interest in deliverables relating to scaling up cooperation on tax administration, including the possibility of looking at taxto-GDP ratios, incentive funds, Tax Inspectors Without Borders, and a one-stop shop for countries looking to strengthen their tax policies. There was also interest in focusing on issues of transparency and tax justice; and issues of illicit capital flows. 38. There was broad support for introducing the topic of development cooperation in middle income countries, noting that middle income countries have many success stories to share. There was interest in a discussion around transition to middle income status, but recognition that deliverables in this area could be challenging. Participants also suggested that the session can provide a platform on constructive dialogue and exchange of knowledge on successful policies by MICs on poverty reduction, including best practices and success stories that demonstrate the impact of the Busan principles. 39. Members also supported adding a discussion of South South and triangular cooperation to the discussion on knowledge-sharing. The discussion noted that South-South cooperation is not only about knowledge-sharing but also includes issues such as trade and investment. Furthermore, the session should ensure the complementarity of South-South cooperation to North-South cooperation, emphasising that it is not a substitute for North-South cooperation 40. On the topic of the private sector, there was interest in moving beyond general agreement on the desirability of greater private sector involvement to discussion of specific partnerships that can empower others to replicate successful examples; a roadmap for accelerating public-private cooperation for development; the possibility of principles for publicprivate partnerships; focus on the interests of workers; focus on the informal sector and small and medium enterprise; and highlighting examples of large scale manufacturing in low-income countries. Members flagged that a parameter for success in this area would be ensuring highlevel business participation. There was also interest in a private sector side event or partnership fair. 41. Members also flagged the need for the HLM to agree issues of governance including membership of the Steering Committee. Session 4: Discussion of proposed agenda for the High-Level Meeting (chaired by the United Kingdom) 42. The Administrator of the US Agency for International Development, Rajiv Shah reiterated the US governmentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s commitment to the Global Partnership. He highlighted the importance of the Fourth High Level Forum on Aid Effectiveness in Busan in setting out core principles for effective development co-operation and in bringing a wide range of stakeholders â&#x20AC;&#x201C; particularly from civil society and the private sector â&#x20AC;&#x201C; more directly into discussions of cooperation. He noted that since the Busan High Level Forum, large-scale public private partnerships have been a particular area of focus for the US. Mr. Shah indicated that the Global Partnership and the Mexico City HLM will be important for helping to implement the Busan principles, and for ensuring inclusivity in development cooperation. He also stressed the importance of transparency within the agenda, noting the value of the Busan High Level Forum in advancing the International Aid Transparency Initiative (IATI). 43. The chair introduced the discussion of the revised agenda of the First High-Level Meeting of the Global Partnership, expressing the hope that the Steering Committee would agree 6

Fourth meeting of the Steering Committee, Washington, DC, USA, 10-11 October 2013

- 188 -

on the proposed session topics (see Document 11). The chair presented ways to ensure inclusive development would feature prominently throughout the meeting. A one-pager was circulated among members to illustrate potential inclusive development outcomes from each session. 44. The emphasis on inclusive development throughout the agenda of the High-Level Meeting received strong support from several Steering Committee members. Some highlighted the need to link this agenda with the global work on Sustainable Development Goals. Others expressed the wish to organise a specific session on inclusive development, as well as on the role of local actors in development, and poverty eradication in fragile states. 45. In the discussion, participants suggested that the domestic resource mobilization session should highlight key issues such as transparency, accountability and tax justice and look at how developing countries can build their local capacity to raise taxes and negotiate fairer tax deals with multinational enterprises. There was also a suggestion that the session should look at ways to promote resource mobilisation at all levels of government, including local, regional and central. 46. Members raised that the session on middle income countries should acknowledge the urban dimension of poverty and explore possible solutions. 47. There was discussion on whether and how Session 4 of the HLM should bring together the issues of knowledge sharing and South-South and triangular co-operation. Members agreed to keep one session, with two distinct components. Parliamentarians volunteered to share examples of effective knowledge sharing and other members suggested that a discussion lessons learned in South-South co-operation could also showcase the importance of innovation in Middle-Income Countries. 48. For the final HLM session on effective development co-operation and the private sector, Members suggested the discussion could look at the specific role of small and medium enterprises, as well as the interplay between the domestic and private sectors. Linking with the domestic resource mobilisation work, the session should also look at how the private sector can apply principles of good governance or risk-sharing arrangements to public-private partnerships. Case studies on multi-stakeholder and public-private partnerships could be shared in preparation for this session. 49. There was a call for the private sector session to be structured as a high-level discussion gathering business, government and civil society leaders around successful practices and ways to scale them up. While the details of the session still need to be defined, it was hoped that it would be based on a broad and democratic consultation process and lead to a concrete roadmap. From this perspective the High-Level Meeting is seen as an important opportunity for business representatives to meet with Global Partnership members. 50. The chair concluded the first day of the meeting by suggesting an open consultation process leading to the drafting of a communiquĂŠ. She stressed the importance of identifying specific outcomes through extensive consultations within and beyond the Global Partnership. A fifth Steering Committee meeting, which is tentatively scheduled in Abuja, Nigeria in mid-January will discuss in further detail the agenda of the High-Level Meeting. Session 5: Discussion of agenda for the High-Level Meeting (Chaired by the United Kingdom)

1 First High-Level Meeting of the Global Partnership for Effective Development Co-operation: Building towards the Post-2015 Development Agenda: Revised concept note and outline agenda

Fourth meeting of the Steering Committee, Washington, DC, USA, 10-11 October 2013

- 189 -

51. The chair summarised the conclusions from the first day of the meeting and introduced a more detailed discussion on the High-Level Meeting agenda and potential deliverables proposed by the co-Chairs, with the aim of starting to identify successful outcomes for each session. 52. Some Steering Committee members noted the need to also discuss the overarching purpose of the High-Level Meeting, for example by looking at ways to accelerate the implementation of Busan commitments. Others underlined the importance of keeping the HighLevel Meeting discussion multi-stakeholder in nature. 53. Breakout groups for each HLM agenda session discussed additions to the list of potential deliverables, and reported back to the plenary (See Annex 1). 54. The Committee then discussed the process for advancing work on each HLM agenda item, building on the roadmap document prepared for the SC meeting. Each HLM session will have one champion from the Co-Chairs or Steering Committee, which will form a core team, ensure multi-stakeholder consultations and select concrete deliverables by 13 December 2013. The table below summarizes the champion for each session: Session Progress on Busan implementation and its impact on inclusive development Domestic Resource Mobilisation Middle-income countries South-South Co-operation, Triangular Cooperation and Knowledge Sharing Private Sector

Lead EU Nigeria Mexico Indonesia, Mexico UK

55. It was agreed that champions would form a core team taking forward the substantive and logistical support required to prepare each High-Level meeting session. They would work in close co-ordination with other Steering Committee members who have already signalled their interest in a given focus area, notably at the third Steering Committee meeting in Addis Ababa, as well as other members from the broader Global Partnership. Specific tasks of the core team will also include drafting advanced concept notes on the content, format and speakers for each session and agreeing on a plan for stakeholder outreach and broader political support. 56. The chair underlined the need to ensure that inclusiveness cuts across each agenda item and set of proposed deliverables. A draft note on integrating inclusive development into the HLM agenda circulated for discussion by the UK (see Annex 2). 57. It was also noted that, while the Joint Support Team would follow the work of the core teams, there is an expectation that members lead substantive preparations. Participating in the work of the core team, either as a lead or member, will require dedicated time by individuals. 58. Mexico noted that particular importance will be attached to projecting the multistakeholder nature of the Global Partnership at the HLM. For this reason two preparatory events will be organised with civil society and with parliamentarians. Mexico also acknowledged the interest of the private sector in a similar initiative. Session 6: Roadmap â&#x20AC;&#x201C; face-to-face communication (chaired by Indonesia)

engagement,

flagship

events

and

online

59. The chair opened the session by recalling the e-discussions as a good way of engaging key players on the Global Partnershipâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s key priorities. For example, the e-discussions on South-

Fourth meeting of the Steering Committee, Washington, DC, USA, 10-11 October 2013

- 190 -

South, Triangular Co-operation and knowledge sharing benefitted from contributions from roughly 50 people. 60. The Steering Committee raised the need to craft a core set of messages around the High-Level Meeting. There was a general agreement that the communiqué should be concise and have impact, pointing to substantive ways the Global Partnership can contribute to the post2015 development agenda, the Sustainable Development Goals and beyond. The document should help define the effective development co-operation agenda, particularly in the period until the second High-Level Meeting, which would be expected to take place between 18-24 months after the Mexico City HLM. 61. Some members called for specific sets of messages to target key constituencies, e.g. parliamentarians or the private sector. The Joint Support Team asked Steering Committee members for the contacts of their relevant communications staff so as to develop this work together, building on the messages already set out in the Global Partnership’s communications strategy. 62. A specific meeting was proposed for February to look in-depth at the evidence from the monitoring data and to help analyse this information before the Mexico City HLM. The Joint Support Team will plan for such a discussion together with the 50+ developing countries engaged in the monitoring exercise. Session 7 – Division of labour for outreach and engagement (chaired by Nigeria) 63. Building on the discussions in Session 6, the Chair led a discussion of the specific opportunities for engagement identified in the Roadmap document, encouraging Steering Committee members to commit to ensuring coverage at each event. The revised calendar (see Annex 3) provides an overview of agreed outreach opportunities and responsibilities. Session 8: Organising the High-Level Meeting – management and costs (chaired by the UK) 64. The chair presented the budgetary requirements for supporting those elements of the HLM not covered by Mexico as the host country. These include the remaining funding gap for the OECD-UNDP support team’s programme of work through 2014, as well as the cost of supporting travel and accommodation for participants from developing countries, which will be managed by UNDP. The remaining resource needs are USD 4.9 million across both sides of the team. A revised budget for the support team has been made available. 65. Mexico, as well as donor country representatives on the Steering Committee stressed the importance of securing funding for organizing a successful meeting. UNDP and OECD emphasized the need for resources to be mobilized as quickly as possible to allow sufficient time for necessary preparations. Session 9: Follow-up and next steps (chaired by the UK) 66. The previous sessions broadly set out the immediate next steps with regard to the preparation of the High-Level meeting in Mexico, including the champions in shaping up their respective sessions. Participants discussed the need for each champion to ensure adequate human and financial resources to take further work forward, noting the previous decision to keep a very light global secretariat. Such preparatory work therefore needs to be conducted by a core group which the champion would put in place to support the process for each session. 67. Participants agreed that the Steering Committee will need to further discuss governance issues, including possible mechanisms/criteria for rotation to ensure continuity, as well as the role

Fourth meeting of the Steering Committee, Washington, DC, USA, 10-11 October 2013

- 191 -

of observers. These discussions could form the basis for a decision at the HLM. The January 2014 Steering Committee meeting offers an opportunity to begin consultations on these issues.

*****

Fourth meeting of the Steering Committee, Washington, DC, USA, 10-11 October 2013

- 192 -

Annex 1: Revised list of possible session deliverables / outcomes for further discussion and consultation 11 October 2013 (revised at end of Steering Committee meeting to reflect group feedback) The proposed HLM agenda and concept note presented by the co-chairs and Mexico set out a shortlist of possible “deliverables” or outcomes for sessions based on previous consultations. Discussions within the Steering Committee on 10 and 11 October have helped identify additional issues or objectives that could be addressed within each session. The secretariat has, on the basis of the group work session, updated the list of items to capture some of the feedback received. The list is by no means comprehensive, nor does it imply that it will be feasible to address each idea in detail over the course of a two-day meeting. Its purpose is to record some of the main elements discussed / proposed so that these can be considered in more detail by the Steering Committee volunteers / champions that will take forward the consultations around individual sessions. Session 1: Progress on Busan implementation and impact on inclusive development a) Review progress, identify challenges and agree on key actions to accelerate progress or remove blockages to the achievement of stakeholders’ respective targets on effective development co-operation. b) Showcase progress and challenges in the implementation of key Busan commitments, such as the New Deal, in fragile and conflict-affected states. c) Put in place or strengthen inclusive partnerships and transparent mutual accountability mechanisms at the regional and country level, with particular focus on aid policy and related multi-stakeholder dialogue structure. d) Identify key actions for promoting national and regional solutions to improve the enabling environment for civil society, including supporting social dialogue. Launch an international “roadmap” to improve the enabling environment for local and regional governments. e) Review progress on key commitments on democratic ownership of development processes, building on existing commitments and mechanisms to ensure rights-based approaches to development. f)

Launch / agree principles for effective philanthropic engagement with development stakeholders, showing how key Busan principles can be advanced by and with foundations and philanthropic actors, working with other constituencies represented within the Global Partnership.

Session 2: Domestic resource mobilisation a) Build consensus around particular types of domestic policy / legislative / regulatory reform or recommendations that can lead to increased domestic revenue mobilisation. b) Scale up development co-operation in support of tax administration to strengthen the national budget processes to ensure fair and equitable fiscal regimes. Look at the different roles development stakeholders can play in scaling up their support and, specifically, at donors’ roles in promoting catalytic aid. c) Look at how aid can leverage national systems and help build domestic resources, particularly in fragile states.

Fourth meeting of the Steering Committee, Washington, DC, USA, 10-11 October 2013

- 193 -

d) Launch or endorse a specific international initiative on tax – e.g. Tax Inspectors Without Borders or other initiatives to be identified in due course. e) Support or adopt international initiatives linked to domestic resource mobilisation, combatting illicit flows – e.g. those in discussion in the G8 and G20 – and curbing aggressive tax avoidance practices by multinational corporations. f)

Measures to identify [large] medium and small firms in the informal sector that evade taxes - e.g. propose tax exemptions and tax clearance for the first 100 firms to apply, in a particular geographic area of the country (this may help capture most of them in the database of revenue authorities and appropriately tax them in future).

g) Suggest ways in which taxation, domestic resource mobilisation and international cooperation in support of these goals might feature in a post-2015 development framework. h) Explore how tax systems / policy can be made more inclusive (“leave no-one behind”). i)

[Are there concrete proposals on extractives / natural resource management, remittances and diaspora / human capital issues, and tax justice that could feature in the plenary?]

Look at good practice in using incentives or setting targets to increase domestic resources.

k) Transparency, accountability and evaluation are also key issues in increasing domestic natural, financial and human resources, as well as people’s trust in paying taxes. This also means supporting equitable and just tax systems and tax policies, including inclusive systems of accountability. l)

Important to stress that DRM should be a priority at all levels of government, including central, regional and local.

Session 3: Middle-income countries (MICs) a) Concrete actions by the international development community to support poverty reduction and inclusive growth in MICs – e.g. looking at the different types of cooperation that may be called for to support inclusive development. b) Explore different criteria for country classification and their implications for international development co-operation. c) Identify and share good practices / approaches in supporting developing countries during their transition from LIC/LDC status, with a particular emphasis on avoiding setbacks in the development gains made by MICs. d) Case study or initiative on the role of local governments (e.g. in addressing urban poverty and regional disparities). e) Showcase successful domestic policies that have enhanced or accelerated poverty reduction. f)

Explore the coherence of developed countries’ aid and non-aid policies that impact on development (e.g. trade) in MICs. How do we avoid setbacks? (For example, when countries graduate, preferential treatment in trade policies can have a more significant impact on poverty reduction efforts than declining aid receipts).

g) [Something on fragile states dimension to MICs, and additional challenges faced by fragile and conflict-affected states in their transition.]

Fourth meeting of the Steering Committee, Washington, DC, USA, 10-11 October 2013

- 194 -

Session 4: South-south co-operation, triangular co-operation and knowledge sharing [Further consideration needed on exact session title and focus – e.g. possibility of focusing on the role of south-south and triangular co-operation, and knowledge-sharing, in promoting inclusive development.] a) How south-south co-operation has been changing the nature of development cooperation. b) Launch or showcase voluntary actions by south-south partners to advance Busan goals and principles. c) Showcase examples of successful south-south and triangular co-operation (to include, for example, approaches that have been successful in promoting inclusive development; addressing the special needs of fragile and conflict-affected states). d) Agree on a number of thematic issues in the post-2015 development framework around which knowledge sharing should be scaled up. e) Showcase and scale up support for existing hubs and platforms that promote knowledge sharing for development (e.g. World Bank, UNDP, G20 and sector-specific initiatives). f)

Network existing knowledge platforms particularly in relation to identified thematic areas to broker supply and demand (e.g. World Bank, UNDP, G20 and sector-specific initiatives Arab hub / parliamentarians).

g) [Idea on linking knowledge to institution-building in recipient contexts (absorptive capacity to receive knowledge from recipient side). h) Showcase initial progress on and support pilot activities [for a prototype hybrid platform] involving a range of stakeholders, e.g. building on country hubs. i)

[Explore the characteristics of effective knowledge sharing with a view to (in the medium- / longer-term) suggesting principles or measures of quality in such cooperation.]

Session 5: Private sector – business as a partner in development a) Present and discuss a roadmap / guidance that sets out what different stakeholders (including government, business, trade unions, civil society and others) will do to advance their Busan commitments in relation to public and private co-operation for development. b) Support (on an individual / voluntary) basis specific initiatives or ideas at the country level to stimulate a positive role for business – e.g. country hubs for driving effective collaboration and increasing public-private dialogue towards a positive business enabling environment. c) Showcase and demonstrate support (on an individual / voluntary basis) for specific initiatives or ideas to leverage private investment – e.g. development impact bonds. d) Showcasing or promoting development co-operation to encourage private sector development in fragile and conflict-affected states. e) Showcasing private sector success stories with a development co-operation dimension (e.g. manufacturing in Africa, natural resources). f)

Initiative or lessons on PPPs – e.g. scaling up good practice; formulation or adoption of principles; risk sharing between public and private sector.

Fourth meeting of the Steering Committee, Washington, DC, USA, 10-11 October 2013

- 195 -

g) Showcase examples of social dialogue at company-level, including international principles or framework agreements. h) Possible presentations or initiatives examining development co-operation and the informal sector i)

Showcasing collaboration and between foreign investment and the growing of local SMEs.

Discussion of corporate governance relating to extractive industries and resource flows; as well as human rights, and social and environmental impact.

k) Showcase examples of philanthropic / foundation partnerships with the private sector.

*****

Fourth meeting of the Steering Committee, Washington, DC, USA, 10-11 October 2013

- 196 -

Annex 2:

Mainstreaming Inclusive Development into the Mexico meeting - Proposal by United Kingdom -

Inclusive Development is fundamental for sustainable development and central to the work of the Global Partnership in delivering effective development cooperation. As the Arab Spring and other protests all over the world have shown, without inclusive development alongside growth, it is hard – if not impossible – to sustain poverty reduction. Without inclusive development, development work and assistance – in whatever form – cannot be effective. But inclusive development is not just a phrase or a silver bullet. It is a mix of policies, a particular perspective and an on-the-ground way of working that includes and prioritises all stakeholders – not only governments, businesses or civil society. It is about working together and reflecting the needs of all in society – including the poorest and most marginalised. The first ever meeting of the Global Partnership should recognise this by incorporating inclusivity within all of its sessions – to bring this special lens and way of working to the fore to deliver truly sustainable and sustained development. In particular: 1. It should be reflected in the title – e.g. “1st HLM of the Global Partnership for Effective Development Cooperation: building towards an Inclusive Post-2015 Development Agenda”. 2. The full range of actors involved in development cooperation should be invited to the meeting –including civil society actors. Finance should be set aside to support participation from nongovernmental actors from the global south. 3. There should be some sort of civil society/parliamentarians/workers forum preceding the meeting. 4. The first session of the meeting should reflect inclusivity in its title – recognising it as a major and particular shift that was meant to take place once the Partnership was created – e.g. “Progress on inclusive development and other development effectiveness principles since Busan”. Evidence that the space for civil society seems to be closing should be presented and explored, alongside other development effectiveness principles such as country ownership, transparency and results, and how all of these principles can themselves assist in supporting inclusive development. 5. The content of the other sessions should reflect inclusivity in the following possible ways as examples: o S2 (tax) – include a case-study/exploration of how tax systems/policy can be made more inclusive – so as to “leave no one behind”. o S3 (MICs) –identify inclusive development as a particular issue for MICs – such that most of the world’s poorest people are now concentrated in MICs despite the availability of finance. This should help in discussing the types of alternative development cooperation tools aside from grant aid that are needed to support poverty reduction in MICs. o S4 (KS/SSC) – include a case-study of knowledge/south-south cooperation that has been shared that promotes inclusive development; o S5 (business in development) – incorporate perspectives from trade unions/civil society/parliamentarians in addition to (central and local) governments and business. 6. Last but not least, the entire meeting and its preparation should have an inclusive “feel” – reflecting the voice of youth, marginalised groups and others in the speaking presentations/panels and the audience, and these should be very open and transparent – e.g. using webcasting and social media outreach so as to allow those who cannot travel to Mexico or elsewhere to actively provide their views and participate. 15

Fourth meeting of the Steering Committee, Washington, DC, USA, 10-11 October 2013

- 197 -

Annex 3:

Draft calendar of relevant events in 2013-14 Global Partnership/ Steering Committee meetings

Relevant International / Regional / Country Events

Proposed format for outreach / linkages

2013

OCTOBER

15-19 Oct Iberoamerican conference, Panama link

Includes heads of co-operation meeting 15-17 Oct

16-18 Oct Africa Platform for Development Effectiveness subregional workshop on postBusan and post-2015, Johannesburg

Focus on domestic resource mobilization

21-25 Oct UNSSC - Building partnerships for Development Effectiveness, New York link

Could one of the co-chairs or a representative participate?

22-23 Oct G20 Dev Working Group, St. Petersburg link

UK and Indonesia to advise.

24-25 Oct UNDCF High Level Symposium on Post-2015, Switzerland

Joint team to discuss opportunities for linkages with UNDESA.

28 Oct – 1 Nov South South Development Expo, Nairobi (hosted by UNEP)

30 October Mexico is planning a parallel event on the Global Partnership

31 Oct - 1 Nov Open Government Partnership Summit, London NOVEMBER

TBC Pan African Parliamentary Summit, Nigeria 13-14 Nov AidEx, Brussels 15 Nov TBC OFID Forum with African countries, Kuwait 18-20 Nov Third Afro-Arab Summit, Kuwait 18-19 Nov International workshop focusing on Busan implementation organised by MOFAT and UNDP Seoul Policy Centre, Korea

26-27 Nov European Development Days "A decent life for all by 2030 – Building a consensus for a new development agenda.” Looking at post-2015 and building common European approach. Brussels

Fourth meeting of the Steering Committee, Washington, DC, USA, 10-11 October 2013

- 198 -

Opportunity to share and discuss cross-regional experience on the countrylevel implementation of the Busan commitments. Could inform the backward looking discussions in the HLM – complementing the global monitoring work. 27 Nov UK and EC are organising a panel on the Global Partnership entitled "Effective Development in a Changing World: The Role of Business". More information at http://eudevdays.eu/

2-6 Dec 2 Session Intergovernmental Committee of Experts on Sustainable Development Financing

DECEMBER

TBC Effective Institutions meeting 3-4 Dec A Global Forum on Using Country Systems to Manage Climate Change Finance, Incheon, Korea link

Facilitated by the Busan Partnership for Action on climate Change Finance and Development

9-13 Dec Open Working Group on Sustainable Development Goals 18-19 Dec TBC Sideevent/debate on MICs (led by Mexico).

Meeting discusses: (1) means of implementation (science and technology, knowledge-sharing and capacity building) and Global Partnership for achieving sustainable development; (2) needs of countries in special situations, as well as specific challenges facing the middle-income countries.

2014 JANUARY

Date TBC Fifth Steering Committee meeting, Abuja

22-25 Jan World Economic Forum Annual Meeting, Davos, Switzerland

TBC Possible workshop on preliminary results from global monitoring exercise FEBRUARY

MARCH

Q1 2014 UN DCF symposium, Germany

Joint team to discuss opportunities for linkages with UNDESA.

TBC Regional workshop on Busan implementation

Organized by Korea, UNDP Asia Pacific and Bangladesh

3-4 Mar DAC Senior Level Meeting rd

3-7 Mar 3 Session Intergovernmental Committee of Experts on Sustainable Development Financing 17-20 Mar Inter-Parliamentary Union Assembly, Geneva 25-27 Mar meeting in Abuja [tbc] 27-30 Mar IaDB Annual Meeting, Bahia, Brazil

Fourth meeting of the Steering Committee, Washington, DC, USA, 10-11 October 2013

- 199 -

APRIL

Date TBC pre High Level meetings with CSOs and Parliamentarians 15-16 Apr 1st Highlevel meeting of the Global Partnership for effective development cooperation, Mexico

MAY

1-4 Apr Paris 21 Annual Meeting, Paris TBC Apr African Union Commission (AUC) and the European Commission, Brussels 11-13 Apr Spring Meetings of the IMF and World Bank, Washington 13 Apr Parliamentary meeting organised by IPU and Mexican Parliament, Mexico City 7-9 May World Economic Forum, Abuja th

12-16 May 4 Session Intergovernmental Committee of Experts on Sustainable Development Financing JUNE JULY

AUGUST

TBC, High Level UNDCF meeting, New York th

4-8 Aug 5 Session Intergovernmental Committee of Experts on Sustainable Development Financing

SEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER

10-11 Dec DAC High Level Meeting

Fourth meeting of the Steering Committee, Washington, DC, USA, 10-11 October 2013

- 200 -

Joint team to discuss opportunities for linkages with UNDESA.

Annex 4. List of Participants

Fourth Steering Committee Meeting Global Partnership for Effective Development Co-operation 10-11 October 2013, Washington D.C. Co-chairs Indonesia

Hon. Armida ALISJAHBANA Minister of National Development Planning/Head of National Development Planning Agency Mr. Wismana Adi SURYABRATA Deputy Minister for Development Funding Affairs Ministry of National Development Planning Mr. Tubagus CHOESNI Director for International Development Cooperation Ministry of National Development Planning Ms. Teni WIDURIYANTI Deputy Director Ministry of National Development Planning Mr. Kurniawan (Iwan) ARIADI Deputy Director Ministry of National Development Planning

Nigeria

Hon. Ngozi OKONJO-IWEALA Co-ordinating Minister for the Economy and Minister of Finance Ms. Chii AKPORJI Special Adviser to the CME and Minister of Finance Ministry of Finance Ms. Ada IHECHUCKWU-MADUBUIKE Deputy Director, Inernational Development Fund International Economic Relations Department Ministry of Finance

United Kingdom

Hon. Justine GREENING Secretary of State for International Development Mr. Anthony SMITH Director, International Relations Division Department for International Development Ms. Hannah RYDER Team Leader, Global Partnership for Effective Development Co-operation Department for International Development Ms. Kathryn CASSON Deputy Principal Private Secretary to the Secretary of State Department for International Development Mr. Guy LEVIN Special Adviser to the Secretary of State Department for International Development

Fourth meeting of the Steering Committee, Washington, DC, USA, 10-11 October 2013

- 201 -

Steering Committee Members and Observers African Union/NEPAD

Ms. Vera Brenda NGOSI Head, NEPAD Coordination Unit, African Union Commission Mrs. Florence NAZARE Head Capacity Development Division, NEPAD Planning & Coordinating Agency

Arab Donor Coordination Group

Mr. Said AISSI Advisor to Director-General, Operations Management OPEC Fund for International Development

Bangladesh

Mr. Abul AZAD Secretary, Economic Relations Division Ministry of Finance

Brazil

Mr. Flavio CAMPESTRIN BETTARELLO Director of Economic Planning & Chief Strategy Officer Embassy of Brazil to the United States

Chad

Dr. Brahim Adoum BACHAR General Secretary, Ministry of Economics & Planning Mr. Jean Yves ADOU Senior Programme Officer NEPAD Coordination Unit, Bureau of the Chairperson

CSO Partnership for Mr. Richard SSEWAKIRYANGA Development Executive Director, Uganda National NGO Forum Effectiveness Ms. Anna BYHOVSKAYA Economist/Policy Analyst, TUAC European Union

Ms. Renate HAHLEN Head of Unit, Aid and Development Effectiveness and Financing European Commission Directorate-General for Development and Cooperation Mr. Timo WILKKI Policy Officer, Aid and Development Effectiveness and Financing European Commission Directorate-General for Development and Cooperation

Guatemala

Mr. Raul BOLAﾃ前S Executive Director, Subsecretaria de Cooperaciﾃｳn Internacional Secretaria de Planificaciﾃｳn y Programaciﾃｳn de la Presidencia de Guatemala

Korea

Ms. Youngju OH Director General, Development Cooperation Bureau, Ministry of Foreign Affairs Ms. Hye-Ryoung SONG Deputy Director, Development Policy Division, Ministry of Foreign Affairs

Mexico

Mr. Juan Manuel VALLE PERENA Executive Director, Mexican Agency for Development Cooperation Ministry of Foreign Affairs Mr. Mauricio ESCANERO Deputy Permanent Representative of Mexico to UNESCO Mr. Noel GONZALEZ Deputy Director General for Policy Making Mexican Agency for International Development Cooperation

OECD/DAC

Mr. Erik SOLHEIM

Fourth meeting of the Steering Committee, Washington, DC, USA, 10-11 October 2013

- 202 -

DAC Chair, Development Co-operation Directorate Mr. Jens SEDEMUND Executive Advisor, Development Co-operation Directorate Parliamentarian representative

Mr. Alessandro MOTTER Senior Advisor, Economic and Social Affairs, Inter-Parliamentary Union Dr. Jeff BALCH Director, Association of European Parlementarians with Africa (AWEPA)

Peru

Mr. Luis OLIVERA Executive Director, Peruvian International Cooperation Agency (APCI)

Private Sector representative

Ms. Marie GAD Chief Advisor, Confederation of Danish Industry (DI) Dr. Darian STIBBE Executive Director, The Partnering Initiative, IBLF

Samoa

Ms. Noumea SIMI Assistant CEO, Aid Coordination Unit, Ministry of Finance Mr. Alfred SCHUSTER Development Cooperation Advisor, Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat

South Africa

Mr. Johnny MOLOTO Deputy Chief of Mission Department of International Relations and Cooperation (DIRCO) South African Embassy in Washington Mr. Francois HENTSCHEL Counsellor: Socio-economic and Development Embassy of the Republic of South Africa, Washington

STARS Foundation

Mr. David CROOK Development Director

Trade Union Mr. Pierre HABBARD Advisory Committee Senior Policy Adviser Timor-Leste/G7+

Mr. Habib MAYAR Senior Policy Specialist, g7+ Secretariat Ms. Mafalda MARCHIORO g7+ Secretariat, Dili, East Timor

Turkey

Dr. Mehmet YILMAZ Head of External Affairs and Partnerships Department Turkish Cooperation and Coordination Agency Mr. Fatih Abdi CETIN Assistant Expert, Turkish Cooperation and Coordination Agency

UCLG/FOGAR

Ms. Lupe MORENO ITURRIAGA Head of Multilateral Affairs, Secretariat for External Affairs Catalunya Secretariat for External Affairs

UNDP/UNDG

Ms. Sigrid KAAG Assistant Secretary General and Assistant Administrator Bureau for External Relations and Advocacy Mr. Paolo GALLI

Fourth meeting of the Steering Committee, Washington, DC, USA, 10-11 October 2013

- 203 -

Cluster Leader, Multilateral Affairs and UN Coherence Cluster Bureau for External Relations and Advocacy United States

Mr. Alex THIER Assistant Administrator, Policy, Planning and Learning U.S. Agency for International Development Mr. Steven PIERCE Special Coordinator, Development Effectiveness U.S. Agency for International Development

World Bank

Ms. Mariam SHERMAN Director, Operations Policy and Country Services Ms. Astrid MANROTH Operations Advisor, Openness and Aid Effectiveness Operations Policy and Country Services Post-2015 Session

Intergovernmental Committee of Experts on Sustainable Development Financing

Mr. Pertti MAJANEN Co-Chair of the Intergovernmental Committee of Experts on Sustainable Development Financing, Finland

Office of the President of the General Assembly

Mr. Noel SINCLAIR Ambassador Office of the President of the 68th session of the General Assembly

Ms. Kirsti AARNIO Ambassador and Post-2015 Coordinator, Department for Development Policy Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Finland

Mr. Jorge LAGUNA CELIS Senior Advisor Office of the President of the 68th session of the General Assembly UN Dept. of Economic and Social Affairs

Ms. Diana ALARCON Development Policy and Analysis Division OECD/UNDP Joint Support Team

Mr. Thomas BELOE Governance and Development Effectiveness Advisor UNDP Asia-Pacific Regional Service Centre Ms. Farida BENA Policy Analyst, Global Partnerships and Policies Division Development Cooperation Directorate, OECD Mr. Gerardo BRACHO Senior Policy Analyst, Global Partnerships and Policies Division Development Cooperation Directorate, OECD Ms. Claire CONDON Coordinator, Global Partnerships and Policies Division Development Cooperation Directorate, OECD Ms. Marcia DE CASTRO Resident Representative UNDP Mexico Ms. Carola KENNGOTT

Fourth meeting of the Steering Committee, Washington, DC, USA, 10-11 October 2013

- 204 -

Programme Analyst, Knowledge, Innovation and Capacity Group Bureau for Development Policy, UNDP Ms. Brenda KILLEN Head of Division, Global Partnerships and Policies Development Cooperation Directorate, OECD Mr. Derek KILNER Partnerships Development Analyst Bureau for External Relations and Advocacy, UNDP Mr. Jon LOMOY Director Development Co-operation Directorate, OECD Ms. Maria del MAR GALINDO Partnerships Development Analyst Bureau for External Relations and Advocacy, UNDP Ms. Wendy MCGILL Communications Specialist, UNDP Mr. Robin OGILVY Senior Policy Advisor, Global Partnerships and Policies Development Cooperation Directorate, OECD Ms. Yuko Suzuki NAAB Policy Adviser and Team Leader, Effective Development Cooperation Knowledge, Innovation and Capacity Group, Bureau for Development Policy, UNDP

Fourth meeting of the Steering Committee, Washington, DC, USA, 10-11 October 2013

- 205 -

▒ 참고자료

지속가능한발전목표(SDGs)에 관한 공개작업반(OWG) 관련 주요 문서

- 207 -

A/67/941

United Nations

General Assembly

Distr.: General 23 July 2013 Original: English

Sixty-seventh session Agenda item 20 (a) Sustainable development: implementation of Agenda 21, the Programme for the Further Implementation of Agenda 21 and the outcomes of the World Summit on Sustainable Development and of the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development

Letter dated 19 July 2013 from the Co-Chairs of the Open Working Group of the General Assembly on Sustainable Development Goals addressed to the President of the General Assembly In our capacity as Co-Chairs of the Open Working Group of the General Assembly on Sustainable Development Goals, and with reference to paragraph 249 of General Assembly resolution 66/288 and paragraph 6 of resolution 67/203, we have the honour to transmit herewith a progress report on the work of the Working Group at its first four sessions. We would be grateful if the report could be issued as a document of the General Assembly. (Signed) Macharia Kamau Csaba K rรถsi Co-Chairs

13-40526 (E) 070813

*1340526*

- 209 -

A/67/941

Progress report of the Open Working Group of the General Assembly on Sustainable Development Goals

I. Introduction 1. In its resolution 66/288, the General Assembly endorsed the outcome document of the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, entitled “The future we want”, annexed to the resolution. Paragraph 248 of the said outcome document read as follows: “248. We resolve to establish an inclusive and transparent intergovernmental process on sustainable development goals that is open to all stakeholders, with a view to developing global sustainable development goals to be agreed by the General Assembly. An open working group shall be constituted no later than at the opening of the sixty-seventh session of the Assembly and shall comprise 30 representatives, nominated by Member States from the five United Nations regional groups, with the aim of achieving fair, equitable and balanced geographical representation. At the outset, this open working group will decide on its methods of work, including developing modalities to ensure the full involvement of relevant stakeholders and expertise from civil society, the scientific community and the United Nations system in its work, in order to provide a diversity of perspectives and experience. It will submit a report, to the Assembly at its sixty-eighth session, containing a proposal for sustainable development goals for consideration and appropriate action.” 2. By its resolution 67/203, the General Assembly recalled paragraphs 245 to 251 of the outcome document of the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, and reiterated that the Open Working Group on Sustainable Development Goals would submit its report to the General Assembly at its sixtyeighth session and that reports on the progress of work of the Open Working Group would be made regularly to the Assembly, taking into account the convening of the first high-level political forum, without prejudice to the format and organizational aspects of the forum, and the special event in 2013 to follow up efforts made towards achieving the Millennium Development Goals. 3. By its decision 67/555, the General Assembly welcomed the membership of the Open Working Group as designated by the five United Nations regional groups and as listed in the annex to the decision. 4. The present report on the progress of work of the Open Working Group is made pursuant to those provisions.

II. Organizational matters A.

Organization of work 5. Sessions were held as follows: first session (14-15 March 2013, four formal meetings); second session (17-19 April 2013, six formal meetings); third session (22-24 May 2013, six formal meetings); and fourth session (17-19 June 2013, six formal meetings).

13-40526

- 210 -

A/67/941

Opening 6. On 14 March, the President of the sixty-seventh session of the General Assembly opened the first session of the Open Working Group on Sustainable Development Goals. Statements were made by him and the Secretary-General of the United Nations.

Election of officers 7. At its 1st meeting of the first session, on 14 March, the Open Working Group elected Csaba K rรถsi (Hungary) and Macharia Kamau (Kenya) as its Co-Chairs by acclamation.

Agenda 8. At the same meeting, the Open Working Group adopted the provisional agenda (A/AC.280/2013/1), which read:

Election of officers.

Adoption of the agenda and other organizational matters.

Follow-up to the outcome of the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, relating to a proposal for sustainable development goals.

Other matters.

Adoption of the report.

Methods of work 9.

At the same meeting, the Open Working Group adopted its methods of work. 1

Proceedings of the Open Working Group 10. In its first session, on 14 and 15 March 2013, the Open Working Group heard the introduction by the Secretariat of the initial input of the Secretary-General to the Open Working Group (A/67/634) and conducted a general discussion and an interactive discussion on the sustainable development goals. 11. In its second to fourth sessions, the Open Working Group, through keynote addresses, introductions of issues notes by the United Nations Technical Support Team, panel discussions and interactive exchanges of views, and national statements, considered the following subjects: (a)

Second session (17-19 April 2013):

(i)

Conceptualizing the sustainable development goals;

__________________ 1

http://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/1692OWG_methods_work_adopted_ 1403.pdf.

13-40526

- 211 -

A/67/941

(ii)

Poverty eradication.

(b)

Third session (22-24 May 2013):

(i) Food security and nutrition, sustainable agriculture, desertification, land degradation and drought; (ii)

Water and sanitation.

(c)

Fourth session (17-19 June 2013):

(i) Employment and decent work for all, social protection, youth, education and culture; (ii)

Health, population dynamics.

III. Substantive highlights of the work of the Open Working Group to date 12. The Groupâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s work has been organized into two main phases. The first phase focuses on stocktaking, collecting views of experts, Member States and other stakeholders, from its first meeting in March this year through February 2014, when members of the Group are deliberating on the main themes, including those identified in the Framework for Action of the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, and how they might be reflected in a set of sustainable development goals. In the second phase, from February through September 2014, the Group will prepare a report to the General Assembly at its sixty-eighth session, mandated by the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development and containing a strategic outlook and a proposal for sustainable development goals. 13. Work on sustainable development goals is an integral part of the ongoing discussions on the post-2015 development agenda. There is wide support for a single post-2015 United Nations development framework containing a single set of goals â&#x20AC;&#x201D; goals that are universally applicable to all countries but adaptable to different national realities and priorities. Morning meetings with major groups and stakeholders 14. Beginning with the third session, the Co-Chairs instituted the practice of daily, hour-long morning meetings with representatives of major groups and other stakeholders, prior to the start of the official business of the Open Working Group. The meetings provided a platform for major groups and stakeholders to express their views and share their experiences. Members of the Group were encouraged to attend the morning meetings. The messages of the major groups were channelled into the discussions of the Member States. 15. The Co-Chairs invited the participants to consider the means of implementation as a cross-cutting issue throughout the deliberations, as those were needed to realize the various proposals being advanced. In turn, Major Group and civil society participants proposed options such as the reallocation of fossil fuel subsidies and military expenditure, tackling tax evasion and tax havens, and creation of international transaction and green taxes.

13-40526

- 212 -

A/67/941

Conceptualizing the sustainable development goals 16. It is widely agreed that the Groupâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s proposal on sustainable development goals should be accompanied by a vision and narrative that frames and motivates the selection of the proposed goals. A narrative is emerging which centres on the transformative change needed to realize our shared vision of poverty eradication and universal human development in the context of sustainable development, respecting human dignity, protecting our planet, and living in harmony with nature for the well-being and happiness of present and future generations. 17. Many reiterated the principles that should inform the proposal on sustainable development goals, notably all the Rio Principles, in accordance with paragraph 246 of â&#x20AC;&#x153;The future we wantâ&#x20AC;? (resolution 66/288, annex). 18. It is recognized that the sustainable development goals should reinforce and build upon existing international commitments in the economic, social and environmental fields. 19. Poverty eradication remains the overarching objective of the international community and needs to be central to a proposal on sustainable development goals and the post-2015 United Nations development agenda. 20. There is widespread recognition that poverty eradication can only be made irreversible if the sustainable development goals advance sustainable development in a holistic manner, that is, if they address and incorporate in a balanced manner all three dimensions of sustainable development and their interlinkages. 21. That is because dynamic and resilient economies and a healthy and resilient environment underpin poverty eradication as well as sustained and sustainable social and economic progress. 22. Thus, the advancement and completion of the most off-track Millennium Development Goals is the starting point, the sine qua non, of the sustainable development goals. But the latter will need to be more comprehensive, balanced, ambitious and transformative, also addressing the challenges ahead. 23. The need for a few aspirational goals that are easy to communicate was emphasized. Therefore global priorities will need to emerge from a common agreement on where national commitments and international cooperation are most critical to bring about greater positive impact and secure our common future. 24. There was general recognition that, while the balance of the three dimensions could be achieved in many ways, the goals and associated targets and indicators should, in the aggregate, represent a pathway to sustainable development and the future we want. The targets need to be differentiated for countries, taking into account the different levels of development. 25. Many felt that the sustainable development goals and associated targets should focus not merely on desirable outcomes but also on key drivers of sustainable development. There were frequent references to the cross-cutting nature of many of the issues under discussion, and the importance of achieving synergies wherever possible by systematically addressing their interlinkages. 26. There are several enablers and drivers, strategies and approaches for sustainable development that may be difficult to enumerate as goals, among others human rights, rights-based approaches, governance, rule of law and wider

13-40526

- 213 -

A/67/941

participation in decision-making. The interdependence and interrelated nature of the goals should be captured in the narrative. 27. The sustainable development challenges the international community faces are not amenable to solution unless all countries, developed and developing alike, cooperate and commit to action. 28. The prospects for permanent eradication of poverty and sustainable human development depend critically on the state of our planet. It is imperative, therefore, that sustainable consumption and production patterns take hold in all countries, with the developed countries taking the lead. 29. A substantially strengthened global partnership will be critical to advancing sustainable development. Some of the direst problems we face do not lend themselves to solely national or local solutions. 30. Progress on sustainable development goals will require resources and concerted actions, and for this reason many stressed that a proposal on sustainable development goals would need to include provision for means of implementation such as financing, technology and capacity-building. 31. Governments, acting in concert, will need to lead, but a truly effective global partnership will have to enlist as active partners all of society, including the business sector, which is the main driver of global economic growth and job creation, and also a major source of the technologies needed to address global problems. 32. On partnerships, it was noted that targeted multi-stakeholder partnerships have met with some success in mobilizing international efforts and resources behind specific Millennium Development Goals, and that similar goal-oriented partnerships could be effective in progressing towards the sustainable development goals. 33. To ensure that progress is measurable and measured, it will be important to have quantified targets and to ensure that countries have the necessary data collection and statistical capacities to support robust indicators of progress. Poverty eradication 34.

Eradicating extreme poverty in a generation is an ambitious but feasible goal.

35. The progress in reducing poverty over the past generation has been impressive in some regions. However, more rapid and sustained progress is needed, particularly in South Asia and sub-Saharan Africa. 36. Income poverty remains the principal target, but poverty is multidimensional and other dimensions need to be addressed in the sustainable development goals, as they were to a degree in the Millennium Development Goals. That includes universal access to adequate and nutritious food as well as to basic services like water and sanitation, primary health care and education, and modern energy services. 37. Setting universal coverage targets with respect to those essentials of human well-being would ipso facto address inequalities, as meeting the targets would require that even the poorest and most vulnerable be covered. 38. Still, to measure progress, it would be important to collect disaggregated data, to ensure that no income group or other social group is left behind.

13-40526

- 214 -

A/67/941

39. In that way, poverty eradication would be addressed not only as a stand-alone goal but also as a cross-cutting objective in other goals. 40. The poor suffer not only from lack of access to basic services but also very often from the poor quality of the services provided. That applies with particular force to education and health care. Thus, both access and quality of services available to the poor need to be addressed going forward. 41. With respect to provision of universal access, many stressed the importance of strengthening institutional capacities at all levels to deliver better targeted and higher quality services. That was frequently formulated in terms of the need to address weaknesses in governance. Food security and nutrition, sustainable agriculture, desertification, land degradation and drought 42. The fundamental right of everyone to be free from hunger was stressed. In this regard, it is critically important to secure access for all to safe, sufficient and nutritious food. Affordability of food is a crucial concern for the poor. 43. An end to hunger and malnutrition is achievable in a generation or less, and it was broadly agreed we should work towards that goal. 44. Adequate nutrition during the critical 1,000 days from the beginning of pregnancy through a childâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s second birthday merits a particular focus. 45. Beyond adequate calorie intake, proper nutrition has other dimensions that deserve attention, including micronutrient availability and healthy diets. Unhealthy diets and lifestyles are closely linked to the growing incidence of non-communicable diseases in both developed and developing countries. 46. Globally, poverty remains most widespread in rural areas, and many smallscale farmers as well as landless agricultural labourers and their households are numbered among the poor and the hungry. 47. Thus, a lasting solution to the scourges of poverty and hunger must include raising smallholder productivity and rural incomes on a sustainable basis. 48. That will require greater investments in agricultural research and rural infrastructure, as well as measures to provide more secure access to land, credit, crop insurance and other productive inputs to smallholder farmers, especially women farmers. 49. Access of small farmers to national, regional and international markets is also critical, including through removal of trade barriers and market-distorting subsidies. 50. Healthy, productive and sustainable fisheries are critical for food security as well as livelihoods in many countries; likewise, sustainable livestock-raising to augment farm incomes and productivity. 51. Agricultural value chains need strengthening in many developing countries, including post-harvest processing, storage and transport to markets. Losses at these stages significantly reduce food availability and raise costs. 52. Food wastage at the retail and consumer end of the value chain is also a major problem that hampers the capacity of the food system to meet demands from growing populations and changing diets.

13-40526

- 215 -

A/67/941

53. Sustainable agricultural practices will need to play an increasingly important role in meeting growing food demand going forward. Sustainable farming systems must make more efficient use of all scarce resources and inflict far less damage on the environment than currently pervasive input-intensive systems. 54. There are many elements of traditional farmer knowledge that, enriched by the latest scientific knowledge, can support productive food systems through sound and sustainable soil, land, water, nutrient and pest management, and the more extensive use of organic fertilizers. 55. Halting and reversing land degradation will be critical to meeting future food needs. The United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development called for achieving a land-degradation-neutral world in the context of sustainable development. 56. Some question whether the objective is sufficiently ambitious, given the current extent of land degradation globally and the potential benefits from land restoration not only for food security but also for mitigating climate change. There is also a recognition that scientific understanding of the drivers of desertification, land degradation and drought is still evolving. Water and sanitation 57. Water is at the core of sustainable development. Water and sanitation are central to the achievement of many development goals, including agriculture, health and education. 58. While the world has met the target of halving the proportion of people without access to safe drinking water five years ahead of schedule, the task of providing universal, reliable access remains far from complete. 59. Moreover, extending improved sanitation facilities in rural areas and poor urban communities remains a major challenge, with insufficient progress realized to date towards the Millennium Development Goal 7 target. 60. There is also a strong case for continuing to link sanitation with safe drinking water, as the two are intimately linked health determinants. 61. Scientific evidence shows the global character of hydrological processes and the strong interdependencies among different water functions and uses. Hence the value of an integrated approach to water resources management spanning multiple levels. The importance of transboundary cooperation in water management was underscored. 62. Water scarcity and water variability are becoming more serious concerns with climate change, and therefore sustainable water management needs to feature prominently in the post-2015 development agenda. 63. Beyond ensuring essential requirements for healthy living, water use needs to become far more efficient almost everywhere, especially in agriculture and industry. 64. Technologies, infrastructure improvements and incentives are needed for reducing water losses, wastage and pollution in order to free up supplies for productive uses. 65. As technologies are needed to use water efficiently, reduce water pollution and treat polluted waters, any targets in this regard should be considered in relation to technology availability and costs.

13-40526

- 216 -

A/67/941

66. Sustainable management of ecosystems for enhanced water regulation, water quality and water availability needs to be reinforced. Experience shows that investing in protection of critical watersheds, for example, can have high returns, but the services provided by such ecosystems are consistently underappreciated and undervalued. 67. There was broad support for a dedicated water sustainable development goal, as the complex interrelations among various water-related concerns call for an integrated approach that would be better catalysed by a single water sustainable development goal. 68. Targets could cover various aspects, including possibly: equitable, universal and sustained access to safe water, sanitation and hygiene; sustainable development, management and use of surface and groundwater resources respecting ecosystem requirements; reduction of water pollution and collection and treatment of used water and wastewater; reduction of exposure and impacts from floods, droughts and other water-related disasters; and enhanced water cooperation and improved water governance. Employment and decent work for all, social protection, youth, education and culture 69. Creation of enough productive jobs to employ all those seeking work at decent pay: this is a major challenge facing all countries, developed and developing alike. 70. In low-income countries, while unemployment as such is also a pressing issue, of more immediate concern is the dominance of low-productivity employment, mostly in the informal sector, which provides insufficient household income to escape poverty. 71. Building dynamic, resilient, sustainable and diversified economies is critical to addressing the employment challenge in developing countries. Africa, for example, has the possibility, given its large “youth bulge”, of reaping a sizeable demographic dividend, but only if economies are able to generate enough decent jobs through structural transformation, including industrialization. 72. As private companies create the lion’s share of decent jobs, a policy environment conducive to private investment and entrepreneurship is critical. 73. Tackling youth unemployment is a global priority. Stronger systems to facilitate the school-to-work transition are vital, including for skills development linked to labour market needs. 74. A variety of proposals have been made on employment and decent work, including as a stand-alone goal and as a target(s) associated with a higher-order goal like “eradicate poverty” or “create jobs, sustainable livelihoods and equitable growth” (goal 8 of the annex to the report of the High-level Panel of Eminent Persons on the Post-2015 Development Agenda (A/67/890)). 75. Social protection programmes are important anti-poverty measures that also help to build social cohesion. Protecting children from extreme deprivation is a valuable long-term investment in individual and societal well-being.

13-40526

- 217 -

A/67/941

76. Access to basic health services, income support, school and other supplemental nutrition — these are all elements of a social protection floor. Thus, some elements of a social protection floor may be addressed through food security and health goals. 77. Unemployment insurance and old-age pensions are also important elements of social protection, common in developed countries but spreading more widely. 78. Evidence suggests that a basic, country-specific social protection floor is affordable and feasible even in low-income countries. 79. Education is absolutely central to any sustainable development agenda. It is not only an essential investment but an important basis for human enrichment through lifelong learning. 80. The post-2015 development agenda must achieve the Millennium Development Goal of primary education for all. However, it should also aim to address quality as reflected in learning outcomes, which will need to be more widely and effectively measured. 81. Gender equality in education is an important objective in its own right, with multiple social, economic and environmental benefits. 82. Moreover, to ensure productive employment in increasingly knowledge-based economies, greater emphasis is needed on secondary school and even tertiary attainment, and some countries may choose to set relevant targets. 83. Even if the emphasis is put on educating young people, continued attention is needed in many countries to raising adult literacy and, in all countries, to lifelong learning to facilitate adjustment to changing labour market conditions. 84. Culture and cultural diversity are widely understood to be important to societies’ creativity, cohesion and resilience, but it is not clear that culture per se is “goalable”. Health, population dynamics 85. Health is a right and a goal in its own right, as well as a means of measuring success across the whole sustainable development agenda. 86. There was a fairly broadly shared sentiment that, while the health priorities captured in the health-related Millennium Development Goals continue to require focus, that could be achieved by integrating them as targets along with other health targets under a single, overarching health goal. 87. One proposed variant of a health goal is: maximize health at all stages of life, and another is: maximize healthy life expectancy. Any such goal would also need to address the quality of life of those with disabilities. 88. Another proposed health goal focuses on access to services more than outcomes: universal health coverage, which encompasses equitable access to quality basic health services; health promotion, prevention and treatment, and financial risk protection from illness and disability. 89. Achieving an outcome like “maximizing healthy lives” would require not only universal health coverage but that a range of social and environmental determinants of health are addressed — from poverty and malnutrition to pollution.

13-40526

- 218 -

A/67/941

90. The diseases that primarily afflict the poor must remain a central focus of post-2015 global health efforts, and that needs to be reflected in the health targets. 91. Sustained progress is needed on vaccination against common childhood diseases as well as on prevention and treatment of communicable diseases like gastrointestinal disorders, malaria, HIV/AIDS and tuberculosis. There was a call for realizing the vision of a generation free from HIV/AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis. 92. At the same time, reducing the burden of non-communicable diseases has become a high priority in many countries, highlighting the need, inter alia, to promote healthy diets and lifestyles. 93. Health is an area where the costs of realizing the same outcome, say in terms of life expectancy or disability-adjusted life years, can vary enormously. Therefore, Governments will need to look at cost-effective approaches, especially where an ageing population is expected to strain health-care systems. 94. The importance was highlighted of respecting and promoting sexual and reproductive health, and protecting and fulfilling reproductive rights in accordance with the Programme of Action of the International Conference on Population and Development, the Beijing Platform for Action and the outcome documents of their review conferences. Also stressed was the need to end violence against women and girls, including sexual violence and abuse. 95. Any set of sustainable development goals and related targets must be cognizant of population dynamics, as those will condition their feasibility. Eradicating poverty, for example, becomes all the more challenging in the context of high fertility rates and rapid population growth. Providing adequate health care for all becomes more challenging in the face of rapid population ageing. 96. Population dynamics also have important implications for economy and the environment. The rate of increase of the labour force relative to the young and old has implications for potential gross domestic product (GDP) growth. Population increase and rapid growth of urban middle classes both have implications for resource use, consumption and production patterns, and environmental pressures. 97. Migration is an aspect of population dynamics that brings important social and economic benefits — through new skills and expanded labour supply in destination countries, remittance flows to sending ones, and return of migrants with increased investment potential to their countries of origin — as well as challenges, including the loss of skilled labour by sending countries and social and cultural integration of migrants in destination countries. Respect for migrants’ human rights is a basic touchstone.

IV. Side events at the third and fourth sessions of the Open Working Group Open Working Group (third session) 98. A total of four side events were organized during the third session of the Open Working Group. The German Ministry for the Environment organized a side event entitled “Environment as part of an overarching agenda: the case of water resources, food security and land degradation”, which examined the environmental dimension

13-40526

- 219 -

A/67/941

of sustainable development while focusing on the interlinkages among thematic areas. The United Nations Development Programme and the Millennium Campaign held a side event on “My world: a snapshot of citizens’ priorities for the new development agenda: a focus on access to clean water and sanitation and affordable and nutritious food”. The Permanent Mission of Brazil and the secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity organized a side event on “Water and biodiversity” on the occasion of the International Day for Biological Diversity. The World Food Programme (WFP) held a side event entitled “Nutrition in the post-2015 context”, featuring a presentation jointly prepared by the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) and WFP. Open Working Group (fourth session) 99. A total of 14 side events were organized during the fourth session of the Open Working Group. Those included presentations of the report of the Secretary-General’s High-level Panel of Eminent Persons on the Post-2015 Development Agenda, as well as the report of the Sustainable Development Solutions Network. The former featured Amina Mohammed, Special Adviser of the Secretary-General on Post-2015 Development Planning, and Homi Kharas, Lead Author and Executive Secretary of the Panel secretariat. Jeffrey D. Sachs, Director of the Sustainable Development Solutions Network, and Guido Schmidt-Traub, Executive Director, presented the Network’s report, entitled An Action Agenda for Sustainable Development. 100. Three side events addressed issues related to youth, one organized by the Commonwealth Secretariat’s Youth Programme and the United Nations Major Group of Children and Youth, entitled “Indicators and benchmarks for children and youth within a potential SDG framework”, and another on “Youth and adolescents in the post-2015 agenda: priorities, challenges and opportunities”, organized by the United Nations Population Fund. In addition, the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland held a side event on “Youth unemployment: going beyond just those not in employment, education and training towards quality jobs”. 101. Addressing the conceptual framing of the sustainable development goals, the Governments of Colombia and Guatemala held a side event to discuss “The Dashboard Proposal — how to arrive at a post-2015 agenda that is universal and responsive to national circumstances”. For its part, the European Union held a side event entitled “Post-2015: global action for an inclusive and sustainable future”. The International Labour Organization held a side event on “Connecting environment, economy and society through decent work”, showcasing concrete experiences and recommendations for decent work policies. On water, the Steering Committee of the Friends of Water (Finland, Hungary, Tajikistan and Thailand, together with Switzerland) organized “The road to a global goal on water”, which included a presentation of the Swiss proposal on “a water-secure world” as a stand-alone goal. 102. The World Health Organization (WHO), the UN Foundation and Sustainable Energy for All organized a side event on “The health nexus — sustainable cities, transport and energy delivering healthy people”. The Permanent Missions of Mexico, Norway and Uruguay, together with Plan International, Save the Children, World Vision and the Management Sciences for Health and Beyond 2015, held a side event on “Ending extreme poverty: getting ambitious on health and education

13-40526

- 220 -

A/67/941

for children”, highlighting ways to make progress towards universal health coverage. Also on health, the Permanent Missions of Sweden and Botswana, WHO and UNICEF, with the support of other partners, organized a side event on “Health in the sustainable development agenda: reflections on the Open Working Group, the Global Thematic Consultation on Health and the High-level Panel Report”. 103. The Government of Bangladesh and the International Organization for Migration organized an event on “Migration in the post-2015 development agenda”, during which diverse stakeholders shared their views and discussed the significance and impact of migration in the context of the post-2015 development framework. Addressing transdisciplinary research and resilient governance, the Governments of Japan and Australia organized a side event entitled “SDGs as a driver for transdisciplinary research and education — a view from the Nature article authors”.

V. The way forward 104. At the midpoint of its stocktaking exercise, the Open Working Group has already explored a great deal of relevant information. Valuable inputs to the Group’s deliberations have been made, inter alia, by the reports of the Secretary-General’s High-level Panel of Eminent Persons on the Post-2015 Development Agenda and the Sustainable Development Solutions Network. 105. A range of crucial topics will be considered in the forthcoming sessions, including sustained and inclusive economic growth, means of implementation, sustainable consumption and production, climate change and disaster risk reduction, and oceans. The continuation of the encouraging experience to date of open and interactive exchange of ideas and concrete proposals would further enhance the Group’s deliberations. In the same vein, the Group could continue to take up the challenge of considering, hand in hand with proposals on goals or targets, the need to prioritize and consider associated means and resources. As the discussions advance, there is also a need to keep in mind the broader framing or narrative, in addition to the consideration of goals and targets. 106. Going forward, the Open Working Group can build on the convergence of ideas around the need to balance the economic, social and environmental dimensions of sustainable development. This endeavour is guided by the unquestioned imperative of poverty eradication, while also integrating more comprehensively economic growth and environmental sustainability in order to make poverty eradication and human development irreversible.

13-40526

- 221 -

▒ 참고자료

고위급정치포럼(HLPF) 관련 주요 문서

- 223 -

Intergovernmental High-level Political Forum on Sustainable Development. Introduction One critical outcome of the Rio+20 Conference was the decision to establish a universal intergovernmental high-level political forum on sustainable development. As a result of a process of informal consultations co-facilitated by the Permanent Representatives of Brazil and Italy the General Assembly adopted resolution 67/290 which which defined the "Format and organizational aspects of the high-level political forum on sustainable development." The high-level political forum, consistent with its intergovernmental universal character, will: x x x x

provide political leadership, guidance and recommendations for sustainable development, follow-up and review progress in the implementation of sustainable development commitments, enhance the integration of the three dimensions of sustainable development, and have a focused, dynamic and action-oriented agenda, ensuring the appropriate consideration of new and emerging sustainable development challenges.

The meetings of the forum will be convened: x x

every four years under the auspices of the General Assembly at the level of Heads of State and Government -- for two days at the beginning of the General Assembly session every year under the auspices of ECOSOC -- for eight days, including a three-day ministerial segment to be held in the framework of the substantive session of the Council, building on and subsequently replacing the annual ministerial review as from 2016

Both meetings will adopt a negotiated declaration. The forum, under the auspices of ECOSOC, will conduct regular reviews, starting in 2016, on the follow-up and implementation of sustainable development commitments and objectives, including those related to the means of implementation, within the context of the post-2015 development agenda. The first meeting of the forum under the auspices of the General Assembly will be convened by the President of the General Assembly at the beginning of the 68th session for one day. It will have an inaugural character. The outcome of the meeting will consist of a President's Summary.

- 225 -

PRESS RELEASE

High level Political Forum Brings Poverty and Sustainability Issues Together at Inaugural Session

New York, 26 September—The initial session of the United Nations High level Political Forum on Sustainable Development “augurs well for the future,” according to General Assembly President John Ashe, in his summation of the proceedings at the close of the meeting, held on 24 September. "Today, we confirmed that we are ready to implement the vision of Rio+20, putting poverty eradication and sustainable development at the core of the post 2015 development agenda,” the President said. “We committed to a Forum that ensures sustainability is factored into global and national decision making and development activities. Leaders from around the world agreed to put serious energy and resources toward making our vision for this Forum a reality." Presidents and prime ministers, along with other high ranking officials, participated in the Forum’s first session, representing a follow up of the commitment made at Rio+20 to continue to press for action on sustainable development at the highest levels. At Rio+20 – the UN Conference on Sustainable Development, held in Brazil in June 2012 in its outcome document “The Future We Want,” Member States called for the creation of the High level Political Forum to ensure that sustainable development tops the agenda of the highest levels of government and is embraced by all actors. “I am pleased to see such high level representation here today,” UN Secretary General Ban Ki moon said. “Your forum is a key platform for examining today's challenges in a holistic and integrated manner.” “This is a new forum, but we are not starting anew,” he added. “We have more than 20 years of work on sustainable development behind us. The Forum can build on what has been learned through its parent bodies, in particular the Commission on Sustainable Development. At the same time, it will take us in new directions, guide the UN system and hold it accountable. By establishing the forum, Rio+20 imagined new ways of pursuing our common agenda. We must be bold as we lay the ground for the Forum’s next sessions. Let us make the best use of its collected expertise, wisdom and influence. Let us make a real difference in the well being of current and future generations.” “We’re off to a good start,” said UN Under Secretary General Wu Hongbo. He said that the forum must be at the forefront of analysis and policy thinking on sustainable development. “Rio+20 wisely calls on the HLPF to strengthen the science policy interface; a global sustainable development report will help serve this important purpose."

- 227 -

Brazilian President Dilma Roussef, who presided over the Forum as the President of Rio+20, said that States had taken a decisive step towards consolidating the Rio sustainable development agenda, having agreed that eradicating poverty was the biggest global challenge. “The task now is to realize their commitments. The Forum should provide a platform for leadership, recommendations and monitoring to ensure the integration of sustainable development’s economic, social and environmental pillars.” She added, “We must live up to the expectations of our peoples.” “Rio+20 created momentum,” World Bank President Jim Yong Kim told the Forum. “We have the opportunity to take it to the next level.” But he warned that environmental degradation could reverse the gains made over the last 20 years that have lifted 660 million people out of poverty. He said that environmental degradation was already costing some countries eight per cent of their gross domestic product, and that “green, inclusive growth was both necessary and affordable.” “We are here today for one reason and one reason only—” said Christine Lagarde, Managing Director of the International Monetary Fund, “—to agree on the actions we must take as a global community to support global sustainable development. “We need 21st century policies for a 21st century global economy, which means thinking more creatively, more cohesively, and more collaboratively than in the past. Why? Because our planet faces a triple challenge: from economic instability, from environmental damage, and from insufficient equity. We cannot view these in isolation. Each feeds on and magnifies the other.” In his concluding remarks, General Assembly President Ashe said that the task ahead is "daunting and governments cannot do it alone," suggesting that development actors must join forces to find new ways to partner and combine resources and creative energies for the common good. "Genuine partnerships and mutual accountability are necessary as we move toward a post 2015 development agenda,” he added. “The Forum can act as a catalyst for effective partnerships and a place for international action for development cooperation." Ashe called the decision of Rio+20 to establish a high level political forum "a powerful step in mainstreaming sustainable development in the post 2015 agenda." He said the forum will be "a home for the international community to address and coordinate the entirety of sustainable development issues. As guardian of sustainability, it can provide a platform for leaders to reflect on today’s priorities, not in isolation but holistically." The report of the Forum’s first session will be followed up next year during the ECOSOC ministerial session. The Forum will next meet under the auspices of the General Assembly in four years. More information on the Forum can be found at http://bit.ly/126ZanH MEDIA CONTACT Dan Shepard, UN Department of Public Information, 1 212 963 9495, shepard@un.org Issued by the UN Department of Public Information

- 228 -

PRESS RELEASE

High level Political Forum Brings Poverty and Sustainability Issues Together at Inaugural Session

- 229 -

- 230 -

▒ 참고자료

지속가능한개발 재원에 관한 전문가위원회(IGCE-SDF) 관련 주요 문서

- 231 -

Co-Chairs’ Summary of the First Session of the Intergovernmental Committee of Experts on Sustainable Development Financing New York, 28-30 August 2013 The Intergovernmental Committee of Experts on Sustainable Development Financing was established by the General Assembly on 21 June 2013 in follow-up to the outcome of the UN Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20) with a mandate to prepare “a report proposing options on an effective sustainable development financing strategy to facilitate the mobilization of resources and their effective use in achieving sustainable development objectives.” A common view is that the wide range of expertise among its members is a strength of the Committee, which should greatly benefit the final report. The Committee held its first session from 28 to 30 August 2013. During its highly interactive meetings, the Committee took a range of important decisions, as follows: 1. Agenda: The Committee adopted the provisional agenda for the whole duration of its work, as contained in document A/AC.282/2013/1. The following items are included as part of its agenda: Ͳ Election of presiding officers (completed during the first session); Ͳ Adoption of the agenda and other organisational matters (completed during the first session); Ͳ Preparation of the report proposing options on an effective sustainable development strategy to facilitate the mobilisation of resources and their effective use in achieving sustainable development objectives; Ͳ Other matters; Ͳ Adoption of the report. The Committee took note of the proposed programme of work for its subsequent sessions, as contained in the annex to document A/AC.282/2013/1, on the understanding that the programme could be revised for each session of the Committee, taking into account the progress made in the Committee’s work. 2. Modalities of work: The Committee approved its modalities of work, as distributed during the session. 3. Calendar of meetings: The dates of the future sessions of the Committee were set as follows, reflecting co-chairs’ decision for the December session: Second Session: 2-6 December 2013 Third Session: 3-7 March 2014 Fourth Session: 12-16 May 2014 Fifth Session: 4-8 August 2014 4. Clusters: The Committee agreed to organise its work in three thematic clusters, facilitated by Committee members, tentatively titled as follows (subject to amendments): Ͳ Cluster 1: Assessing financing needs, mapping of current flows and emerging trends, and the impact of domestic and international environments. Facilitators: Mr. Reginald Darius (Saint Lucia), Ms. Liz Ditchburn (UK); Ͳ Cluster 2: Mobilisation of resources and their effective use. Facilitators: Mr. Nathan Dal Bon (Australia), Mr. Francisco Gaetani (Brazil), Mr. Zou Ji (China), Mr. Norbert Kloppenburg (Germany), Mr. Joseph Enyimu (Uganda); ϭ

- 233 -

Í˛

Cluster 3: Institutional arrangements, policy coherence, synergies and governance issues. Facilitators: Mr. AndrĂŠ Lohayo Djamba (Democratic Republic of the Congo), Mr. Tonis Saar (Estonia), Mr. Amjad Mahmood (Pakistan).

It was further agreed that intersessional work on cluster 1 would start immediately, as well as consultations on cluster 2.

5. Terms of Reference. As requested by the Committee, the Co-chairs prepared terms of references for the facilitators of each cluster based on the principles of inclusiveness and transparency and taking into account limited support capacity available to some of the Committee members. 6. Communication and Consultation Activities. The Committee members agreed to consult with stakeholders broadly on their work. Four types of activities were proposed: (i) multistakeholder consultations in the form of written contributions and dialogues; (ii) dedicated periods reserved for interaction with Member States and other relevant stakeholders during each Committee session; (iii) interventions by outside experts (e.g., academics, think tanks, regional development banks and representatives from the private sector and institutional investors) at Committee meetings; and (iv) regional meetings organised by UN regional commissions, in collaboration with regional development banks or other actors and with participation of interested Committee members. On this basis, it was decided that the Co-Chairs will share a document outlining communication and consultation activities with Committee members, with the understanding that this is a living document that can be reverted to in the December session.

ĎŽ

- 234 -