Joint Post-2015-FfD session, Debate on Zero Draft for Addis, Next Steps

With the Third International Conference on Financing for Development (FfD) in Addis Ababa just three months away, in April there was an intense focus on financing and means of implementation (MOI) issues. The week of April 13-17 included an initial discussion on the zero draft of the outcome document, the Addis Ababa Accord and Action Agenda, and was followed by the World Bank-IMF Spring meetings in Washington over the weekend. From April 21-24, a joint session led by both pairs of co-facilitators on the FfD outcome (Guyana and Norway permanent representatives, Ambassadors George Talbot and Geir Pedersen) and the post-2015 development agenda (Ireland and Kenya permanent representatives, Ambassadors David Donoghue and Macharia Kamau) sought to bring clarity to the relationship between the two processes and how those outcomes should relate to one another.

At the end of the week, Co-Facilitator and Ambassador Talbot of Guyana described the relationship between the two as: “The OWG outcome is the floor, and Addis needs to go beyond it.” The FfD co-facilitators announced additional drafting sessions in May, so that the Addis agreement could be finalized by mid-June. Many agreed that in order for Addis to attract the high-level attention that it will need to be a success, it will be important to reach agreement well ahead of the July 13-16 conference.

 

FfD Drafting Session

At the second drafting session of the Addis outcome document, April 13-17, member states had an initial opportunity to comment on the zero draft released by the Guyanan and Norwegian co-facilitators in March. Several procedural issues were raised over how the negotiations should work; some preferred a commentary on the overall draft, to be followed by a revised draft, while some G77 countries requested a line by line negotiation with text on a screen to capture all comments; this seemed to reflect a desire by some countries to have more control over the drafting process as it gets closer to July.  As a compromise, the co-facilitators will share a compilation of comments heard on the zero draft before the next session, in addition to a revised draft, expected in early May.

On substantive issues, tensions arose over how to balance the universal nature of the agenda (“a shared global responsibility”) with the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities (“CBDR”), the idea from environmental law that some countries have a greater responsibility due to historical imbalances; at issue is how to include the concept of national differentiation or differential responsibilities in a universal post-2015 sustainable development agenda. This debate was also reflected in conversations about ODA vs domestic resource mobilization, as some developing countries believed that too much emphasis was being put on the role of the state as opposed to the role of the international system. Others called for a stronger emphasis on domestic enabling environments.

Another sticking point was systemic issues, such as reform of international financial institutions.  While developing countries consistently called for greater representation in the global economic system, the European Union, for example, said that this section would have to be balanced with additional language on domestic enabling environments. These tensions between global vs national responsibility, and universal vs differentiated responsibly continued to play out throughout the week. The co-chairs reminded delegates that is it not an “either-or” question but a matter of both – all have a role to play. With the ambition that we’re aiming for, it is becoming clear that all actors will have to contribute and play a role, including those beyond government.

 

Joint FfD and Post-2015 Means of Implementation discussion

Ahead of the joint post-2015 and FfD negotiating session, Ambassador Kamau of Kenya outlined five things that member states must deliver together by the end of this process:

1. A new policy environment for sustainable development;
2. New institutions and agreements to deliver the SDGs;
3. Financing for underfunded areas, including climate change, biodiversity, inequality, agriculture, and the social floor;
4. New actors brought into a renewed global partnership; and
5. A follow-up and review process.

The joint session included a discussion with the international financial institutions (IFI’s), a debate on a possible technology facilitation mechanism, and a discussion of critical process questions such as coherence between the FfD and post-2015 outcome documents and whether or not there should be joint or separate follow-up of the two processes. Many developed countries believe that the Addis FfD outcome should form the means of implementation (MOI) for the post-2015 agenda, elaborating the policy framework needed to implement the SDGs (including the OWG’s Goal 17 on MOI, as well as the MOI targets that are weaved throughout the report). Some argue that any further negotiation on MOI after Addis would diminish the significance and ambition of Addis. Other governments, including several developing countries, emphasize that Addis is a distinct and complementary process and do not want Addis to be the last word on MOI; they would like the opportunity to close any gaps that the Addis outcome may not address. The co-chairs have said that FfD must make the link between the MOI targets (including Goal 17) and financing for sustainable development, but recognize that it may not be possible to comprehensively address every single MOI target in the FfD outcome document.

Another point of contention was whether or how to move forward on the proposal for a Technology Facilitation Mechanism. While developing countries saw technology transfer as a key means to achieving sustainable development, many developed countries questioned the added value of creating a new UN mechanism, versus building on existing initiatives. Many also raised concerns about intellectual property rights and existing WTO and other mandates. Some ideas that emerged included: a global forum on technology; a global technology partnership (or multiple partnerships) focused on the needs of different countries around different goals; and the Secretary-General’s proposal for an online global platform that would map existing technology facilitation mechanisms, needs, and gaps, to better share information. Several member states said they looked forward to the outcome of the Secretary-General’s High-Level Panel on a Technology Bank for Least Developed Countries (LDCs), which was appointed last year. Though these discussions did not reach a conclusion, the co-facilitators will include time for this issue during the next FfD session in May.

While many issues remain unresolved, Ambassador Donoghue of Ireland did outline a few areas of convergence at the end of the week:

• The Addis outcome should match the ambition and universal nature of SDGs
• Political will is needed to ensure the big policy and institutional changes necessary for achieving sustainable development
• The zero draft is a good starting point reflecting a number of advances beyond Monterrey
• The two processes are distinct but mutually reinforcing, so the focus should be on complementarity. If SDGs are the “what,” then Addis must answer the ‘how” question.
• Addis should agree on commitments and deliverables, which will supplement and complement the MOI commitments already included in the SDGs.

 

Next Steps

All agreed on the importance of finalizing the FfD outcome ahead of the July conference in Addis. Because there is still significant work to be done, the co-facilitators have added additional negotiating time: May 11-15, May 26-29, and June 1-5, in addition to the June 15-19 dates that were already scheduled. With these additional sessions, the co-facilitators hope to have the Addis outcome finalized by June 19.

The May session of the post-2015 negotiations will include a discussion of follow up and review, as well as a briefing by the UN Statistical Commission on the status of indicators. The co-facilitators may also revisit the proposal for the technical tweaking of targets, as indicated in the March session.  A zero draft of the Post-2015 Summit outcome document is expected towards the end of May, with subsequent sessions focused on negotiating the outcome document.

As Ambassador Talbot said at the close of the session, this is perhaps the first time in the UN’s recent history that we have two major events that are so closely linked in both substance and time – “it brings a special challenge, but a challenge that we will all meet.” Success for FfD will help pave the way for success for the post-2015 summit in September and the COP in Paris after that.

 

Must-Reads

In this Future United Nations Development System briefing, Financing for Development Conference 2015: Views from the Global South, Manuel F. Montes presents perspectives from the global south on the state of the international financial ecosystem, emphasizing developing countries’ concern about implementing the post-2015 development agenda if an enabling financing environment is not in place.

New York University School of Law International Organizations Clinic and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) jointly published Accountability through Civic Participation in the Post-2015 Development Agenda, proposing four principles to frame the global post-2015 accountability framework: transparency, inclusiveness, deliberation and responsiveness.

IISD’s Briefing Note by Mark Halle and Robert Wolfe, “Architecture for review and follow-up of the SDGs: Options for the High-Level Political Forum” explores three possible components of a review process: an inclusive conversation at national level, a peer review at regional level, and a global assessment of progress that allows for course adjustments along the way.

ODI’s Report by Shannon Kindornay and Sarah Twigg, “Establishing a workable follow-up and review process for the SDGs,” emphasizes a review process that is inclusive of stakeholders at all levels. It also explores how to incentivize participation from both state and non-state actors, and how to balance a universal agenda with the need for country differentiation.

Prepared jointly by the African Development Bank, the Asian Development Bank, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, the European Investment Bank, the Inter-American Development Bank, the IMF, and the World Bank, From Billions to Trillions: Transforming Development Finance highlights the massive increase in financing needed to implement the Sustainable Development Goals, specifically with the help of the private sector.

On behalf of CAFOD and Beyond 2015 (the civil society advocacy umbrella group), Neva Frecheville asks What If? Mapping Scenarios to the End of 2015, identifying four possible scenarios from January to December 2015 and presenting policy options to stimulate discussion and highlight risks and opportunities.

The Economist’s blog, The pioneering continent, discusses the wave of technological innovation in Africa, including how technology is opening up new markets for Africa and how its business environment is attracting a growing number of Western companies. It notes that solutions are increasingly likely to come out of Africa thanks to this “innovation revolution”.

Amar Bhattacharya and Homi Kharas, of Brookings Institution, argue in The Economist that the Sustainable Development Goals are Worthy of Support. The Economist also published a series of letters from other global development experts, including Mark Suzman, in response to the Economist’s criticism of the SDGs in its March Issue.

 

Look Ahead

• May 4: President of the General Assembly’s High-Level Thematic Debate on Strengthening Cooperation between the UN and Sub-Regional Organizations (UN headquarters)
• May 6 – 8: World Economic Forum on Latin America (Riviera Maya, Mexico)
• May 11 – 15: Financing for Development additional session (UN headquarters)
• May 18 – 22: Post-2015 Intergovernmental Negotiations on Follow-Up and Review (UN headquarters)
• May 21 – 23: World Economic Forum on the Middle East and North Africa (Dead Sea, Jordan)
• May 26 – 29: Financing for Development additional session (UN headquarters)
• June 1- 5: Financing for Development additional session (UN headquarters)
• June 3 – 5: World Economic Forum on Africa (Cape Town, South Africa)
• June 7 – 8: G7 Summit (Bavaria, Germany)

 

1,259 total views, 1 views today