“A New Approach to Partnerships”

Partnerships between National Commissions for UNESCO and Agencies of the Wider United Nations System in Member States

Mr. Chairperson,

Distinguished delegates,

Ladies and Gentlemen

Introduction

It is an honour for me to participate today in this discussion under the theme: “A new Approach to Partnerships” concentrating my presentation on Partnerships between National Commissions for UNESCO and Agencies of the Wider UN system in Member States.

I presume I was invited to address this topic given that, as Resident Coordinator, I have responsibility for coordinating the UN system not only in Jamaica, but as well The Bahamas, the Cayman Islands and Turks and Caicos Islands. And it is a pleasure for me to do so.

The UN system in Jamaica is comprised of eight agencies based in the country namely, the UNFPA, UNEP, FAO, UNESCO, UNICEF, PAHO/WHO and the World Bank, and of course, UNDP which I have the honour to represent. Most of these UN agencies have regional responsibilities and have responsibility for The Bahamas, like I do. In addition, there are several non-resident agencies which are members of the UN country team. These are: ECLAC, ILO, ITU, UNDCP, UNIC, and UNIFEM. Already, I believe that you have a sense of how challenging it is to coordinate activities among agencies, but it is not impossible. But I want to come back to this particular point later on in my presentation.

My presentation is structured in 3 parts:

  • Firstly, a few words on what is partnership and why partnerships are critical for the UN system.
  • Secondly, no discussion of partnerships between national commissions and the UN system could take place without highlighting some of the more central aspects of the UN reform process and their impact to date; and
  • Thirdly, the importance of building and deepening partnerships between national commissions for UNESCO and the wider UN system in member countries, and
  • Finally, some closing thoughts.

What is partnership and why partnerships are important for the UN system

What is partnership?

I see partnership as an attempt to move beyond traditional boundaries or the conventional context and to establish solid relationships with a variety of actors, which will further the interests, mandates and ultimately increase the overall impact of the UN system.

It is my view that the concept of forging partnerships in the 21st century is critical to the continued existence and survival of United Nations system agencies, including UNESCO.

Why are partnerships important for the UN system?

  • As the range of choices broadens with globalization, organizations must reach out to new and emerging actors to confront the myriad issues facing them and to add value to their interventions;
  • As sources of traditional funding decline, we must look towards exploring new avenues for mobilising resources to enhance the overall impact of projects and programmes;
  • Engaging a wide range of partners broadens the scope of our interventions and contributes to a greater understanding of the multiplicity of areas in which many organizations are now being called upon to operate; and
  • The issues, with which we deal, are crosscutting and multi-sectoral. This dictates that we establish partnerships to enable us to understand the issues more clearly, and to address them from a collaborative perspective. Poverty eradication as a multi-sectoral problem springs to mind.

Highlights of UN Reform

I now turn to some highlights of UN Reform

The Secretary-General’s reform efforts were launched in July 1997. The fundamental objectives were, inter alia, to:

  • narrow the gap between aspiration and accomplishment in the UN by establishing new leadership and management structures;
  • promote a new organizational culture which would lead to greater unity of purpose, coherence of efforts, and agility in responding to the pressing needs of the international community;
  • to develop meaningful partnerships with the widest possible range of actors which could complement the UN’s efforts and increase the scope and reach of its impact

The SG had this to say on the reform efforts: “…At the end of the day, I would want to see a UN system, a United Nations and its agencies that works more as a system than anything else, a group of agencies that pool their efforts, coordinate their activities, eliminate duplication and aim at having a greater impact on society and for the Member States.”

Reform Measures

Several far-reaching reform measures were introduced. These encompassed the following:

  • establishing the post of Deputy Secretary-General to help manage Secretariat operations and raise the UN profile in leadership in the economic and social spheres;
  • encouraging the establishment of a new secretariat leadership and management structure;
  • strengthening UN capacity for post-conflict peace building by creating a focal point within the UN (Department of Political Affairs);
  • restructuring the Secretariat machinery for coordinating humanitarian assistance;
  • proposing a new system of multi-year funding for development cooperation activities to ensure greater predictability;
  • bringing together, the UN funds and programmes into a UN Development Group to facilitate and consolidated the UN presence at the country-level under the leadership of a Resident Coordinator;
  • initiating the consolidation of UN offices and programmes at the country-level into a unified “UN House.” To date there are over 40 such “UN Houses.”
  • promoting initiatives aimed at increasing UN consultation and cooperation with civil society, the business community, labour unions, NGO’s and academia;
  • the convening of a Millennium Assembly, which was held in September 2000. In this context Member States of the UN recommitted themselves, inter alia (Millennium Declaration 55/2) over the next few years, to the further strengthening of the UN in pursuing the priorities of sustainable development, the fight against poverty, violence terror and crime; and to building partnerships through cooperation between UN and national parliaments, the private sector, non-governmental organizations and civil society.

Impact of UN Reform to date

Reform has wrought gains in areas such as peacekeeping and peace-building, coordination of humanitarian action and delivery of humanitarian services, bridging the digital divide, accountability and oversight, enhancing communication, administration and management, engaging with other actors and, in improving operational performance. These include:

  • a dramatic increase in peacekeeping activities and recognition of the links between peacekeeping and peace-building in the field in areas such as Kosovo, East Timor and the DRC;
  • improved coordination of international humanitarian action which has been characterized by the implementation of innovative approaches in major emergencies in Kosovo and East Timor;
  • the adoption of a comprehensive strategy to bridge the digital divide through which connectivity capacities are being built for 15 sub-Saharan countries, and connectivity established for several countries including East Timor, Bhutan, Tuvalu and the Lao People’s Democratic Republic;
  • accountability and oversight, which have, through the Office of Internal Oversight Services, become important pillars of change particularly with regard to strengthening internal controls and improving management performance;
  • enhanced communication, which has increased the breadth and depth of communication about the UN and what it does. One such initiative has been the system-wide “UN Works” campaign that explains how the organization is addressing the main challenges of the 21st century. The use of the UN web site continues to increase and now exceeds 400 million hits per year;
  • progress in administration and management towards creating an organizational culture that is responsive and results oriented. Important developments were the drafting of a human resources reform package, and information technology policy and a capital master plan (for repair and refurbishment of the UN HQ in NY)
  • initiatives to build partnerships with other entities of the UN system, NGOs, educational institutions and the business community. These have been done through co-sponsorship of conferences, briefings, exhibits and events such as the World Television Forum and World AIDS Day. Contact with over 1600 hundred NGOs has been dramatically enhanced though the use of video conferencing and live web casting;
  • benefiting from the ideas, expertise and resources that only the private sector can provide. The private sector in turn, benefits from a stronger UN that promotes norms and standards. Other partners include philanthropic foundations and the newly created UN Fund for International Partnerships. To date, the fund has programmed funds totaling US$ 310 million in 12 countries in four specific areas namely, children’s health, women and population, environment and peace, security and human rights;
  • improving operational performance. Since 1997, the UN system has been making steady progress in improving the coherence and effectiveness of its operations, particularly at the country level. Since May 1999, several countries have participated in the UNDAF. Over 37 common country assessments of national development needs have been finalized and 55 more are being prepared. Another 19 assessments are in the planning phase.

Challenges still, however, remain. These include:

  • further improvement of the productivity of the organization;
  • simplifying and streamlining the rules and procedures of the organization;
  • improving operational performance;
  • coping with increased workloads without a compensatory increase in resources;
  • improving responses to humanitarian crises and to natural and environmental disasters;

Impact of Reform at the Country Level - Partnership at the Jamaica Country Level

I wish to turn briefly to the role of the RC. It involves:

  • coordination among UN system agencies at the country level in the context of a mechanism referred to as the United Nations Development Assistance Framework (UNDAF).

The UNDAF mechanism:

  • is an integral part of the UN’s reform efforts which are intended to lay the foundation for cooperation, at the country level, among the UN system agencies, government and other development partners through the preparation of a complementary set of programmers and projects;
  • also encourages close consultations with civil society, the private sector and the donor community (including international financial institutions).

I now wish to reflect a little on the impact of UN reform among the UNCT in Jamaica. The reform efforts have improved coordination in:

  • public information and advocacy:
  • joint draft media strategy prepared resulting in improved visibility for UN system;

-UN web page was launched in December 2000;

-support for UN Peace Day 2000 provided by UNCT;

  • Theme Groups on:

-HIV/AIDS - Integrated Plan of Action was prepared in 2000 to guide the work of the Theme Group;

-Social Capital – the aim of this Group is to promote the development and sustainability of the network of individuals, communities and institutions to rebuild social capital in Jamaica;

  • UN House and Common Premises and Services:

-the process is currently underway to establish a UN House in Jamaica by 2002;

  • follow-up to UN Global Conferences specifically Beijing +5, WSSD +5,

World Summit for Children and UNGA Special Session on HIV/AIDS.

  • promoting partnerships with:

-civil society – relations between the UN system and civil society have improved over time. In the delivery of many of the programmes delivered by the UN system, there has been collaboration with civil society groups;

-the private sector – collaboration between the private sector and the UN system has been growing in areas such youth activities (UNFPA and UNESCO support to the Area Youth Foundation);

A number of challenges remain at the country level. These are as follows:

  • financial constraints;
  • harmonization of programme and budget cycles with other agencies;
  • multi-country mandates of UN system agencies;
  • non-resident nature of some agencies which makes coordination difficult;
  • resource mobilization;
  • capacity building of NGOs in programme formulation, monitoring and delivery of much needed support to communities;
  • increased collaboration with the private sector.
  • benefit from increased collaboration between UNESCO and other UN system agencies;

Why should UNESCO be involved in promoting partnerships at the country level alongside other UN system agencies?

  • UNESCO, as I see it, is linked to the UN system by a shared commitment to the common ideals of promotion of peace and development and by the purpose for which it was established in 1945;
  • Like other agencies, UNESCO, in the achievement of its objectives, relies on continued cooperation with the UN and its agencies, as well as on the development of new partnerships with numerous constituents of civil society and the private sector;
  • The UNESCO National Commissions can serve to sensitize other agencies to a broad range of issues from the grass roots level.

What role then, do the National Commissions have in promoting partnerships?

The National Commissions are the mandatory channel between states and UNESCO at all levels and in all spheres of UNESCO activities. By the same token, they can serve as channels between UNESCO, UN system agencies and partners. They are an enriching supplement to the work of UNESCO at the national level. The importance of the National Commission is borne out in Chapter VII of the UNESCO Constitution and the Charter of National Commissions of UNESCO.

The National Commissions will undoubtedly serve as the eyes and ears of UNESCO in those countries where there is no UNESCO field office. They will have to be the UNESCO focal point alongside other UN system agencies and participate in the work of the UN country team. This should enrich the work of the country team as the National Commissions bring a uniquely national perspective to the table.

Against this background, the National Commissions are well placed to promote partnerships for the following reasons:

  • Composition – they bring together the best national competencies;
  • work at the grass roots levels – through their work they seek to influence and promote UNESCO’s best ideals, message and programmes in all component parts of the society, right down to the grass roots;
  • they can also serve to bring the concerns of the grass roots level to higher levels which could not otherwise find clear expression;
  • well placed to identify a range of problems.

I think that, the National Commissions’ role will be further enhanced if they are able to reflect changing realities and, to adapt to changes on the ground. Their composition should also reflect these realities and will enable them to have full grasp of the new and emerging issues, which may arise at any given time.

But I wish to pause here and point out a number of things. In order for national commissions to do what I have set out here effectively, a number of things must be in place. That is:

  • National commissions must have both the requisite financial and human resources to function effectively.
  • The role and mandates of National Commissions must be clarified and made clear so that as to allow for full cooperation between themselves and UNESCO field offices and so their efforts might be seen as complementary (there is enough for everyone to do) and;
  • Duplication of functions between UNESCO and those of the national commissions must be avoided.

The foregoing could only be accomplished if there is goodwill, dialogue and consultation.

It is my view that National Commissions for UNESCO are important to other UN system agencies. This is so because:

  • They provide a broad-based perspective which can enhance the agencies’ understanding of various issues and provide insights into issues which UN system agencies may not fully grasp;
  • They are unique (other agencies do not have National Commissions to play a complementary role to their activities);

.

Any restructuring of UNESCO has to give pride of place to the role of the National Commissions and can, in my view, help to streamline their work and enhance their specific focus on the areas identified in the reform process. This is all the more important in the context of UNESCO’s Decentralization Reform Strategy, which is pointing toward clustering and closure of field offices. I therefore see a heightened role for National Commissions particularly where there is no UNESCO field office presence. Furthermore, greater engagement of National Commissions with the UN system and the UNCT is essential if the mandate of UNECSO is to be fully discharged.

Of course, with increased engagement of National Commissions, perhaps in the implementation of UNESCO’s activities, will come greater responsibility. And this will require, as I have suggested before, greater capacity on the part of the National Commissions to carry out these activities and as well, increased accountability arrangements.

If we accept this, then the role of governments is crucial for providing resources to enhance the operational capacities of the National Commissions to enable them to function more effectively and also to ensure that they have the requisite leadership and expertise within the Secretariats of the National Commissions. They cannot be starved for resources.

As well, UNESCO Secretariat can contribute in helping build capacities of National commissions, sharing information, enhance cooperation among National Commissions at the subregional, regional and interregional levels to promote knowledge-sharing among them; and encourage stronger support from National Commissions for the representational role of UNESCO’s field network.

Of course, the unique situation in the English Caribbean comes to mind where a Cluster office is to be established in Kingston, to serve 13 countries. As I listened yesterday I noted that Cluster offices are to play a pro-active role in consulting with individual Member States, their National Commissions, the United Nations system and other partners. While this may be appropriate, the complex relationships that would have to be worked through in this new dispensation ought not to be underestimated.

(Using the Jamaica context as a point of reference, the Jamaica National Commission for UNESCO has been involved in a number of areas consistent with its mandate. These include, seeking to advance knowledge and understanding of people and promoting the free flow of ideas; in maintaining, increasing and disseminating knowledge. The Commission has worked closely with Government Ministries, Embassies and other international organizations. It therefore has fostered wide-ranging partnerships (and initiated activities) with various groups and sectors of the society in broad areas such as education, science and technology, culture and communication).