Research programme:
The multilateral system in the field of development
Introduction
This research programme focuses on the role of the multilateral system, its function and application in the field of development. Important points for study include the relationship between the multilateral system and new developmental trends, as well as how the various multilateral organisations operate as a system, both in establishing and in coordinating their operational activities at the country level. There is a need for strengthening the development of theory concerning organisational aspects, concerning the dynamics of negotiations processes, and with regard to how various actors take part in and influence multilateral organisations and the multilateral system. In addition, more needs to be known about how multilateral organisations function as arenas for the establishment of norms and standards, and how the multilateral system can serve as a tool for management and regulation.
Much is expected of the developmental work of multilateral organisations. The rapid global changes affecting the developmental issues demands an on-going critical evaluation of the roles and functions appropriate to the multilateral system as such, and to its various component parts. Also important is an improved understanding of how multilateral organisations can, from a systems perspective, best tackle new challenges and issues that cut across traditional areas of competence, thereby helping to strengthen coordination within these areas.
The preceding research programme on the multilateral development assistance system has already yielded valuable insights into several central aspects of the multilateral system. However, the emphasis has been on separate institutions, and this has made the collective contribution of the programme somewhat fragmented. Further work here will need to employ a more integrated systems perspective, so as to provide better insight into the overall effectiveness of the multilateral system.
Features of global development
The world that the multilateral system of the 1990s finds itself facing is a complex one: the international political system has undergone major changes, and globalisation is on the rise in many areas. International interaction has intensified greatly in recent years. In the period 1984–95, international trade as measured in relation to total GNP increased three times more rapidly than in the preceding decade. Among developing countries, however, the growth in trade is highly uneven, and the GNP share of foreign trade fell in 44 of 93 developing countries during that same period.[1] The flow of capital from North to South has changed character. In 1990 transfers development assistance totalled USD 56 billion and private resources USD 44 billion. By 1996, however, transfers of development assistance had fallen to USD 41 billion, whereas private transfers had soared to USD 244 billion. The latter, however, are highly concentrated: a full 73% of all private transfers in 1996 went to only 12 countries.[2] These development features indicate the obvious potential for integrating the developing countries into the global economy. On the other hand, for those countries who do not succeed, the consequences, through further marginalisation, could be dramatic.
The private sector has become increasingly important as a catalyst for growth and development. Experience has shown that the interplay between public and private sector can be decisive, which in turn points up the importance of developing the institutional, legal and financial frameworks for the private sector. Moreover, in countries recently integrated into the global economy, the state has played an important strategic role.
Gradually, a deeper understanding has developed concerning the importance of framework conditions for national development. One such set of conditions is provided by the necessity of establishing sustainable regimes for the management of natural resources, and of showing environmental awareness on both the national and the global levels. Another type of framework conditions concerns the international trade regime, including market access for the products of developing countries. A country’s debt situation can also be seen as a type of framework condition. Here we have witnessed a shift: from a systems crisis, where the possibility of debt default on the part of large and powerful creditor countries might have threatened the international financial system, to a debt crisis on the level of individual countries. For countries in such crisis, the debt burden can often represent a major barrier to the implementation of a strategy for national development.
Over the years, strategies for national development have changed, and the initial flood of developmental optimism has now abated somewhat. Although on the global importance of development assistance funding has been reduced, such transfers have become more and more important for some countries. Many developing countries now recognise the danger of aid-dependency, and are increasingly willing to coordinate development assistance themselves. The belief that economic growth in itself would solve the problems and challenges facing the developing countries has gradually been replaced by a ‘bottom–up’ approach, with greater emphasis on human resources and institutional capacity. On the other hand, this is not true of all developing countries. The recognition that lasting and stable socio-economic development must build on broad popular participation in socially constructive work has helped to place the struggle against poverty high on the agendas in rstrategies of development.
In recent years, dictatorships have been replaced by more democratic forms of government in some developing countries. All the same, there is in many countries still room for improvement in this area, also as regards problems like corruption and the misuse of funds and positions of power. Violations of human rights remain a threat to stable development in much of the developing world.
Moreover, the patterns of conflict are changing. Today, armed conflicts are frequently internal in origin, often caused by socio-economic inequality. Recent years have also witnessed increased involvement of the world community in specific peace processes, as in the Middle East, in former Yugoslavia and in some countries of Central America. Further challenges are represented by the streams of refugees, and the consequences of migration.
In parallel with these tendencies, a whole series of new actors have appeared on the international arena. The various sectors of civil society are more in focus. Private firms, together with institutions for export guarantees and export financing, have become more important in their own right. The same applies to the many national and international voluntary organisations.
Developmental trends in the multilateral system
Recent tendencies in global development can be summarised briefly as follows: firstly, a differentiation has taken place within the ‘group’ of developing countries; secondly, the development agenda has been expanded and has become more complex. As a result, developmental strategies may vary considerably from country to country, depending on factors such as degree of development and access to private capital; moreover, the linkage between development measures takes on an independent importance. Religion, culture and values also influence the actors’ choices of paths to development, and their behaviour on the international arena.
In the course of the last decade the UN[3] has held a series of global conferences[4] where the so-called integrated perspective on development has occupied a central position. As many have pointed out, development and nation-building are complex processes. If lasting results are to be achieved, attention must be paid to a great many factors including poverty reduction; environmentally- and women-oriented development based on popular participation; investments in the social sector and economic development and respect for human rights. All factors are heavily interrelated and thus must be seen in parallel. In political terms, it is often said that the conferences and international debate of the 1990s have contributed to widespread global agreement on common norms and priorities which, taken together, comprise an ‘integrated perspective’ on development. Seen from other angles, however, the concept still appears unclear: there is no general agreement as to what it includes, how it differs from earlier perspectives, and to what degree consensus and a shared understanding actually have been achieved. On the other hand, an integrated perspective on development will represent a challenge to the multilateral system in terms of follow-up and implementation. Specialised organisations and agencies will have to adapt to a broader concept of development, and organisations will become involved in wider co-operative relations, rather than working in isolation.
The need to view the various individual developmental factors in a broader context has certainly given rise to a whole series of organisational and operational challenges within the multilateral system. On special importance are relations between the UN system, the Bretton Woods institutions, the regional development banks and the World Trade Organisation (WTO). One pronounced structural feature noticeable for some time now has been the considerable expansion of the developmental focus of the various development banks, especially that of the World Bank, and their relevance to development policy. Some may hold that this has taken place at the expense of the role of the UN system itself. Others will say that the development banks have helped to fill a vacuum. Be this as it may, there lies a major challenge in establishing co-operative relations, at both the policy and the operational levels, that can maximise overall efficiency within the system. Co-operative relations between the WTO and the rest of the multilateral system are still in the initial stages. The increased importance that international trade has on development issues makes it crucial to ensure the establishment of such co-operative relations.
Negotiations are currently underway for major reforms within the UN system, including relations between the UN Secretariat, the various UN funds and programmes, and the UN specialised agencies. Here the Nordic countries have provided important contributions in the form of conclusions from The Nordic UN reform Project 1996. A central challenge is now to identify feasible forms of co-operative relations and role-division which can most efficiently enable the realisation of an integrated perspective on development. The points of intersection between the World Bank and the IMF have undergone considerable change in the course of the years, not least as a result of the Bank’s gradual expansion of its developmental perspective and the IMF’s involvement in developing countries. Similarly, there has been more and more discussion of the relations between the various development banks.
Co-ordination of development efforts has become increasingly important, and here the multilateral institutions particularly the World Bank and the UNDP have played an central role. However, one may well question whether the potential for greater efficiency in co-ordination has been fully realised.[5] This applies especially to operative co-ordination in the recipient-countries, not least between the various multilateral organisations.[6] However, the issue involves more than merely channelling assistance. It is also a question of views on development, and national strategies reflect the discussions and decisions taken in the international arena.
The multilateral development system has, over the years, expanded its role in many ways, not least in connection with peace processes. In focus here are various forms of financial and social stabilisation aimed at deepening a negotiated peace settlement, with the subsequent reconstruction of the institutions of war torn societies. Other examples include the importance of ensuring respect for human rights, developing democratic forms of government, good governance and promoting equal opportunities for women and men.
Focus of the research programme: a systems perspective
The multilateral system will serve as the point of departure for research under this programme. Research will not focus primarily on individual organisations. Instead, the intention is a systems focus that can make a contribution to the development of theory. Put another way: thematic and organisational design will be subordinated to the development of knowledge about, and understanding, of the multilateral system.
1. Process dynamics and arena function, in historical and contemporary perspective
The years have seen various reform initiatives in the UN. Only rarely have the results corresponded to expectations. Individual reform efforts have often been scrutinised in light of the immediate reactions they have provoked, in the form of enthusiasm or opposition. What seems to be lacking, however, is a better understanding of the underlying developmental characteristics behind these reactions, characteristics which influence the possibilities for getting more thorough-reforms adopted and implemented. The extent to which the various reforms actually have led to the desired results is another area where little analysis has been undertaken.
One feature of the multilateral system is the emphasis on seeking to create consensus through negotiations. This can enable the creation of policies and attitudes towards development issues that influence more than only the multilateral actors. Inputs to such processes often come in the form of reports and analytical work with considerable power. Studies of the dynamics of such processes the roles of participants, their international weight, etc. represent a thematic area in their own right.
This arena function is organised in variously different ways throughout the system as with e.g. the UN General Assembly, international conferences, OECD/DAC, UNCTAD and the Bretton Woods institutions. It is important to shed light on the consequences of different ways of organising and participating in the arena function.
A further thematic area concerns the member-states and their influence on decision-making within the system and by the various organisations. More needs to be known about what factors (power-political, historical, cultural, resource-related, person-specific) affect the formal and informal influence of the individual member-states. Here it is of particular interest to study the role played by the developing countries and by representatives of the various regional groupings in decision-making processes intended to lead to the establishment of global norms, standards, regulation and policy. It is also important to see what role the management and the staff of the organisations play in these processes. The same applies to the role of external actors, such as private organisations, firms, lobbies of various types, etc. A special thematic area could focus on the roles of the different internal and external actors in decisions that involve organisational reforms and other changes within the system itself.
One example of the practical manifestation of process dynamics and area function within the multilateral system concerns the preparation for the various UN global conferences, as well as their implementation and follow-up. From these conferences the concept of an integrated perspective on development has emerged. A whole series of institutional mechanisms have been established to ensure follow-up of the conferences and the decisions taken there. To what degree can it be said that consensus has been achieved on such an integrated development perspective capable of influencing specific developmental strategies in the Third World, as well as influence the work of multilateral and bilateral institutions? How does this relate to the regular work of the UN and of other multilateral organisations?
2. The multilateral system as a tool for steering and regulation
One result of the process dynamics and arena function mentioned above, could be improved collective rationality, through the creation of changes in the conditions that determine the actions of the various actors. We need insight into how the system works to create lasting change in the choices available to states, firms and other central actors. One example here would be institutions and their responsibility for monitoring, analysis, advice and professional support. Another example could be the establishment of global norms, standards, regulations and policy.
We can identify a series of central problem-areas with respect to the establishment of more or less permanent and institutionalised regimes or arrangements for dealing with trans-border challenges. The WTO and its regulatory work in trade would be one example; another could be international collaboration to fight international criminality. Yet a further example is financing from the Global Environmental Facility (GEF). A fourth example could be the integrated initiative undertaken by the World Bank and the IMF[7] which involves, among other things, co-ordinated behavior by all types of creditors.
The multilateral system is composed of a series of organs with differing mandates, declarations of principle, main goals, forms of financing, etc. This in turn creates a potential for co-operative relations, co-ordination, integration, division of labour and distribution of competence but also for conflicts of interests and struggles to obtain mandates. Of interest here are the relations between the Bretton Woods institutions, the UN system and the WTO, as well as those involving institutions within the UN system, between the IMF and the World Bank, between institutions of the World Bank group, and between the various multilateral development banks. One thematic area could be to chart and analyse the internal barriers within the system, barriers that prevent the necessary interplay between and among different institutions in the work of establishing steering and regulation mechanisms aimed at solving international challenges.