& çâÌæÚUæð´ ·¤è ¥ôÚU Îð¹Ùæ ÁæÚUè ÚU¹ð´ ¥ÍæüÌ ¥ÂÙð ÜÿØ ÂÚU ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´Ð ãæÚU Ù ×æÙð´, €UØô´ç·¤ ·¤æ× ·¤ÚUÙð âð ¥æÂ·¤ô ©gðàØ ·¤è Âýæç# ãôÌè ãñ ¥õÚU ÁèßÙ ·¤æ ¹æÜèÂÙ ÎêÚU ãôÌæ ãñÐ ÖÜð ãè ÁèßÙ ×ð´ ç·¤ÌÙè Öè ·¤çÆÙæ§ü €UØô´ Ù ¥æ°, çÁ™ææâæ ¥õÚU ©ˆâæã ÕÙæ° ÚU¹ð´Ð ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´, ÜÿØ ã×ðàææ ¥æÂ·Ô¤ Âæâ ãôÌð ãñ´ çÁ‹ãð´ ÂæÙð ·Ô¤ çÜ° ÂýØæâ ¥æÂ ·¤Öè Öè àæéM¤ ·¤ÚU â·¤Ìð ãñ´Ð

Development Cooperation

How Bangladesh Should Deal with the UN and the World Bank

by Dr. Khalilur Rahman
***There is no alternative to building capacity of the country. Government’s managerial capability needs to be strengthened for better outcome of UNDAF/CDF. As owner of these frameworks, government should have appropriate and vital say in the finalization of these frameworks. Government should play the important role in bringing the UNDAF and the CDF together at the country level. National priorities should also serve the basis for closer coordination between the UN and WB for ensuring synergy and complementarity between UNDAF and CDF. It is the Government that should set the pace and tone of the development process at the country level.***
THE necessity for integrated and harmonised cooperation among the UN agencies and other development partners at the country' level emerged against the backdrop of continuing declining of core resources for international development and cooperation over the past decades. There has been a realisation that effective development requires a holistic approach in order to prevent each single organisation to broaden its activities to areas that overlap with others. Overlap has enhanced the need for coordination and cooperation among the organisations and compounded the problem of fragmentation of existing resources for development activities. At the country level, this fragmentation and overlap have been making it difficult for the United Nations to respond to the needs of countries In a consistent, coherent, coordinated and cost-effective manner.
In order to address the issue in proper perspective, the UN General Assembly (UNGA) for the first time adopted the Resolution 44/21 1 Ln 1989 seeking to effective collaboration, coordination and cooperation on economic and social development among the countries and among the development partners emphasising, among other things, that the “separate funds and programmes and specialised agencies must make a commitment to work together to integrate assistance provided by the UN system into the development process of the recipient countries in a fully coordinated manner".
UNGA has also adopted a number of successor resolutions on this issue.
Given the above and in response to Increasing demand by the member-states for effective and meaningful reforms, the UN Secretary-General in his report "Renewing the United Nation: a programme for reform" emphasised the need for goal-oriented collaboration, programmatic coherence and mutual reinforcement of the UN programmes of assistance as part of a single United Nations Development Framework with common objectives and timeframe. Under this reform pack-
age the United Nations Development Group (UNDG) was formed and a United Nations Development Assistance Framework (UNDAF) was established through it In 1997.
UNDAF is viewed as a unified force for development - a key tool for helping the UN to fulfill Its development mandate more effectively. It is a strategic planning and collaborative programming framework for the development operations of the UN system al the country level by Identifying priorities for the country as well a for the UN system. it Is designed to bring greater coherence, collaboration and effectiveness to UN development efforts In the field in order to ameliorate the well being of the people served by the UN system. Close cooperation between the UN. national government and development partners has been envisaged in this process to determine the most effective way to achieve common priorities.
The UNDAF is based on the Common Country Assessment (CCA) - a country-based process for reviewing and analyzing the national development situation based on a strategic approach. The CCA identifies Key Issues as a basis for advocacy, policy dialogue and preparation of a common UN response. In order to avail of the opportunities UNDAF can offer, the UN system has to face some potential challenges. One of the challenges is the harmonisation of programme cycles of UNDG partners, where applicable, by 2004 working under the UNDP Resident Coordinator at the country level. All the members of the UNDG have to have their programme cycles harmonised into 5-year. Currently, these organlsatiosn are having different programme cycles. Lot of energies have to be spent in making UNDAF a truly “joint exercise" at the country level. It will also require detailed work in harmonising administrative procedures and requirements aiming at simplification and elimination of redundancies.
The biggest challenge for the UNDAF. however, is the latest World Bank (WB) development strategy Comprehensive Development Framework (CDF) launched in January 1999
CDF Is claimed to be an In elusive picture of development -a system In which the macro-economic and financial aspects are not considered apart from structural, social and human aspects and vice versa. It calls for integration of each of these subjects at the national level and among the global development players. CDF lays greater emphasis on poverty alleviation and development effectiveness along with Issues linked to poverty. Its speaks for commitment to integration of effort by expanding partnerships. transparency and accountability. It Is a holistic and strategic approach to development cased on country ownership and partnership.
CDF and UNDAF:
Complementary or Duplicatory?
Both CDF and UNDAF stem from the same logic - the need to look at development strategies from a holistic perspective and the desirability of coordinated and coherent interventions by all development partners to achieve maximum impact. The essential purpose of the UNDAF is to achieve coherence mainly among the UN actors, whereas the CDF seeks to provide a framework for all the stakeholders in development, including bilateral donors. UN agencies. other GOs and NGOs and the private sector. Both, however. place the recipient country at the centre of the process.
The another significant difference between UNDAF and CDF perhaps is that while UNDAF takes into account the
recommendations of the major international conferences and conventions and declarations. CDF has no such stated objec-
Now the question Is: what can be the scenario or how can it be managed or Integrated when a country would have both UNDAF and CDF together? In some UNDAF pilot countries. WB. however, participated in the CCA process. WB seems to be in a better position to outsmart UNDAF by Its CDF for the very simple reasons that the Bank has money. It does not need to go to anybody to finance activities under CDF. It can easily produce a better and quality CDF document in short time compared to UNDAF.
On the other hand, it takes more time to prepare a UNDAF document by the UN system, since all participating agencies are to be consulted along with the government to complete it. There is also no formal secretariat for UNDAF at the country level. Resource is also not available for this purpose. All this affects quality of the product as well as the whole process of UNDAF.
Need for Synergy between UNDAF and
CDF
The objective of both UNDAF and CDF Is to avoid duplication of efforts and scarce resources through forging partnership among all development partners under the leadership of the recipient country for a coherence, coordinated and comprehensive response to country's development needs. It. however, seems
that UNDAF and CDF are dupll* catory in nature and scope. Efforts are on to integrate or fit UNDAF suitably into CDF. In order to have maximum Impact on development activities at the country level, there Is a need to ensure synergy between the two and to make them complementary to each other. It Is now quite some time that WB is providing more and more technical assistance, while decreasing donor contributions have prevented the UN from assuming central responsibility for development activities as it was originally intended. Poverty reduction is now one of the WB's main goals. This has to some extent eliminated difference between the UN and WB and their strategies and working methods have converged. While this convergence has provided opportunities for cooperation, it has also enhanced the possibility of overlapping and competition.
The UN. however, is not averse to WB's moving into social agenda. The UN Secretary-General in his reform proposal advocated for fostering a constructive partnership between the UN and the Bretton Woods Institutions. He welcomed WB's movement Into areas similar to those hitherto in the purview of the UN as it can bring additional resources to bear on similar objectives. He has. however. cautioned that this brings added urgency to the task of ensuring an appropriate distribution of responsibilities between the World Bank Group and the UN for the benefit of programme countries. There is now a joint UN-WB high level
"Learning Group" to monitor the CDF pilot countries and to identify lessons that both CDF and UNDAF can benefit from. Partnership between the UN and WB. however, implies significant changes in the modus operandl of both the WB and the UN system as a whole.
With Mr. Mark Malloch Brown, a formerly Vice-President of WB. as the new Administrator of UNDP further rapprochement and closer cooperation between the UN and WB can be expected and increased WB perspective is likely to feature in UN development cooperation. Cooperation between the UN and the Bretton Woods institutions is the subject of a special study. Recommendations of this study are likely to improve the cooperation between them. It is yet to see whether UNDAF and CDF would complement each other or UNDAF would be integrated into the CDF concept. On the other hand, with both UNDAF and CDF in place, some donors have already expressed their renewed concern and they like development partners not to duplicate but to complement each other's efforts. Some donor has made it public that a certain percentage of their voluntary contribution to the UN would be dependent on the progress made in cooperating with the World Bank and on an assessment of cooperation in the field. This decision has been taken by some donors in view of the apparent duplication of efforts between UNDAF and CDF
The success of CDF and UNDAF would, however, mostly
depend on the shared assessment of a country’s priorities, convergence on policies and strategies and a clear division of labour among development stakeholders based on their comparative advantages.
Bangladesh,
UNDAF and CDF
Bangladesh has been rolled out by the UNDG in the second pilot phase for UNDAF. CCA has already been completed for this purpose Bawd on the CCA. UNDAF would now be prepared.
Other fact is that Bangladesh has close collaboration with WB in many areas. Many WB pilot projects have also been replicated in the country. Bangladesh can also be Included as a CDF pilot country by WB. With UNDAF already in place, we need to decide on whether we should agree to WB proposal or whether we should decide on our own approach WB to be included as a CDF pilot country. The Issue, however, is that whether we can manage both the UN and the WB simultaneously for UNDAF and the CDF respectively. With CDF coming up In a big way. UN itself is in search of necessary strategy to cope up with this new development concept of WB. As an LDC, it is quite natural for Bangladesh to grope for appropriate strategy and policy to deal with the UNDAF and the CDF.
A cell in the Planning Ministry may be set up with the representatives from all the line Ministries including the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. This cell can be designated as Focal Point for UNDAF/CDF. It would represent the Government in all meetings/negotiations with the UN Team for drafting UNDAF.
Our negotiating team must ensure that country's needs and priorities are adequately and appropriately reflected in the development framework. Once the draft UNDAF or CDF is pre-
pared in consultation with all partners including the Government. the same should first be discussed in a Secretary level meeting of the line ministries. Then It should be discussed In open seminars/workshops with the participation of politicians, academia, media and civil soci-
A separate discussion on the draft should also be held for the MPs. We need participation of people from all walks of life in our development planning. That Is how we can ensure par-tlclpatory development. Based on the recommendations, suggestions coming out of the semlnars/symposla. the draft UNDAF/CDF should be reviewed and necessary adjustments be made.
We should always bear in mind that Government Is the owner of both the UNDAF and the CDF. Until and unless the Government agrees to their drafts, these framework cannot be finalised Government should make best use of Its ownership of these frameworks.
There is no alternative to building capacity of the country. Government s managerial capability needs to be strengthened for better outcome of UNDAF/CDF. As owner of these frameworks. government should have appropriate and vital say in the finalization of these frameworks. Government should play the important role In bringing the UNDAF and the CDF together at the country level. National priorities should also serve the basis for closer coordination between the UN and WB for ensuring synergy and complementarity between UNDAF and CDF. It is the Government that should set the pace and tone of the development process at the country level.
The writer is a Director in the Ministry oj Foreign Affairs. Views expressed in the article are the writer's own.