Strengthening the Economic and Social Council
By Gert Rosenthal
|
In January 2004, I ended my one-year term as President of the UN Economic and Social Council. It was, to my mind, a productive and stimulating year and also a learning experience. Although I had participated before in Council activities in my previous capacity as a staff member of the UN Secretariat, this was my first hands-on experience as a delegate in its day-to-day activities. I learned that this organ of the United Nations has a unique role to play in the furthering of development, international cooperation, the observance of human rights and humanitarian assistance. At the same time, I felt that it was not making optimal use of its potential. Now that various initiatives for change are in the air—notably the High-Level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change, designated in October 2003 by Secretary-General Kofi Annan—how can we move ahead with the strengthening of the Economic and Social Council?
I believe that the key can be found in a more ample, focused and rigorous fleshing out of each of its generic functions, as spelled out in Articles 62 to 64 of the UN Charter. These include analytical, normative, advocacy, coordinating and oversight activities, and I would like to suggest the direction in which we should move in some of these areas.
Firstly, the Council is a unique forum for policy debate. Indeed, one of the things the United Nations does best is explore emerging development issues and make them understandable not only for policy makers but also for the proverbial man on the street. Indeed, the UN debate ultimately does impact on public awareness and also on policy prescriptions. The Organization has multiple arenas where debate can and is undertaken, but, in my opinion, the global forum best suited for a serious policy debate is the Economic and Social Council, given its mandate, limited composition (54 members) and tradition.
From time to time, the Council has risen to the occasion and made a substantial impact on the real world. An example can be found in the significant boost that the 2000 substantive session gave to the role of information and communications technologies in the development process.1
However, not all of the debates are as successful. I have argued that the Council needs to heighten the bar as a forum for policy debates in the future, and this begins with the selection of the themes to be examined at the yearly high-level segment. Whether or not that theme meets the test of relevance will determine the quality of the discussion, the level of participation and the impact of the debate on the real world.
Secondly, the Council should make better use of three potentially powerful instruments that it has at its disposal in order to fulfil its role of promoting coherence, coordination and cooperation within the UN system, and even within the Secretariat. These are as follows:
The integrated and coordinated implementation and follow-up to the outcomes of major United Nations conferences and summits, all of which offer internationally agreed development goals, and especially those contained in the Millennium Declaration. General Assembly resolution 57/270 B and Economic and Social Council resolution E/2003/6 have enhanced the capacity of the Council to use conference follow-up as a framework for planning, monitoring and assessing United Nations activities, which basically is another manner of introducing coherence, coordination and cooperation into its work.
The annual spring meeting with the Bretton Woods Institutions, the World Trade Organization and, as of this year, the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. Since the International Conference on Financing for Development took place in March 2002, the spring meeting is part of the conference follow-up procedures. However, that meeting far transcends follow-up activities; rather, it offers the possibility of introducing a much greater level of coherence, coordination and cooperation into the work of the main multilateral institutions through closer interaction and understanding at the management and intergovernmental levels.
The interaction with the five UN regional commissions, whose role, among other aspects, is to bring the regional dimension to global issues and introduce these issues into the regional dimension. The natural link for this to take place at the intergovernmental level is the Economic and Social Council. Yet, less than a full working day is dedicated to this very important activity, which translates into a serious under-utilization of its considerable potential.
Thirdly, the more general role of advocacy for development and international cooperation can take on very significant and concrete expression. An example is the ad hoc groups on African countries emerging from conflict. Two have so far been created, on Guinea-Bissau and Burundi, and have had a considerable impact in mobilizing international assistance that combines humanitarian and development aid.
Further, this mechanism has allowed for a much closer working relationship between the Economic and Social Council and the Security Council.
Fourthly, the Economic and Social Council appears to be the main forum to bring humanitarian assistance into the mainstream of the UN agenda. This is especially so during the transition phase that links humanitarian activities on the ground with the development prospects of populations affected by natural or man-made disasters. I believe that some important innovations have been made, especially in underlining the need to consider the transition from relief to development in an integrated manner.2
Fifthly, the Council does not appear to do justice to its key role of offering oversight and management direction to its diverse subsidiary bodies, including the functional commissions, as well as informing its own work by their activities. I believe that a greater effort must be made to interact with these bodies than has been the pattern in the past.
Finally, a special word is in order for the United Nations operational activities, as seen from the vantage point of coherence, coordination and cooperation. The major operational activities are in the hands of the programmes, which are subsidiary bodies of the General Assembly, in the economic and social fields. Still, it is difficult to discern the differences in regard to these operational activities, in the authority of the General Assembly, the Council and the Executive Boards of the programmes. Clearly, there is need for some streamlining, and it is highly desirable to strengthen the United Nations operational arm, so that the Organization can complement its policy orientation with some specific technical support in the field.
There are many other topics that are commonly associated with the Council's revitalization, including its size and composition (for some, 54 members is too many; for others, it is not enough), the venue of its meetings (should its regimen of biennial meetings in Geneva be continued?) and its working methods. On the latter point, I have argued that there does not seem to be any compelling reason to try and cram all the substantive activities into a single four-week session. Be that as it may, I have no doubt that with a relatively modest effort, the Council's relevance can be greatly enhanced. Hopefully, this will happen in the near future as part of a broader effort to adapt the United Nations to changing realities.
|
|
| 1. | See "Development and international cooperation in the twenty-first century: the role of information technology in the context of a knowledge-based economy" (E/2000/L.9 of 11 July 2000). The Council also created the United Nations Information and Communication Technologies Task Force, through Council resolution E/2000/29 of 28 July 2000. |
| 2. | See Economic and Social Council resolution E/2003/5 of 15 July 2003, followed up by General Assembly resolution A/RES/58/114 of 17 December 2003. |
|
|
Gert Rosenthal, Permanent Representative of Guatemala to the United Nations, was elected President of the Economic and Social Council in 2003. He served as Executive Secretary of the UN Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC) from 1988 to 1997. |
Go Back Top
|
|
Print 