The United Nations is a multilateral organization with near-universal reach. With few exceptions, United Nations rules and regulations apply to all 193 Member States. The operational activities for development of the United Nations system, however, are organized along a binary logic by which “developed” countries provide funding to United Nations entities and “developing” countries receive United Nations support.
Against the backdrop of ongoing discussions under the United Nations Secretary-General’s UN80 initiative, we suggest that the United Nations reform its development work to ensure that it engages all Member States. Universalizing United Nations development functions – i.e., mandating the Organization’s development pillar to engage with countries of all income categories – is a key step towards a more effective multilateral development system.
United Nations development structures are under pressure
The list of challenges facing extant United Nations development structures is long. Normatively, established North–South dynamics have been explicitly challenged by the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, which sets out the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) as a framework “for the entire” world, for “developed and developing countries alike”. Financially, recent funding cuts by major donors are set to fundamentally challenge the traditional role of the United Nations development system as a conduit for official development assistance (ODA) provided by wealthy Member States.
Structurally, the rise in income levels across parts of the so-called “developing world” could result in an ever-diminishing global role for United Nations development entities if they continue to engage with low- and middle-income countries only. The People’s Republic of China is just the most prominent example of countries on track to graduate to high-income status. Based on current rules, United Nations development entities will either have to close their offices in such countries following a transition period or identify alternative sources of funding.
The case for universality
Despite these challenges, the United Nations development system still reflects the donor-recipient relations of the traditional ODA regime, in which development assistance – or “aid” – is primarily seen as a means to enabling “developing” countries to catch up with “developed” countries. It has so far failed to adapt to the sustainable development paradigm, under which development-related needs can no longer be seen as a simplistic function of a country’s income status.
Across the North–South divide, which in many ways is artificial, countries share not only common domestic problems like inequality or societal polarization but also face collective, transnational challenges, such as climate change, pandemics and migration processes. The more complex landscape of sustainable development is also reflected in the fact that some high-income countries are far behind on some SDG targets, such as responsible consumption. Their economies’ negative spillover effects condition development prospects elsewhere; the SDGs are unlikely to be achieved without such countries committing to structural changes.
In addition to these functional issues, there is also a political need for a more universal approach to United Nations development governance, marked by more horizontal relations among Member States. At present, the United Nations development system largely operates in line with the traditional ODA regime, which is based on the idea that traditional donors provide resources to support and co-shape the policies of “developing” countries. Exclusively labelling countries as either “donors” or “recipients” (i.e., “programme countries”) creates unhealthy multilateralism that ultimately undermines the ability of the Organization to effectively address global challenges.
With no substantive global governance role and the heavy influence of earmarked funding provided by donor countries, the United Nations development system has settled into the role of a service provider for “developing” countries only. This perpetuates symbolic inequalities and fosters operational weaknesses. The one-sided service provider role has made the Organization prone to pursuing development in seemingly unpolitical and bureaucratic ways, assuming that development works differently “there” than “here”. In reality, a new global policy of knowledge and cross-border learning is needed.
A more universal approach to development work
Faced with these anachronistic features, we suggest that universalizing the United Nations development pillar is a key step towards making sure that the Organization delivers in supporting Member States with, and remains a relevant player in, sustainable development processes. However, the expansion of United Nations development work towards “developed” countries should not simply integrate the latter into the Organization’s existing country office networks.
Instead, we suggest a leaner and differentiated model for engagement with high-income countries, one requiring a focused and advice-oriented approach. Mechanisms of engagement at the country level would centre on advising, contributing to public debate and providing limited, carefully targeted operational support.
At the global level, the United Nations development system should focus on three functions.
First, the United Nations should provide a more inclusive governance platform with stronger elements of mutual accountability. If, for example, donors can shape engagement with programme countries by setting policy priorities in the strategic plans of a United Nations development entity, then low- and middle-income countries should be able to contribute to addressing conditions in high-income countries in similar ways.
Second, a key function of development support should focus on monitoring sustainability challenges and best practices that help address such issues. While the United Nations already monitors SDG implementation, a deeper analysis of trends and challenges – with a stronger focus on externalities – could be used to identify practical solutions and create more compelling narratives that speak to audiences across the globe.
Third, the United Nations development system should facilitate learning across established divides. Although sustainability challenges often transcend national borders, the development focus of the United Nations has remained directed at “developing” countries, while entities such as the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development concentrate on “developed” nations. As this fragmented approach limits understanding and hinders cooperation, the United Nations as a quasi-universal body provides the best available framework to overcome deep-seated barriers.
The political economy of universalizing United Nations development work
A more universal approach to United Nations development work is likely to raise significant objections from both sides of the North–South divide. However, an exclusive focus on aid entitlements or attempts to protect privileged multilateral positions reflect an outdated North–South paradigm that overlooks the broader mission of the United Nations. The Charter of the United Nations emphasizes “co-operation in solving international problems”, and the 2030 Agenda extends this to include global sustainability concerns. A universal approach to multilateral development work could strengthen the Organization’s relevance for all Member States, and help address cross-border challenges, from migration to energy provision.
High-income countries would be able to rely on United Nations support in tackling such challenges, which in many cases have already come to severely impact their domestic space of manoeuvre. For “developing” countries, a more universal United Nations development pillar would provide greater equality and a stronger voice in the governance of and discussions about development, better enabling them to hold “developed” States accountable on issues they deem critical for their development prospects.
Overall, the United Nations needs to adjust to new realities that differ significantly from what the world looked like when the distinction between “developed” and “developing” countries first gained traction. Universalizing the United Nations development work is not only a necessary but also a feasible step towards ensuring that the Organization – despite its current challenges – remains a guarantor of multilateral cooperation. Member States should take advantage of preparations for a post-2030 global development framework to jointly chart the contours of a truly universal United Nations development system.
The UN Chronicle is not an official record. It is privileged to host senior United Nations officials as well as distinguished contributors from outside the United Nations system whose views are not necessarily those of the United Nations. Similarly, the boundaries and names shown, and the designations used, in maps or articles do not necessarily imply endorsement or acceptance by the United Nations.
