Sixty-ninth session,
20th & 21st Meetings (AM & PM)
GA/EF/3405

As Second Committee Takes Up Countries in Special Situations, Speakers Call for Intensified Efforts to Fully Implement Istanbul Programme of Action

The current global financial and economic crisis undermined development in the least developed countries, many of which continued to “lag in meeting most of the internationally agreed development goals”, Bolivia’s representative told the Second Committee (Economic and Financial) today as delegates met to discuss groups of countries in special situations.

She emphasized the need for the full implementation of the Programme of Action for the Least Developed Countries for the Decade 2011-2020, and supported initiatives that would enable them to reach the stage of graduation.

Several other delegates also called for intensified efforts to implement the commitments made in the Istanbul Programme of Action.  The Sudan’s representative said that the Programme’s objectives could be met if economies worked together to mitigate the effects of climate change, provide decent job opportunities, and improve health, education and technology transfer.

Least developed countries faced many challenges.  According to Haiti’s representative, less than a third of those countries’ populations had access to electricity, and their trade rates had decreased in 2012.  On the other hand, there was a considerable increase in foreign direct investment to those countries over the 2011-2013 period compared to the 2001-2003 period.

On the same issue, Nepal’s representative noted that most least developed countries were off-track on the Millennium Development Goals, and 46.2 per cent of their people remained in extreme poverty.  The plight of countries in special situations had been diagnosed, treatment plans made, and responsibilities allocated, but the actual treatment was “progressing sluggishly”.

Speaking for a country which had graduated from the least developed status, the representative of Maldives noted that the graduation process was “far from smooth” and a recipe to shape future transitions adequately was yet to be found.  After graduation, the official development assistance (ODA) “completely dried out”, tariff and non-tariff barriers were erected against Maldivian products, and concessional financing was no longer available.

Another issue often discussed at the meeting was the special situation of landlocked developing countries.  Botswana’s representative noted that their transport costs were higher, their economies frequently depended on a single commodity, and their economic growth was vulnerable to external fiscal crises and volatile commodity prices.

In that context, several delegates highlighted the need for a new and ambitious programme of action for those countries, built on the experience of the Almaty Programme of Action.  Costa Rica’s representative said that such a programme must address the issues including freer access to and from coastlines, development and maintenance of infrastructure, improvement of trade, economic and structural transformations of the economy, and capacity-building to address the effects of climate change.

Furthermore, Zambia’s representative stated that the multilateral trading system should support better the needs of those countries.  She welcomed the Bali trade facilitation agreement but called for preferential treatment for landlocked countries, to improve competitiveness, capacity, value addition and diversity of exports.  Gyan Chandra Acharya, Under-Secretary-General and High Representative of Least Developed Countries, Landlocked Developing Countries and Small Island Developing States, said that regional integration should be promoted and the global partnerships to help landlocked countries should be improved at the Vienna Conference.

The Committee also concluded its debate on the eradication of poverty, with several speakers highlighting inclusiveness as a vital aspect of achieving that goal.  A representative of the International Organization for Migration (IOM) said the policy priorities outlined in the Secretary-General’s report could only be successful if they were based on an approach that promoted the social and economic inclusion and empowerment of marginalized groups and vulnerable people.

The importance of access to decent work was also mentioned, with a representative of the International Labour Organization (ILO) noting that where decent work was scarce there was less growth, less security, and less human and economic development.  She welcomed the proposal to include the promotion of full and productive employment and decent work for all, as well as social protection systems and measures, in the new set of goals.

Speaking on poverty eradication were representatives of Lao People’s Democratic Republic and Rwanda.

The Permanent Observer for the Holy See also spoke.

Representatives of the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC), and the Sovereign Military Order of Malta also spoke.

Speaking on groups of countries in special situations were representatives of Myanmar (on behalf of the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN)), Malawi (on behalf of the African Group), Benin (on behalf of the Group of Least Developed Countries), European Union, Brazil, Malaysia, United States, Zimbabwe, Ethiopia, Bhutan, Myanmar, Bangladesh, China, New Zealand, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Morocco, Russian Federation, Togo, Kazakhstan, Japan, Turkey and the Solomon Islands.

A representative of the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO) also spoke.

The Committee will meet again at 10 a.m., on 27 October to discuss Item 21 of its agenda:  Globalization and interdependence.

Background

The Second Committee (Economic and Financial) met this morning to conclude its discussion of “Eradication of poverty”.  It also took up “Groups of countries in special situations”.  The Committee had before it reports related to least developed countries and landlocked developing countries (documents A/69/270, A/69/95-E/2014/81, and A/69/170).

Eradication of Poverty

MAYTHONG THAMMAVONGSA (Lao People’s Democratic Republic), associating himself with the Association of Southeast Asian Nations and the “Group of 77” and China, said his country had made poverty eradication and rural development one of its top priorities in its 2010-2015 socioeconomic development plan.  The Millennium Development Goals had been mainstreamed into that plan, and his country hoped to achieve those targets in 2015 and to graduate from least developed country status by 2020.  The macroeconomy had been stable, and the economy had grown by 8.2 per cent annually over the past three years.  The national poverty ratio had been on the decline and currently stood at 20.5 per cent.  As some of the country’s Millennium Goals were still off track, the country believed the Goals needed to be carried over to the sustainable development goals, and that poverty eradication should be made a priority.

JEANNE D’ARC BYAJE (Rwanda), associating herself with the Group of 77 and China, and the African Group, said that even though Africa had sustained positive economic growth in the last 20 years, the process had not translated significantly in the reduction of poverty.  Progress towards controlling poverty remained uneven, with an increasing number of people living in the threshold of poverty in most developing countries.  On top of promoting global economic growth, more efforts must be deployed in building individual and community-level capabilities, assisting national policies and strategies, ensuring increased access to services such as health and education, improving access to decent work, and recognizing the importance of information and communications technology among other enablers. Since 2000, her country had managed to sustain its economic growth and to reduce income inequality, thus lifting more than one million out of poverty and providing social protection to the most vulnerable.

BERNARDITO CLEOPAS AUZA (Holy See) said that “countries should develop evidence-based policies and strategies to combat extreme poverty, rather than relying on pre-conceived one-size-fits-all solutions”.  Sustainable development required the participation of all in the life of families, communities, organizations and societies.  “Participation is an antidote to exclusion”, be it economic, social, political or cultural.  The exclusion of women from equal and active participation in the development of their communities was a barrier to sustainable development.  Poverty was not mere exclusion from economic development, he said, “it is as multifaceted and multidimensional as the human person himself or herself”.  Development was more than the sum total of resources invested into projects and their measurable material results.  In efforts to eradicate poverty, the world must promote “the authentic development of the whole person and of all peoples”.

AMBER BARTH, ILO, said that last year’s extreme poverty was reduced by only 2.7 per cent, one of the lowest rates of reduction in the past decade.  The global workforce had been growing at around 42.6 million people per year.  However, only about 40 million were finding work, and about half of those were finding wage employment.  Where decent work was scarce there was less growth, less security, and less human and economic development.  She commended the Open Working Group on Sustainable Development Goals which had proposed that promoting full and productive employment and decent work for all, as well as social protection systems and measures, should be included in the new set of goals.

MICHELE KLEIN SOLOMON, IOM, said that inclusiveness was a vital aspect of poverty eradication.  A lack of it was often a primary barrier to improving migrants’ development outcomes.  The policy priorities outlined in the Secretary-General’s report could only be fully successful if they were based on an approach that promoted the social and economic inclusion and empowerment of marginalized groups and people in vulnerable situations.  Measures in the post-2015 development agenda should maximize the development potential of migration and help reduce poverty, as migration was a key factor in poverty eradication.

AJAY MADIWALE, International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, said building the resilience of vulnerable people to withstand shocks such as disasters and emergencies was an essential aspect of poverty reduction.  The poorest tended to live in hazard-prone areas within countries, including flood plains, informal settlements, and on degraded land.  Disasters caused setbacks to poverty eradications, as seen in the 2010 earthquake in Haiti and the 2011 drought in Djibouti, which resulted in a return to pre-2001 poverty levels in both countries.  The failure of the Millennium Development Goals to address the risk factors which pushed people into poverty could not be repeated in the sustainable development goals and the post-2015 development agenda.

BERTRAND DE LOOZ KARAGEORGIADES (Sovereign Military Order of Malta) said the Order’s primary mission was assisting people who were suffering and he listed humanitarian work in which it was involved, which included the funding of ambulances.  The “White Cross” was working more closely with the Red Cross and the United Nations.  Ebola was a priority and the Order was channelling funds to Guinea and had sent protective equipment to Liberia.

Groups of Countries in Special Situations

GYAN CHANDRA ACHARYA, Under-Secretary-General and High Representative of Least Developed Countries, Landlocked Developing Countries and Small Island Developing States, introduced three reports.  On implementation of the Programme of Action for the least developed countries for the Decade 2011-2020 (document A/69/95-E/2014/81), he gave an overview of economic activity in least developed countries and looked to their near term prospects.  Progress had varied across the goals and targets of the priority areas of the Istanbul Programme of Action.  He noted a decline in ODA from Development Assistance Committee members in 2012, and stressed the centrality of ODA and other means of implementation to least developed countries’ development.

Turning to the report on strengthening investment promotion regimes for foreign direct investment in the least developed countries (document A/69/270), he said that foreign direct investment flows to least developed countries had risen steadily since 2000.  However, further efforts were needed to establish better rules and regulations governing foreign direct investment entry, operations and treatment.  The report also proposed establishment of an international investment support centre dedicated to least developed countries.  On the 10-year review of the implementation of the Almaty Programme of Action (document A/69/170), he said landlocked countries remained hampered by their geography to enter international trade.  Growth and trade had improved but trends were volatile and not shared equally.  Efforts on transport and transit efforts had reduced expenses but export costs remained high and continued to grow.  In the next development phase, there should be a more holistic approach to the challenges faced by landlocked developing countries, focusing on developing productive capacities, adding value to exports and diversifying economies.  Regional integration should be promoted and the global partnerships to help landlocked countries should be improved at the Vienna Conference.

PAMELA GRACE LUNA TUDELA (Bolivia), speaking on behalf of the Group of 77 developing countries and China, said the current global financial and economic crisis undermined the development in the least developed countries, many of which “continue to lag in meeting most of the internationally agreed development goals”.  She emphasized the need for the full implementation of the commitments made in the Programme of Action for the Least Developed Countries for the Decade 2011-2020.  Moreover, she supported the initiatives that would serve as key enablers for those countries to reach the stage of graduation.

On landlocked developing countries, she expressed concern about the fact that the economic growth and social well-being of those countries remained vulnerable to external shocks, as well as to the financial and economic crisis and climate change.  The international community must enhance development assistance to those countries to help them overcome their vulnerabilities, build resilience and set themselves on a path of sustainable social and economic development.  She urged development partners to “provide sufficient, reliable and predictable financial and technical assistance to LLDCs [landlocked developing countries] to address the specific needs and challenges imposed by their particular geographical situation” in the new Programme of Action.

DENIS RÉGIS (Haiti) spoke on behalf of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM), and associated himself with the Group of 77 and China, and the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC).  He said that much effort was still necessary to achieve the goals decided in Istanbul by 2020.  He was concerned about the ongoing decrease in ODA and the weak global economic recovery affecting the Aid for Trade initiative.  He spoke about several challenges faced by the least developed countries.  For example, the relative importance of different sectors of the economy in most of those countries had hardly changed in the past 10 years, and less than a third of their population had access to electricity.  Moreover, as more than 70 per cent of their population lived in rural areas, productivity of their agricultural practices must be improved.  On trade, the rates in least developed countries had significantly decreased in 2012, and the pace of developed countries opening their markets to those countries had slowed.

Haiti sought to graduate from the list of least developed countries in a specific and realistic timeframe, he said.  For the first time in history, the country had leaders from business and the private sector, who understood the importance of investment as the driving force of growth and sustainable development.  They were working to implement policies that could rework the legal context and the business climate to ensure an increase in the amount of foreign direct investment in Haiti.  Such investment could have a cross-cutting benefit in terms of the three dimensions of sustainable development.  He welcomed recent statistics showing a significant increase in foreign direct investment to least developed countries over the 2011-2013 period compared to the 2001-2003 period.  He also reiterated the importance of putting those countries at the heart of the post-2015 agenda to ensure that “everybody has a dignified life”.

PAULA COTO-RAMÍREZ (Costa Rica), speaking on behalf of CELAC, reaffirmed the Community’s belief in the need for a new and ambitious programme of action for the landlocked developing countries, built on the experience of implementing the Almaty Programme of Acton.  He stressed the importance of promoting new partnerships with the United Nations development system and relevant agencies that would include the accountability mechanisms of Member States.  It was crucial to establish a time-bound programme that laid out responsibilities of development partners and transit developing countries.  That programme needed to address issues of interest to landlocked developing countries, those included:  freer access to and from coastlines; development and maintenance of infrastructure; improvement of trade; economic and structural transformations of their economies; and capacity-building in order to address the effects of climate change.

He called on the international community to support landlocked developing countries in transforming their economies, and to provide an enhanced level of financial and technical support.  That support included ODA and cooperation in accordance with the Nairobi Outcome document of the United Nations Conference on South-South cooperation.

MWABA PATRICIA KASESE-BOTA (Zambia), pointed to progress in implementation of the Istanbul Programme of Action, particularly on transport issues, like harmonization of transit policies; laws to reduce transit times for exports and imports; maintenance of transport infrastructure, and streamlining of border facilities and procedures.  Economic growth and trade had increased and the special needs of landlocked countries were more visible and recognized in the international arena.  Challenges remained which hampered economic growth and poverty eradication, including low investment in regional infrastructure, low competitiveness, vulnerability to external shocks, and climate change.

Improvements were needed in the multilateral trading system to make it support better the needs of landlocked developing countries, she said, calling for an ambitious new Programme of Action that was transformative and ambitious on expanding trade and reducing gaps between landlocked countries and other groups.  She welcomed the trade facilitation agreement concluded in Bali but called for preferential treatment for landlocked countries, to improve competitiveness, capacity, value addition and diversity of exports.  The 10-Year Review Conference for the Almaty Programme should focus on trade and integrating landlocked countries better into the global market.  Key priorities should include cooperation on transport policies; internal infrastructure development; increasing investment; diversifying exports; regional integration; and building resilience to emerging challenges.  Scaled-up support from development partners and the United Nations was needed.

U KYAW TIN (Myanmar) spoke on behalf of ASEAN and associated himself with the Group of 77 and China.  He said that the uneven recovery of the global economy since the economic crisis had continued to have negative impacts on many developing countries, as well as States in special situations.  He called for a renewed dedication to stakeholders in North-South, South-South, and triangular cooperation to achieve development goals of countries in special situations.  Further, he said that the Association supported the establishment of a high-level panel of experts to define the functions, structure and funding sources of the Technology Bank for least developed countries.

The upcoming International Conference on Financing for Development would be a stepping stone for the Summit on the post-2015 development agenda, and he urged development partners to deliver on their pledges to countries in special situations.  Since the Almaty Programme of Action, progress among landlocked developing countries had been uneven, and he hoped that the upcoming conference on those countries in November would help shape a new development agenda.  All three least developed countries of ASEAN had announced their intention to graduate from that status by 2020, and he envisioned the Association as a “thriving regional group with stronger economies”.

CHARLES P. MSOSA (Malawi), speaking on behalf of the African Group, and associating himself with the Group of 77 and China, said his continent had built stronger institutions, registered results in implementing the Millennium Goals, and was working towards regional cooperation and integration.  Notwithstanding the progress made, much remained to be done.  The economic structures of many African countries were yet to develop to address various socioeconomic and environmental challenges, and the progress towards several Goals was uneven.  “It is unacceptable that 227 million Africans are starving, while Africa has the potential to feed itself and the world”, he said.  It was in that regard, that the continent’s Governments were pursuing agriculture transformation.  Further, they focused on infrastructure development, as well as on structural economic transformation and inclusive growth through industrialization and value addition.

He urged the international community to intensify efforts towards implementation of the commitments made in the Istanbul Programme of Action.  He also called for the fulfilment of all ODA commitments made towards the African countries, and for the timely implementation of duty-free and quota-free market access for all least developed countries.  Concerning landlocked developing countries, there must be a focus on addressing their specific needs due to their geographic situation.  In conclusion, he highlighted the special challenges faced by countries in conflict situations and those emerging from conflict.

JEAN-FRANCIS ZINSOU (Benin), speaking on behalf of the Group of Least Developed Countries and association himself with the Group of 77 and China, pointed to “mixed results” in implementation of the Istanbul Programme of Action.  Least developed countries were vulnerable to shocks, as illustrated by the Ebola outbreak in West Africa, where health systems were “on the verge of collapse”.  Support was needed for a crisis mitigation and resilience building fund and the Office of the High Representative for the Least Developed Countries, Landlocked Developing Countries and Small Island Developing States should take the lead on that.  The most important priority of the Programme of Action was productive capacity-building and the Cotonou Agenda was clear on least developed countries special needs on that, as well as structural transformation.  He welcomed Turkey’s decision to host a Technology Bank and Science, Technology and Innovation support mechanism.  Least developed countries planned to double their share of global exports by 2020 and duty-free, quota-free market access was needed to help achieve that, as well as the elimination of tariff and non-tariff barriers.  ODA was vital, as were debt relief and South-South cooperation.  On investment promotion, he said “we cannot be content with the result achieved” and called for “robust measures” to foster investments in least developed countries.

AMERICO BEVIGLIA ZAMPETTI (Italy), speaking on behalf of the European Union, confirmed the Union’s determination to deepen partnerships with the least developed and landlocked developing countries, as well as its commitment to the Istanbul Programme of Action.  Development cooperation was increasingly focused on countries with the greatest need and for greatest impact.  The European Union States would continue to accompany the least developed countries in their structural reforms, and were ready to promote trilateral cooperation with other Southern partners.  He reaffirmed the Union’s commitment to provide increasingly focused Aid for Trade, and noted that the least developed countries benefited from duty-free, quota-free access to the European Union market under the reformed Global Scheme of Preferences.

He said that the European Union was committed to strong, transparent, and predictable engagement to accompany the least developed countries as they transitioned from the least developed category.  The Union believed that the upcoming Conference on Landlocked Developing Countries and its outcome documents should concentrate on key areas of relevance to the countries and on the key “bottleneck” areas of transit, transport and commercial transaction costs, trade facilitations, and regional integration.

GUILHERME DE AGUIAR PATRIOTA (Brazil), associating himself with the Group of 77 and China, and the CELAC, said that as the international community moved forward with the implementation of the Istanbul Programme of Action for least developed countries, due importance must be given to bilateral and regional initiatives.  Brazil developed many regional cooperation initiatives with those countries, channelled through the Brazilian Cooperation Agency — ABC.  An important example was the joint project, together with the Brazilian Agricultural Research Institute for the development of the cotton industry in the Cotton-4 countries and Togo.  Another initiative was the construction of a generic medicine plant in Mozambique.  In the case of landlocked developing countries, Brazil served as an important transit country for Paraguay, and had implemented various projects designed to improve the latter’s access to the sea.

VANITHA GOPALAKRISHNAN (Malaysia), associating herself with the Group of 77 and China, and the ASEAN, said that three years into the implementation of the Istanbul Programme of Action, least developed countries had made some progress on many of the Programme’s goals and targets.  However, poverty remained high with almost half of their citizens living on less than $1.25 a day.  Progress had been modest on education, gender inequalities remained high, and physical infrastructure continued to be largely below the international standard.  Her country had committed itself to assisting small island developing States in their pursuit of sustainable development.  It had pledged $1 million towards conducting courses and programmes to support genuine, enduring and sustainable partnerships with those States in the fields of public administration and management, tourism, environment and other areas based on their development needs.

JILL DERDERIAN (United States) said that her country remained committed to least developed countries, and had provided them with $8.4 billion in ODA in 2013.  However, helping them with their development must be more than just about the ODA levels.  First, the effects of conflict on trapping poor countries at the lowest levels of development had to be recognized.  Second, major development progress in those countries required a continuous commitment of transparent and accountable Governments.  Third, the creation of a stable and predictable investment environment was crucial for achieving more foreign investment.  She also welcomed the efforts to develop a smooth graduation process, with advanced planning, including between donors and recipients, playing a crucial role.  Concerning landlocked developing countries, she said that they continued to face very real challenges but the conference in Vienna was taking place “at a hopeful time”.

DURGA PRASAD BHATTARAI (Nepal) aligned himself with the Group of 77 and China, and the Groups of Least Developed Countries and of Landlocked Developing Countries.  He said Nepal had “a prohibitively high cost and alarmingly vulnerable economy”.  The primary responsibility for development lay with the national Government but development was not possible alone.  The plight of countries in special situations had been diagnosed, treatment plans made, and responsibilities allocated, but actual treatment was “progressing sluggishly”.  The means of implementation were vital but had “long been less than needed and incoherent”.  Despite work on the Millennium Summit and Declaration, “a lot less than would, could and should have been done” had been achieved.  Most least developed countries were off-track on the Millennium Goals, and 46.2 per cent of people in those countries remained in extreme poverty.  Development efforts suffered from a resource gap and Nepal’s ambition to graduate by 2022 demanded enhanced, predictable and continued international support in all areas.  He noted the challenges faced by landlocked developing countries and said the new programme of action needed to address the concerns and needs of those countries holistically.

AHMED SAREER (Maldives) aligned himself with the Group of 77 and China and the Alliance of Small Island States.  He was proud that his country had graduated from least developed country status in 2011 and noted that he understood the “challenges, the frustrations, as well as the hope and commitment” of countries in that category.  The process of graduation was “far from smooth” and the international community was yet to find a recipe to shape future transitions adequately.  States had to learn lessons from the Maldivian experience to ensure the next graduates had better support during transition.  Current determining factors in the process, such as gross domestic product (GDP), did not reflect holistically the advancement of society.  After graduation, ODA “completely dried out”; tariff and non-tariff barriers were erected against Maldivian products; and concessional financing was no longer available.  The country remained at risk of backsliding in key social development indicators.  The Small and Vulnerable Economies category used by the World Trade Organization (WTO) acknowledged the inherent vulnerability arising from smallness and provided trade benefits to such countries.  He urged the United Nations to adopt a similar category and praised the successes of the Samoa conference on small island developing States.

RWAYDA IZZELDIN HAMID ELHASSAN (Sudan) reiterated the necessity of follow-up on the Istanbul Programme of Action, calling for inclusive and effective partnerships.  The Programme’s objectives could be met if economies worked together to mitigate the effects of climate change, to provide decent job opportunities, and improve health, education and technology transfer.  Through the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) least developed countries should receive more assistance and better access to global markets.  Foreign direct investment had to be enhanced at the same time as debt cancellation.  It was necessary to analyse why least developed countries were least developed, with reasons including climate change, lack of investment, a poor agriculture sector and dependence on imports.  Sudan had suffered internal conflict and its already weak economy lost 75 per cent of its resources.  She urged the international community to help by lifting sanctions and stressed the importance of debt cancellation to all developing countries.

FREDERICK M. M. SHAVA (Zimbabwe), associating himself with the Group of 77 and China, said the economic development of landlocked developing countries had been largely driven by the export of primary commodities, whose fluctuating prices had hindered efforts by those States to reduce poverty, create jobs and achieve sustained growth.  The United Nations and other development agencies should help landlocked countries to shift towards the production of higher, value-added goods.  Deeply concerned by the decreased contribution of manufacturing and agriculture to the GDP of landlocked countries, he called for increased foreign direct investment in those sectors.  Multilateral financial institutions should also help the countries mobilize the financial resources required to develop a transport infrastructure

AMAN HASSEN (Ethiopia), associating himself with the Group of 77 and China, Group of Landlocked Developing Countries, and the Group of Least Developed Countries, said that despite progress made in achieving development goals, the enormous challenges faced by those countries lingered.  In the last decade alone, the proportion of people living in poverty in those least developed countries remained high, with 50 per cent surviving on less than $1.25 per day.  In that regard, the Istanbul Programme of Action must be integrated into the post-2015 development agenda given its focus on the most marginalized people of the world.  His country was implementing the Programme, which it had aligned with its five-year growth and transformation plan.  Also, in order to meet the targets set out in the Programme and to graduate from the status of least developed countries, Ethiopia was heavily investing in infrastructure development.  It was estimated that the development of landlocked developing countries was on average 20 per cent lower than what it would have been if the countries were not landlocked.  In that regard, he called for strengthened international partnership and concerted global actions to enable landlocked developing countries to overcome their challenges.

KARMA CHOEDA (Bhutan) associated himself with the Group of 77 and China, and the Groups of Least Developed Countries and Landlocked Developing Countries.  He said that while progress had been achieved over the past decade with the Almaty Programme of Action, Bhutan needed to diversify its economy and find new drivers for economic growth.  Infrastructure remained weak, leading to high trade and transportation costs.  The private sector’s role needed to be strengthened.  Twelve per cent of the population lived below the national poverty line and climate change had created a serious threat.  In Bhutan, glaciers that were the primary source of its river system were melting at an alarming rate.  To address their special needs, landlocked countries needed a new programme of action that built on the Almaty Programme.  The upcoming conference in Vienna was an opportunity to highlight the critical areas, which could then be woven into the post-2015 development agenda.

HAU DO SUAN (Myanmar) associated himself with the Group of 77 and China and the Group of Least Developed Countries.  He said that without making sustained progress in productive capacity-building, many of the least developed countries would be unlikely to achieve their Millennium Development Goals.  He expressed concern over the recent decline in ODA to those countries, and called on development partners to fulfil their financial commitments.  He welcomed the potential of the Bali Package to enhance the advances of those countries in the multilateral trading system with duty-free and quota-free markets, and called for the integration of the Istanbul Programme in the post-2015 development agenda.  Through economic reform and increased ODA, Myanmar had registered a steady 7.3 per cent economic growth from 2012 to 2013, with expected growth of 8.7 per cent in the 2014 to 2015 period.  Preparations were underway for Myanmar to graduate from least developed country status.

A.K. ABDUL MOMEN (Bangladesh), associating himself with the Group of 77 and China, and the Group of Least Developed Countries, reminded the Committee that there were 48 least developed countries which made up nearly 25 per cent of the United Nations membership.  Those countries were home to 860 million people, or one-twelfth of the world’s population, and nearly 70 per cent of them were poor and vulnerable.  Foreign direct investment flows had averaged $1.5 trillion over the last three years, yet only $25 billion, or 1.7 per cent, went to those least developed countries.  Technology transfer, along with investment, was essential to expand their economies and he noted resolution 68/224, which included a proposed Technology Bank for the countries.  Trade was another area where those countries were marginalized and Member States needed to implement the decisions outlined at the 2013 WTO Ministerial Meeting in Bali.  ODA was the most important source of finance for those country’s development programmes and he urged Member States to follow the guidelines of Monterrey and Doha.

WANG MIN (China), aligning himself with the Group of 77, said implementation of the Istanbul Programme of Action had “not been encouraging” and that least developed countries faced “a herculean task” in achieving development but he appreciated mainstreaming of the Istanbul Programme by the United Nations system.  Positive results had been achieved on the Almaty Programme of Action but the overall situation remained “fragile” for landlocked countries.  The Vienna Conference was a chance to comprehensively review implementation.  China was a “staunch supporter” of other developing countries through South-South cooperation and the Ebola epidemic had harmed health and security in West Africa and posed an urgent threat to “global public health and security”.  His country had reacted rapidly, with immediately delivering batches of humanitarian assistance.  Close to 200 experts and medical workers had also been dispatched.  A fourth batch of assistance had been announced, and another round of assistance was under consideration.

ANGELA HASSAN-SHARP (New Zealand) said the recent conference in Samoa showed that it was more important to take concrete steps to address the challenges facing vulnerable countries than debating the challenges.  Genuine and durable partnerships, led by the vulnerable countries, could involve any combination of Member States, United Nations agencies, regional and international organizations, local Governments and the private sector.  Each partnership needed targets, concrete outputs, planned outcomes and a timeline.  Those features would let the international community monitor progress, identify gaps in implementation and form new partnerships.  “It is the responsibility of all Member States to work with countries in special situations — each according to our means,” she added.

MAYTHONG THAMMAVONGSA (Lao People’s Democratic Republic) associated himself with the Group of 77 and China, Group of Least Developed Countries, Group of Landlocked Developing Countries, and ASEAN.  He said that given the global landscape, it appeared less optimistic that the least developed countries would be able to realize the Istanbul Programme by 2020.  He called on the international community to continue to provide ODA.  To achieve its goal of graduating from least developed country status by 2020, his Government had integrated the Istanbul Programme into its national development plans, including its 2016 to 2020, 8-year plan.  His country had made steady progress in implementing the Almaty Programme of Action in areas such as developing the road network, which would help realize the ultimate goal of regional connectivity.  His Government was also intensifying efforts towards an ASEAN free trade area.  After more than a decade of negotiations they had realized their goal to become a member of the WTO.

ZAKIA EL MIDAOUI (Morocco), aligning herself with the Group of 77 and China and the African Group, called for an innovative and holistic approach to enable least developed countries to take charge of their own destinies and to implement policies that achieved development.  The next decade would be decisive for least developed countries and their development partners.  The global financial crisis, climate change, epidemics, and food commodity price fluctuations were among the challenges undermining their chances to deal with the problems they faced.  Resources were vital to implementing development policies and she looked forward to the 2015 International Conference on Financing for Development.  Her country supported least developed countries in many areas, including the environment, pharmaceuticals, and telecommunications.

TATIANA ZVEREVA (Russian Federation) welcomed the intention of some least developed countries to graduate from the category and said it should be pursued in line with the provisions of the Istanbul Programme of Action.  Reaffirming her commitment to development cooperation, she said Russian assistance, excluding debt relief, totalled $610 million and gave significant attention to strengthening trade regimes.  Notable progress was evident on implementation of the Almaty Programme of Action and she described some national-level improvements made.  The new programme of action on landlocked countries should work more for their comprehensive integration into the global economy, on diversification, climate change mitigation and transport development.  The Greater Tumen Initiative was a regional transport strategy for northeast Asia providing for the creation of several transport corridors and she hoped it would help revitalize the global partnership for transport between transit and landlocked countries.

KOUMÉALO ANATE BALLI (Togo) associated herself with the Group of 77 and China, African Group and the Group of Least Developed Countries.  She noted that the majority of the actions prescribed by the Istanbul Programme of Action had been integrated into the development policies of her country.  Sectors with strong growth potential were at the centre, as were infrastructure development, human capital improvements and the promotion of sustainable development.  Togo had seen “significant growth” of transport infrastructure, including the recent construction of their third double walled wharf for large container ships.  The port of Lome could now receive new generation ships and the port served the subregion’s landlocked countries.  Modernization of the international airport brought it up to speed with international norms.  Private financing and Government investment was responsible for “the entirety of progress made” and the Government had launched an economic governance programme to get the “economic house in order”.

TLHALEFO MADISA (Botswana), aligning himself with the Group of 77 and China and the Africa Group, said landlocked developing countries faced many concerns.  Transport costs were higher, their economies were not well diversified and frequently depended on a single commodity, and their food security and agriculture were threatened by land degradation and climate change.  Economic growth was vulnerable to any external fiscal crisis and volatile commodity prices while their geographic isolation boosted the cost of setting up businesses, which then hurt their ability to attract foreign direct investment.  Botswana asked the international community to increase its support to help those countries develop the infrastructure necessary for moving goods and services.  Assistance aimed at supporting the development of roads, railways and telecommunications services would help minimize the transaction costs associated with trade.

Ms. YESHMAGAMBETOVA (Kazakhstan) emphasized that when considering a new programme of action for landlocked developing countries, priority areas should be in line with national development policies and strategies.  In addition, expected outcomes could be enhanced through partnerships at all levels and across sectors and should be based on the equitable sharing of benefits derived from the actions of concerned parties.  Areas for effective international support should also be identified.  She stressed the importance of regional integration and bi-lateral cooperation noting that there was further potential in areas such as energy security, transport development, trade facilitation and in promoting inclusive growth and sustainable development.  Economic diversification was also important.  As the country furthest from any seaport, she highlighted the need for effective transport systems and infrastructure.

MICHIKO MIYANO (Japan) said the international community should continue to support the efforts of the least developed countries, and welcomed the fact that development partners had diversified.  Peace and security were among the most crucial prerequisites for development, particularly in those countries.  Moreover, private investment, especially foreign direct investment, and technology also played an important role.  Japan was engaged in the preparation of the Second United Nations Conference on Landlocked Developing Countries in Vienna, especially in the consultations on the outcome document.  It supported a comprehensive approach in the new action plan, but the key focus should be on trade and infrastructure.  She also stressed the importance of disaster risk reduction to protect individuals and communities in least developed countries and landlocked developing countries.

HAKAN KARAÇAY (Turkey) underscored the importance of foreign direct investment but noted that limited foreign investment went to a limited range of industries.  Innovative ways to increase investment should be sought.  A facility like the international investment support centre, dedicated to least developed countries, which had been recommended in the Cotonou Agenda for productive capacity-building was worth due consideration.  The importance of effective and timely implementation of the Istanbul Programme of Action was clear, especially with the target of graduating half of the least developed countries by 2020.  “Further and urgent efforts” were needed to meet the targets.  Incentives to encourage graduation were needed and the process should be looked forward to “rather than an eventuality to be worried about”.  Smooth transitions were required to ensure irreversibility of graduation.  He stressed the need for technology transfer and attached great importance to the Technology Bank and science, technology and innovation supporting mechanism, which he hoped to host.  Noting Turkey’s assistance programme which worked in 38 countries, he looked forward to Turkey’s G-20 presidency when least developed countries would be among the priorities.

HELEN BECK (Solomon Islands) aligned with the Group of 77 and China, calling for a sustainable global partnership to enable the graduation of half the least developed countries by 2020.  Foreign direct investment and productive capacities needed to be built and employment opportunities needed expanding.  Timely and targeted investment was vital to reduce poverty, particularly in agriculture,

 

which could boost trade, food security and rural development.  She welcomed the Cotonou Agenda on productive capacity-building, noting that many least developed countries were also post-conflict and conflict-affected countries, and stressed the importance of investment to peacebuilding initiatives.  Trade was also vital to jobs and poverty elimination but least developed countries’ share remained low and there was a lack of will to conclude the Doha Round.  The National Sustainable Development Strategy was in place to translate the Istanbul Programme into national policy, noting its encouragement of partnership.

Ms. HEHER, observer for the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO), pointed to decreased numbers of least developed countries reaching the 7 per cent growth rate in recent years, with the trend testimony to the ongoing challenges they faced.  In that context, building productive capacities was vital.  Landlocked countries continued to bear high costs for trade participation, but trade participation was “an indispensable engine” for sustainable development.  Infrastructure and competitive productive capacities were the first prerequisites for trade and the “steady de-industrialization trend in LLDCs” was greatly concerning.  The Draft Programme of Action for Landlocked Developing Countries for the Decade 2014-2024 was reassuring.  UNIDO was implementing its “LDC [Least Developed Country] Strategy and Operational Plan 2012-2020”, which emphasized South-South and triangular cooperation, and was devising several pilot Country Partnership Programmes targeting least developed countries and landlocked developing countries under the Lima Declaration.

For information media. Not an official record.