1 / 19

Southern Voices in the international system

Southern Voices in the international system. 15th November 2005 Cecilia Alemany Social Watch. Contents:. Introduction IFIS: Which part is more permeable to southern voices? UN: What should reform of the UN’s development role require as a minimum? Concluding remarks. 1) Introduction.

irma
Télécharger la présentation

Southern Voices in the international system

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Southern Voices in the international system 15th November 2005 Cecilia Alemany Social Watch

  2. Contents: • Introduction • IFIS: Which part is more permeable to southern voices? • UN: What should reform of the UN’s development role require as a minimum? • Concluding remarks

  3. 1) Introduction • From LA (Skeptical) • LA is not a cooperation “priority” • LA is not in the “neighborhood” • LA is not the poorest continent… • But it is the most unequal…and this inequality is higher each year…

  4. - If we look at the donors:Source: Freres, Christian (2005).

  5. So, which voices? From the South: • B-R-ICS? • Governments? • Regions? Or regional institutions? • CSOs?

  6. 2) IFIS: Which part is more permeable to southern voices? • IMF • WB • IADB (regional banks) • A key actor: the EU

  7. a) IMF • We cannot talk about a CS agenda • Informal dialogues • Selected CSOs • Without operative guidelines on CS • Lack of transparency and accountability

  8. b) WB, CS participation • « CS participation as a conditionality » 1982: Com. WB - NGOs 1990: Working Group NGOs WB (GTONG-WB) Participation as an obligation: environmental risks, indigenous people, people mobilizations National dialogues, SC Unit, consultations, etc. Good governance and stakeholders framework

  9. WB and IADB internal governance • Decision making processes: • LAC countries 50 % participation in IADB And only 10 % in the WB… So, the IADB is more relevant to LAC countries and CSO…

  10. c) IADB • Dialogues and consultations • Conditionality • Project oriented and good governance framework • « Comite Asesor »

  11. d) EU as a key actor • Non state actors approach • EESC • SC Fora: EU-Mexico, EU-CAN, etc. • DG Trade Dialogue with CS • Bi-regional committees • New Perspectives 2007-2013 (CSP and RSP)

  12. 3) UN: What should reform of the UN’s development role require as a minimum? • A) UNDP • B) ECOSOC • C) « Reform » and Cardoso Report • D) MDGs are not enough

  13. UNDP: legitimacy to have a stronger position Democracy Report (LAC) Human Development Reports • ECOSOC: limitations • Reform: Security Council (decision making process) Council for Global Development and Environ. (CGDE) german proposal ?

  14. Cardoso Report • Partenariat Group • SC and CS • National CS consultative groups • Liaison Groups: NGOs, Congress, private sector • Bureau: permanent autochthones issues • Public auditions etc. • Expanded trust fund to support CS participation (regional or UN headq.)

  15. 4) Concluding remarks: • Regional banks are new actors and has to be reinforced, in these spaces the CS participation has to be re- df. • CS participation in regional integration processes is crucial and has to be supported effectively (formal and informal participation).

  16. UNDP can play a major role, has to be strengthen and has to strengthen the relations with CSOs • ECOSOC is not effective so we have to revisit the Cardoso Proposals

  17. We need a constructive debate on how CS participation can be more effectively at the global and national level. • Nobody knows how to deal with CS heterogeneity, diversity and challenges…even if IFIS ask to the governments to do it.

  18. MDGs can be a pretext to promote national dialogues (and consensus) on development between all the development actors (because PRSP weren’t generally). • MDGs are the new “aid framework”, so they can be a pretext to develop real participation

  19. For that it will be necessary to establish mechanisms (UN, banks and regional level) that give: • Transparency: information, access to agendas, papers, reports, etc. • Access to the debates: consultation • Systematic participation in all the phases of the decision making process: planning, execution, monitoring and evaluation = Accountability=Watchdog = Ownership

More Related