Final 13 October 2015
Note on the peace-humanitarian-development nexus in
key post-2015 reviews, processes and frameworks
UN Working Group on Transitions
I. BACKGROUND
“The “silos” established by the Charter in dividing responsibilities between
the principal intergovernmental Organs are directly and unhelpfully
mirrored in the distribution of responsibilities between the different UN
entities. They communicate with each other in different ways and at various
levels, but there is general recognition that deep fragmentation persists, as
each entity focuses on its own specific mandate at the expense of over-all
coherence, added to the absence of a more forceful culture of coordination
from the top. A particular additional layer of fragmentation is added between
the UN’s Secretariat and its agencies, funds and programmes, with
structural disincentives and even prohibitions against mixing or pooling their
respective funding streams.”
The Challenges of Sustaining Peace report, para. 63.
1.
In 2015, various reforms, reviews and frameworks – henceforth referred as “the global
agendas” – are producing recommendations that will shape the future of global governance for
the years to come. While the global agendas are procedurally, legally and chronologically quite
distinct, focusing on specific pieces of the broader UN system and its roles, mandates and
organizational arrangements, many of their problem statements, derived principles,
policy/paradigm shifts and areas of action have significant degrees of similarities and overlaps.
To shape the United Nations and its partners to be “fit for purpose” to deliver on the ambitious
commitments emanating from the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), it is fundamental
that all these agendas present a coherent picture of current challenges and solutions in a
complementary, coordinated, indivisible and self-reinforcing manner, recognizing that this
requires system-wide engagement beyond institutional silos. All the global agendas highlight
the need for coherent and holistic approaches as it is widely recognized that they each hold
elements of the other’s solutions and that the SDG commitments are fundamentally
interdependent. If the global agendas are not better integrated, simply put, these commitments
will not be achieved.
2.
Through the 2030 Agenda on Sustainable Development, Member States have stressed
the “important role and comparative advantage of an adequately resourced, relevant, coherent,
efficient and effective United Nations system in supporting the achievement of the Sustainable
Development Goals and sustainable development”.1 The need for greater coherence has also
been highlighted by Member States at various intergovernmental fora, including through the
ECOSOC dialogue on the long-term positioning of the UN Development System (UNDS).
During the ECOSOC dialogue, the Member States have suggested that the post-2015
development agenda serves as a window of opportunity to take a comprehensive look at the
funding architecture for operational activities; including to ensure availability of “better
1
United Nations, Transforming our World: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (A/69/L.85, 12 August
2015), para 46. Para. 88 also refers to the UN’s role in the implementation of the new development agenda.
1
Final 13 October 2015
system-wide statistics, analysis and reporting on the volume, sources and destination of
funding flows for UN operational activities”.2
3.
On 6 July 2015, members of the UN Working Group on Transitions have decided to
map out the most important interlinkages among key post-2015 reviews, reforms and
processes. This initiative will support and feed into the UN Development Group (UNDG) ASG
Advisory Group retreat, as well as other processes and reports, including the Chief Executives
Board and the Secretary-General’s reports on the Quadrennial Comprehensive Policy Review
(QCPR).
4.
This note focuses on the commonalities and synergies between the three peace and
security reviews (the report of the Advisory Group of Experts (AGE) on the Peacebuilding
Architecture Review, the Report of the High-Level Independent Panel on UN Peace
Operations (HIPPO) and the ongoing Global Study on the implementation of Security Council
Resolution 1325); the preliminary key messages from the two ongoing Humanitarian processes
(World Humanitarian Summit and the High-Level Panel on Humanitarian Financing); the
High-Level Panel on Global Response to Health Crises; the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable
Development; the outcome of the Third International Conference on Financing for
Development (Addis Ababa Action Agenda); the Sendai Framework on Disaster Risk
Reduction (SFDRR); and previous outcomes of the UN Framework Convention on Climate
Change (UNFCCC) intergovernmental process.3
II. COMMON PROBLEM STATEMENTS
“Global health threats, more frequent and intense natural disasters,
spiralling conflict, violent extremism, terrorism and related humanitarian
crises and forced displacement of people threaten to reverse much of the
development progress made in recent decades. Natural resource depletion
and adverse impacts of environmental degradation, including desertification,
drought, land degradation, freshwater scarcity and loss of biodiversity, add
to and exacerbate the list of challenges which humanity faces. Climate
change is one of the greatest challenges of our time and its adverse impacts
undermine the ability of all countries to achieve sustainable development.”
Transforming our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development,
para. 14
5.
The changing operational landscape for development and humanitarian activities and
peace operations has been framed by the different agendas in strikingly similar ways (see
Annex 2). Common challenges related to all kinds of shocks and stresses, including new trends
in violent conflicts and natural hazards, inform the problem statements of the various
processes, reviews and frameworks. This section explores the commonalities and key messages
emanating from a review of the global agendas, specifically regarding the underlying
challenges and their stated root causes. It identifies the key elements of an emerging common
narrative that suggests that the scope, complexity and sheer interconnectedness of today’s
problems have surpassed the ability of the UN and Member States to address them
individually. While many of the self-reinforcing and overlapping analysis may not be new, the
2
UNDESA (2015), ECOSOC Dialogue on the longer-term positioning of the UN development system in the
context of the post-2015 development agenda. Report. Phase 1: December 2014-May 2015, p. 4.
3
Please refer to Annex 1 for a snapshot on these key global agendas.
2
Final 13 October 2015
fact that the global agendas are prominently referring to similar problem statements may be an
opportunity to create new pathways and different modus operandi to address long-standing
problems.
More intractable and protracted crises globally
6.
Global challenges such as the changing nature of conflict and the rise of violent
extremism are making crises more intractable and protracted. The world is facing a recordbreaking 60 million forcibly displaced people (which include 19.5 million refugees, 1.8 million
asylum seekers and 38.2 million internally displaced people) – half of which are women and
the majority finding refuge in urban areas, not in camp settings. Children below 18 years of
age constituted 51 per cent of the refugee population in 2014, the highest figure in more than a
decade. The number of refugees and IDPs continues to grow and the length of stay in host
countries has been on the rise in recent decades. For example, more than 75 per cent of
displaced people live in a state of protracted displacement lasting for more than 5 years. They
live in “second exile”, caught between the inability to return to their homes and the lack of
durable solutions elsewhere. Since 2008 the number of major violent conflicts has almost
tripled. About two-thirds of UN peacekeepers today and 90 per cent of staff working in Special
Political Missions are working in and on countries affected by high-intensity conflict.4 This
situation is also reflected in the humanitarian side of the UN, where roughly 80 per cent of
emergency response is undertaken in protracted conflict-affected situations, with Syria and its
regional impact alone accounting for over 40 per cent of the 2015 record-breaking $18 billion
global humanitarian appeal.5
7.
In its preamble, the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, highlights the
interconnectedness between peace and development, which is also the common thread among
many of the processes analysed in this note: “there can be no sustainable development without
peace and no peace without sustainable development.”6
8.
Even the agendas that do not explicitly focus on conflict such as the SFDRR and FfD,
refer to the same root causes of vulnerability as threats to development 7 and underlying
disaster risks drivers.8 For example, the absence of livelihoods, social economic deprivation,
inequalities, chronic poverty, climate change, unplanned urbanization, disputes over land
management, water scarcity, demographic changes and weak institutions are cross-referenced
throughout the global agendas, as either disaster risk drivers in the SFDRR, conflict drivers in
AGE and HIPPO or drivers of humanitarian need and factors contributing to complex health
crises.
9.
The compounding effect of these global challenges creates new risks and exacerbates
existing ones, which in turn can undermine peace, reverse development gains and create
additional humanitarian needs. Given these challenges, all the global agendas share a concern
that not enough is done to anticipate and prevent crises as well as strengthen resilience to the
complex nexus between multi-hazards shocks and stresses. A more anticipatory approach to
managing natural disaster risks and preventing lapse and relapse into conflict is a key element
of commonalities among their problem statements.
4
AGE, p.14
UN OCHA, available at: http://www.unocha.org/top-stories/all-stories/2015-global-appeal-164-billion-help-57million-people-22-countries
6
SDGs, preamble.
7
FfD, para. 4.
8
SDFDRR, para. 6.
5
3
Final 13 October 2015
Institutional fragmentation
10.
The multi-dimensional nature of many of the challenges the UN faces, and the
interlinkages among them, makes the fragmentation of the UN particularly problematic. The
global agendas, including the SDGs with its universal commitment to a people-centred
approach that aims to leave no one behind, require greater coherence among all parts of the UN
to collectively support Member States in realizing their commitments. It also requires a deeper
collective understanding of the interconnections and the issues that run across the global
agendas. Institutional and sectorial fragmentation is therefore a major hurdle for achieving
transformational impact.
Exclusion of women and girls
11.
The global agendas acknowledge that gender inequality is a key challenge. They
highlight the importance of gender mainstreaming and the role of women, as central for the
success of their respective objectives, particularly in peacebuilding, development, disaster risk
reduction, climate change mitigation and adaptation as well as effective humanitarian action.
Half the world’s forcibly displaced are women. Sexual violence is used as a tactic to displace
refugee and IDP populations, while the ideological opposition of many extremist groups to
girls entering public spaces, including educational institutions, is placing them at a heightened
risk. The exclusion of women from employment opportunities and the systematic
underpayment of women, are obstacles for sustainable development. The agendas require an
all-of-society-approach that takes into account and further enables women to make significant
contributions to peace and development.
Failure to recognize the centrality of political solutions to tackle global challenges
12.
The centrality or primacy of politics is an important theme among the global agendas,
as many of the challenges depicted in their problem statements are directly linked to the lack or
weakness of political considerations and decisions and solutions to today’s most intractable
crises. The lack of inclusive national ownership and governance arrangements in development
policies, peace processes and disaster risk reduction initiatives, are essential elements of the
global agenda problem statements.
Lack of collective action
13.
The agendas highlight the lack of a collective vision to manage cross-cutting global
challenges through flexible, adaptable, context-specific and interoperable planning
mechanisms and frameworks for action that are able to deliver in complex operating
environments and are adapted to the needs of the most vulnerable people. While 62 per cent of
the world’s poor are expected to be living in fragile states by the time the SDGs come to a
close in 2030, 9 the absence of sustained donor support to focus on a long-term collective
agenda rather than short-term outputs and disconnected results could impair the effective
implementation of the SDGs. The global agendas express concern over the gap between
Member State pledges to funding long-term solutions that address collective problems, such as
climate change, prevent lapse and relapse of conflict, forced displacement, reduce disaster
risks, including those of complex health emergencies, and their inconsistent actions towards
this pledge.
Insufficient partnerships
9
OECD (2015), States of Fragility report, Meeting Post-2015 Ambitions.
4
Final 13 October 2015
14.
Finally, there is a lack of effective partnerships with actors – including political and
financial ones – within and beyond the UN, at the international, regional, sub-regional, national
and local levels, that could effectively support reducing the vulnerability of people affected by
shocks and stresses. It is clear that implementing the global agendas cannot be done by the UN
system alone. There is a need for a holistic approach across actors to these interconnected
agendas that is more inclusive and targets the underlying causes of economic, environmental,
social and political upheaval. Current partnerships must be strengthened and new partnerships
must be explored to enhance delivery, based on cost-effectiveness and comparative
advantages.
III. OVERVIEW OF FINANCING PROPOSALS
“Development finance can contribute to reducing social, environmental and
economic vulnerabilities and enable countries to prevent or combat
situations of chronic crisis related to conflicts or natural disasters. We
recognize the need for the coherence of developmental and humanitarian
finance to ensure more timely, comprehensive, appropriate and cost-effective
approaches to the management and mitigation of natural disasters and
complex emergencies.(…) We recognize the major challenge to the
achievement of durable peace and sustainable development in countries in
conflict and post- conflict situations. We recognize the peacebuilding
financing gap and the role played by the Peacebuilding Fund. We will step
up our efforts to assist countries in accessing financing for peacebuilding
and development in the post-conflict context.”
Addis Ababa Action Agenda, paras. 66 and 67
The SDGs and their many building blocks
15.
The most encompassing framework is the post-2015 development agenda and the
associated 17 sustainable development goals, which includes issues of peace, justice and
governance. While the costs of implementing the agenda have not been fully determined,
estimates range from $3.5 trillion to $5 trillion a year.10 Given the scope of the SDGs, their
universal character, applied to developed and developing countries, and their ambition to leave
no one behind, the financing of all global agendas can be understood as an integral element of
implementing the SDGs.
16.
The financing for development framework proposes that 0.7 per cent11 of the GNI of
developed countries is devoted to Official Development Assistance (ODA), one of the
financing streams supporting the SDGs. Based on the 2014 figures, this would be in the range
of $300 billion to $400 billion per year (0.7% of $42-$57 trillion).12 The Intergovernmental
Committee of Experts on Sustainable Development Financing has estimated that it would cost
about $66 billion per year13 to maintain a social safety net to eradicate extreme poverty, which
10
Remarks to the press of Ambassador Macharia Kamau, of Kenya, co-facilitator of the 2030 sustainable
development agenda, 2 August 2015.
11
Outcome of the Third International Conference on Financing for Development in Addis Ababa on 13-16 July
2015. Section C 51
12
World Bank Estimate GNI. Lower value is total GNI developed countries based on OECD definition (excluding
countries as Saudi Arabia, Qatar etc.) Higher value is “high-income countries”, based on World Bank definition
(including countries as Saudi Arabia, Qatar etc.)
13
United Nations, Report of the Intergovernmental Committee of Experts on Sustainable Development Financing
(A/69/315).
5
Final 13 October 2015
is one of the SDGs. The extent to which this new agenda will impact the total operational cost
of the UN system ($43 billion in 201314) has not been quantified.
17.
The UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) has estimated that
$100 billion per year15 should be invested in mitigation of and adaption to climate change in
developing countries. This annual target should be reached by 2020. Funding for this has to
come from the public and private sectors, for instance via a carbon tax. In 2013, $4 billion16 of
gross ODA was invested in climate change mitigation and adaption. The Green Climate Fund
created by the UNFCCC has received pledges from 35 countries totalling $10 billion, 17 of
which $6 billion has been signed. The level of UN-led implementation of projects underlying
the $100 billion appeal and projects from the Green Climate Fund is still unclear. It is also
unclear if the $100 billion goal accounts for new funds or the reorganization of previous
pledges and whether it includes private financing.18 Greater clarity is needed on how climate
financing goals fit within the overall ODA envelope of Member States, especially at the
recipient country level, where all financial flows should be better interlinked and underpinned
by a common theory of change to maximize their impact towards achieving collective
outcomes.
18.
In 2014, the UN humanitarian appeal was $18 billion, 19 while the total ODA
expenditure on humanitarian activities was $13 billion.20 The UN received a little over $10
billion in 2013.21 In 2015, the humanitarian appeal is set at $20 billion.22 The largest portion of
the appeal is intended for addressing the humanitarian situation in protracted crisis (Iraq, South
Sudan, Syria and Yemen). Part of the humanitarian appeal is geared towards addressing the
impact of natural disasters, which are significantly affected by climate change. Investments in
mitigation of and adaption to climate change will reduce the humanitarian impact of natural
disasters. The Sendai framework on DRR does not quantify the financing needs to implement
priority actions, but highlights that the total economic loss attributable to the impact of natural
disasters from 2005-2015 was more than $1.3 trillion.23
19.
The approved budget for peace operations for mid 2014 - mid 2015 is $8.5 billion.24 No
long-term projections are made for the cost of UN peacekeeping operations. There is no figure
available on the funding need of peacebuilding expenditure. As suggested in the AGE report,
several development partners have started the process estimating the overall funding needs for
14
United Nations, Implementation of General Assembly resolution 67/226 on the quadrennial comprehensive
policy review of operational activities for development of the United Nations system, Report of the SecretaryGeneral (A/70/62–E/2015/4, 13 January 2015).
15
COP21 agenda
16
OECD StatExtracts, sum Principal and Significant objective of gross ODA spend on Climate Change mitigation
and adaption.
17
Status of Pledges and Contributions made to the Green Climate Fund, 4 August 2015.
18
World Resources Institute (2015), Getting to $100 billion: Climate finance scenarios and projections to 2020,
Working Paper, May.
19
OCHA humanitarian appeal process
20
United Nations, Implementation of General Assembly resolution 67/226 on the quadrennial comprehensive
policy review of operational activities for development of the United Nations system, Report of the SecretaryGeneral, 2015 (A/70/62–E/2015/4, 13 January 2015).
21
United Nations, Implementation of General Assembly resolution 67/226 on the quadrennial comprehensive
policy review of operational activities for development of the United Nations system, Report of the SecretaryGeneral, 2015 (A/70/62–E/2015/4, 13 January 2015).
22
OCHA humanitarian appeal process
23
SDFDRR
24
UN DPKO Factsheets
6
Final 13 October 2015
sustaining peace. Estimates of ODA expenditure on peacebuilding in 2013 vary significantly
and range from $2 to $8 billion. 25 In 2014, the Peacebuilding Fund (PBF) invested $100
million 26 in peacebuilding programmes and requested the same amount from donors. The
Peace Operations report, the Secretary-General’s report on that report and the peacebuilding
architecture report highlight the need to prioritize and secure sustained funding for
programming activities as part of the assessed budgets to peace operations. The peacebuilding
architecture report suggests that initially a symbolic 1 per cent or at least $100 million27 of the
total UN budgets for peace operations should be allocated to the PBF on top of voluntary
contributions.
Recognizing the interlinkages
20.
The financial proposals underlying the post-2015 development agenda are closely
interlinked. For example, investments in addressing climate change will reduce the risk of
instability and probably funding needs for peacekeeping, peacebuilding and humanitarian
support. Investments in conflict prevention, peacebuilding and conflict resolution will also
increase stability and result in lower peacekeeping and humanitarian costs. Overtime,
humanitarian appeals in particular, can be reduced by better investments in sustaining peace
and addressing the root causes of conflict and building resilient societies. The humanitarian
appeals will only decrease in size and scope if and when long-term solutions fundamentally
address the root causes (political, economic, social and environmental) of humanitarian needs.
Increasingly, conflict in itself causes the greatest degree of vulnerability and humanitarian need
amongst affected populations and remains the biggest threat to human development according
to the final Millennium Development Goals report.28
Table Various funding streams
(in millions of US$)
Total ODA*
Humanitarian
Humanitarian
Debt relief
UN System
Funding for operational activities
Global norms, standards and advocacy
Peacekeeping
SDGs (SDSN estimate)
Climate change
Climate change mitigation
Climate change adaption
Peacekeeping
Peacebuilding
PBF contributions
2013
135,072
11,000
2014
135,164
13,000
2015
Appeal
18,440
3,600
42,600
26,838
8,094
7,668
476
1,535,000-2,529,000
100,000
10
1,928
1,959
7,780
2,000-8,000
41
78
8,470
100
* Total ODA includes humanitarian, debt relief, parts of funding for the UN system and part of peacebuilding
25
PBSO estimate. Difference between a narrow and broad definition of peacebuilding. Narrow definition: all
OECD sector 15, peace and security, codes, including. ‘Child soldiers, prevention and demobilization’ and
‘Security system management and reform’. Broad definition: including activities like ‘Democratic participation
and civil society’ and ‘Legislatures and political parties’
26
MPTF Office Gateway, PBF allocation.
27
AGE Peacebuilding Architecture report, section 108, p. 43.
28
United Nations (2015), The Millennium Development Goals Report 2015, New York.
7
Final 13 October 2015
21.
Against this backdrop and the ambitious new development agenda, the UN should
ensure more predictable, coherent and joined-up financing, clearly quantifying the building
blocks of a more diversified, integrated and complementary global financing architecture
(peacekeeping, peacebuilding, humanitarian, climate change, etc.), preferably over a multi-year
basis. The UN system needs to arrive at a “common narrative” on funding issues, planning,
programming and structural/architectural changes, in line with current Policy Committee
resolutions, e.g. Integrated Assessment and Planning policy (2013) for integrated missions, and
the Decision on Durable Solutions (2011). The forecasting of the cost of the UN system should
be linked to this common narrative, which is part of a larger financing landscape including
bilateral development assistance, international financial institutions (IFIs), regional
development banks, private investment among others. Greater reliance on assessed
contributions combined with increased use of inter-agency pooled funds capitalized through
multi-year commitments could ensure predictability and allow for long-term joint strategic
planning for UN programming.
IV. COMMON SOLUTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
“The UN Secretariat must embrace the need for yet more change as it looks
to the future. The world continues to evolve and so must the United Nations.
The United Nations of tomorrow will be judged not by the quality of its
conferences or its resolutions, but by the quality of its response”.
Uniting our Strengths for Peace report, para. 42
22.
The year 2015 presents an historic opportunity to shape the role of the United Nations
to be better able to manage crisis risks of the future and leverage new opportunities for a more
resilient future. The UNDG in particular is well positioned to support countries in the
implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development through a revised process of
planning, costing, financing, implementation, monitoring and reporting that is inclusive of the
diversity within and outside the UN system to jointly deliver collective outcomes. A strong
2016 Quadrennial Comprehensive Policy Review will advance UNDS efforts to become “fit
for purpose” to deliver on the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. In being “fit for
purpose”, the primary “purpose” is to deliver sustainable development results at country level
through joined-up capacities and resources for integrated and coherent policy and operations.
We need to pursue strategic partnerships and forge issue-based coalitions to support these
efforts. UN expertise should be offered across policy and technical areas that match country
context and operational complexity. We need to invest in high-performing UN leaders on the
ground by strengthening policies and procedures, tracking implementation of the mutual
accountability framework and support to strengthened learning and performance management
systems.
23.
The overlap between the solutions and recommendations proposed by the global
agendas analysed in this note show the urgency of identifying, promoting and operationalizing
greater synergies among a broader community of actors, including within and outside the UN,
to enable sustainable development and peace. While there seems to be a broad consensus on
common problem statements and on a collective way forward under the overarching scope of
the SDGs, considerable obstacles need to be addressed in order to translate global
commitments into action. The subsections below provide a snapshot on the key common
solutions and recommendations.
Concerted and coherent action to manage global challenges holistically
8
Final 13 October 2015
24.
The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development makes a clear case for a holistic
approach in addressing all the basic needs of the most vulnerable people, encompassing the
provision of basic services, safety and security, resilient livelihoods, rule of law, access to
justice and the respect of human rights and human dignity. It requires better partnerships
within and beyond the UN system, overcoming political, procedural and cultural hurdles to the
extent possible to enable effective collaboration with international financial institutions,
regional and development banks, governments, regional organizations, civil society groups,
youth, the private sector, diaspora groups, among many others. One of the ways in which the
UN can operationalize this is to adopt multi-stakeholder planning mechanisms that incorporate
the contributions of a diverse set of actors over the short-, medium- and long- term, at country,
regional and global levels.
Focus on prevention and resilience
25.
The focus on prevention resonates well with the UN’s charter commitment to “save
succeeding generations from the scourge of war” and “to promote social progress and better
standards of live in larger freedom.” Yet, it remains a largely underprioritized and underfunded
area. Increasingly, the trend within the donor community and international actors has been to
direct efforts and funding towards costly and oftentimes short-term crisis response and postconflict interventions that are easier to measure and yield more immediate results, which have
inadvertently curtailed global efforts to sustain peace. A people-centred approach and the
commitment to leave no one behind cannot be achieved through reacting to shocks as a
palliative when evidence suggests that they could have been prevented and human suffering
and economic losses avoided. Therefore, addressing the root causes of conflict and disaster and
strengthening people’s resilience to better cope, adapt, recover and transform when facing
complex shocks and stresses has emerged as a major area of overlap. The 2015 review
processes hold a great potential to bring about a transformative, synchronized and actual shift
in donor and UN system mind-set to advance and prioritize the prevention, peacebuilding and
resilience agendas. While crises are an inherent part of development processes, their
destructive impact can be greatly minimized if early warnings signs trigger early and
preventive actions, which the system has fallen short of operational delivery to date. The focus
on prevention requires greater focus as one UN system on reducing and managing the risks of
disasters, complex emergencies, violent conflict, health emergencies and all types of shocks,
including forced displacement. Building resilience to all kinds of shocks and stresses, and
recovering better and faster, have emerged as a key common action area of the global agendas.
More seamless “transitions”
26.
A less linear approach to transitions from conflict to sustaining peace or from relief to
development is needed, with a more strategic focus on the political aspects and processes,
longer-term focus and flexibility to adjust to a changing context. There is a need to implement
a stronger approach to various transitions based on specific context and technical expertise and
capacities, leverage the mandates of the UN and non-UN actors in their areas of comparative
advantage, and pave the way for more sustainable approaches needs to be implemented. That is
particularly the case in contexts of chronic vulnerability or recurrent hazards.
Better interconnection and sequencing of financing requests among the UN family
27.
Many of the global agendas call for substantial financial resources for prevention,
improved flexibility in the usage of funds, the creation of different funding facilities, including
the establishment or reinforcement of global pooled funds, and an increased share of public
and private funding to meet the growing challenges and constant financial shortfalls.
Inherently, UN entities are all “fishing in the same pond” of resources and in a time of global
9
Final 13 October 2015
austerity and donor fatigue. It is important to recognize that increased financing through both
voluntary and assessed contributions is necessary to respond to the unprecedented needs
emanating from complex violent conflicts, global pandemics and the adverse effects of
climate-related disasters. However, it is equally important to place today’s immediate financial
requests towards preventive measures in the context of a longer-term time horizon where the
fruits of investments in sustaining peace, climate change mitigation and adaptation disaster risk
reduction and resilience building are anticipated to gradually result in downsized humanitarian
and peace operations costs. The global agendas highlight the need for increased risk-informed
financing for prevention, risk reduction and response with the necessary flexibility to
effectively support ex-ante measures in line with a new agenda of sustaining peace.
Moving towards improved and streamlined funding solutions
28.
Given that the SDGs are much broader than the MDGs, it will be important to consider
how to avoid silos and ensure much greater inter-linkages across vertical and thematic funds in
a post-2015 era. The UNDS will have a critical role to play in managing and leveraging
coherent approaches, building on experience and lessons learned to date with existing global
partnerships in support of MDG achievement, and in close partnership with other actors,
including IFIs, regional development banks and private foundations in support of national
results. Discussions are already underway on how existing global partnerships can be
leveraged in support of the SDGs. Pooled funding mechanisms can be further encouraged and
used as centers of gravity advancing coherent, joined-up UN interventions at the global,
regional, country and thematic level, where appropriate. Pooled funding can act as a vehicle for
host-country, private sector and individual giving, help manage risks, ensure a better joined-up
results focus for the UNDS, drive UN synergies and policy coherence and convene partners
around shared results. Similarly, greater priority needs to be given to innovative funding
approaches that can leverage further resources such as domestic resources and support that
transformations called for by the new global development agenda. Funding must support
priority functions and agreed development, humanitarian and peace and justice agendas, while
it will be essential to make a strong case to donors for core and/or assessed funding.
The centrality of politics, addressing root causes of crises at all levels
29.
The global agendas refer to the centrality of politics or political solutions in the
management of global challenges, from reaching an agreement on lower carbon emissions and
bringing the average world temperature increase to accepted boundaries, to reducing the risk of
violent conflicts and sustaining peace over the longer term. The centrality or primacy of
politics entails recognizing both the local and transnational root causes of the crises the UN
tries to address and aiming to address them through longer-term strategic engagement. It is
fundamental to have strong understanding of the situation on the ground, including through
risk analysis and corresponding context-specific approaches that foster inclusive political
agreements that address drivers of crises, leveraging the mandates of the UN entities and nonUN actors in a manner that builds on their respective comparative advantages towards
achieving collective outcomes.
Localizing response through renewed focus on nationally or locally-owned processes
30.
In the context of a new development agenda, and where country needs and demands are
increasingly complex and individualized, the UN Development System must develop more
differentiated models of support, tailored to individual country needs, based not only on
income status, but also on human development achievements, fragility, vulnerability and risk
and sustainability challenges, in line with the development effectiveness principles of national
ownership and demand. The global agendas also recommend renewing commitments to
10
Final 13 October 2015
supporting nationally or locally-owned processes to ensure effectiveness and sustainability. For
example, localized response has emerged as a key element of a more effective international
humanitarian system. Likewise, the recognition that the sustainability of peace rests with
national and local actors means that peace operations must recognize local and national
engagement as core to mission success. Developing new operational partnerships that
recognize the equal role of local and national actors will require a more field-oriented UN, with
municipality, community and household-level engagement.
V. WAY FORWARD: LEVERAGING OPPORTUNITIES FOR MAXIMIZING
SYSTEM-WIDE COLLECTIVE IMPACT
31.
This note has highlighted that the universal, indivisible and fundamentally
interdependent nature of the Sustainable Development Goals cannot be fully achieved if all the
global agendas and their reform processes are not approached in a coherent and selfreinforcing manner. In order to capitalize on the overlapping messages emanating from the
global agendas and to address the fundamental issue of UN fragmentation, three practical
action areas to be brought to the UNDG ASG Advisory Group retreat are:

Institutional architecture, including leadership and organizational arrangements.
Operating in complex, protracted, urban and fragile environments is increasingly the
reality of UN operations aiming to reach the most vulnerable people. The UN must
seize the opportunity of the synergies among the global agendas to implement solutions
and recommendations in a reinforcing manner, including through the ECOSOC
Dialogue on the longer-term positioning of the UN Development System and the
QCPR process.

Analysis and planning for achieving collective outcomes. Different UN planning
tools, processes and mechanisms, each geared towards delivering its own
short/medium-term outputs, do not always contribute to creating collective values and
outcomes. Common objectives and strategies should be based on joint analysis. The
UN must embrace the SDG call for a new global partnership and the commitment to
“leaving no one behind” and shift from a focus on delivering services to enabling a
broad coalition of partners to achieve collective impact. The UN must not only update
the UNDAF model to deliver on the SDGs, but also link it to other planning
mechanisms within or beyond the UN in order to define collective outcomes to be
achieved over the medium and long term, in line with the SDG 15-year vision of a new
global partnership. In its own planning, the UN must focus on the leveraging role that
the UN can play in delivering these collective outcomes, including by prioritizing
prevention, peacebuilding, preparedness and resilience building. In mission contexts,
there should be renewed attention to the implementation of the UN Policy on Integrated
Assessment and Planning.

Financing. The UN must make better and more coherent use of existing financing
mechanisms, including pooled funds, and focus joined-up resource mobilization and
resource allocation to risk-informed priority areas. The UN must speak with one voice
for a dedicated portion of funding towards prevention, peacebuilding, preparedness and
resilience building, and to encourage innovation and change initiatives.
11
Final 13 October 2015
VI. ANNEX 1 Various global agendas (in chronological order)
1.
Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030 (SFDRR)
Background: The Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030 was adopted at
the Third UN World Conference in Sendai, Japan, on 18 March 2015. It is the outcome of
stakeholder consultations and inter-governmental negotiations, supported by the United
Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction at the request of the General Assembly.
Objectives: Develop a framework to assess global progress in preventing new and reducing
existing disaster risk. Highlight priority areas and propose actions to support countries in
reducing disaster risks.
Scope: The risk of small-scale and large-scale, frequent and infrequent, sudden and slow-onset
disasters, caused by natural or manmade hazards, specifically focussing on least developed
countries, small-island developing states, landlocked developing countries and African
countries, as well as middle income countries facing specific risks. All UN entities involved in
disaster risk reduction.
2.
“Uniting our Strengths for Peace”, Report of the High-level Independent Panel on
UN Peace Operations (HIPPO)
Background: An independent review commissioned by the Secretary-General, driven by the
growing demands placed upon peace operations. The Panel consulted with Member States,
regional organizations, civil society, think tanks and the broader UN system. The report was
released on 16 June 2015.
Objectives: Take stock of evolving expectations of UN peace operations and how the
Organization can work toward a shared view of the way forward. Provide concrete
recommendations on how peace operations can better fulfil their mandate in the future.
Scope: The report looks at the full spectrum of responses required, the underlying analysis,
strategy and planning that leads to more successful design of Security Council-mandated
missions.
3.
“The Challenges of Sustaining Peace“, Report of the Advisory Group of Experts
on the 2015 Review of the UN Peacebuilding Architecture (AGE)
Background: Outcome of the first phase of the 2015 review of the Peacebuilding Architecture
requested by the Presidents of the General Assembly and the Security Council, executed by an
Advisory Group of Experts (AGE). The AGE report was submitted to the Presidents of the two
Organs on 29 June 2015 and is intended to feed into a second, inter-governmental phase, led
by two GA and SC appointed Co-facilitators, and to be translate into concrete actions, in the
form of resolutions on how to strengthen the UN’s approach to sustaining peace.
Objectives: Propose ways to address the ‘gaping hole’ in the United Nations institutional
machinery in helping nations to transition from conflict to peace. Propose ways to strengthen
the performance and impact of the Peacebuilding Architecture, with a view to realizing its full
potential. To this end, the review should provide recommendations on the functioning,
resources and modes of engagement of the Peacebuilding Architecture and on its links with the
UN system entities that engage with it.
Scope: The report conducts a critical analysis of how the UN system sustains peace accounting
for the role of the Member States, the UN system itself and its actors ranging from the
political, security, humanitarian, human rights to development sectors and proposes
Recommendations for all of the above, going beyond the Peacebuilding Architecture entities,
12
Final 13 October 2015
on how to move away from the deeply ingrained siloed approach to enable integration,
prioritization of conflict prevention and breaking patterns of lapse and relapse.
4.
Addis Ababa Action Agenda, Financing for Development (FfD)
Background: Outcome of the Third International Conference on Financing for Development
in Addis Ababa on 13-16 July 2015, resulting from extensive intergovernmental negotiations.
It builds on the 2002 Monterrey Consensus and the 2008 Doha Declaration.
Objectives: Develop a framework and commit to concrete actions to deliver on the promise of
the Post-2015 Development Agenda.
Scope: National financing frameworks, coherent and mutually supporting world trade,
monetary and financial systems, strengthened and enhanced global economic governance and
development aid.
5.
Post-2015 Development Agenda (SDGs)
Background: Very broad consultations have taken place over the last three year on the Post2015 Development Agenda and Member States have negotiated over the last two years. The
final outcome will be adopted at the summit in September 2015. [Draft was adopted by
Member States on 2 August.]
Objectives: By setting 17 Sustainable Development Goals and 169 targets, stimulate global
actions for the next fifteen years to end poverty and to heal and secure our planet for present
and future generations. The cornerstone of the new agenda is the universal commitment to
leave no-one behind.
Scope: The Post-2015 Development Agenda encompasses the main priorities for people,
planet, prosperity, peace and partnership.
6.
Global Study on the implementation of Security Council Resolution 1325
[draft still to be finalized]
Background: In resolution 2122 (2013), the Security Council reiterated its intention to
convene a High-level Review in 2015 to assess progress at the global, regional and national
levels in implementing resolution 1325 (2000), renew commitments and address obstacles and
constraints that have emerged in the implementation of the resolution. In the same resolution,
the Security Council invited the Secretary-General, in preparation for the High-level Review,
to commission a global study on the implementation of resolution 1325, highlighting good
practice examples, implementation gaps and challenges, as well as emerging trends and
priorities for action. The results of the study will be submitted by the Secretary-General within
his annual report to the Security Council in 2015. At the same time, the 20-year review of the
Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action (Beijing+20) will also be conducted.
Objectives: The aim of the Study is to review the achievement of the objectives set out in
Security Council resolution 1325 (2000) and subsequent resolutions, and presents an
opportunity to consult directly with women affected by conflict to bring their experiences to
light, review impacts achieved and set an agenda for policy and implementation going forward.
Scope: The Global Study will highlight good practice examples, implementation gaps and
challenges, as well as emerging trends and priorities for action. It provides an invaluable
opportunity to ensure that the progress made at the normative level is effectively translated into
action at the global, regional and national levels.
7.
High-Level Panel on Global Response to Health Crises
13
Final 13 October 2015
[ongoing process]
Background: The panel was appointed on April 2015 with a mandate to make
recommendations to strengthen national and international systems to prevent and manage
future health crises, taking into account lessons learned from the response to the outbreak of
Ebola virus disease. The panel is currently looking at key aspects to enable more effective
responses to global health crises. The panel is undertaking a wide range of consultations,
including with representatives from the affected countries and communities, the UN system,
multilateral and bilateral financial institutions and regional development banks, NGOs,
countries supporting the response effort, other Member States, health care providers, academic
and research institutions, the private sector, and other experts. It will submit its final report to
the Secretary-General at the end of December 2015, ahead of the World Humanitarian Summit.
Objectives: Make ambitious recommendations to strengthen prevention and response efforts
to future health crises.
Scope: All aspects of health crisis prevention and response.
8.
High-Level Panel on Humanitarian Financing (HLPHF)
[draft still to be finalized]
Background: The growing gap between humanitarian needs and funds is straining the
capacity of the international humanitarian system to keep up with the growing demand for
emergency aid. Over the past 10 years, humanitarian funding requests through inter-agency
appeals have risen by more than 600 per cent. The compound effect of a series of global
challenges such as climate change, population growth, water scarcity, increasing conflicts,
among others, will continue to contribute to a situation where the current resources are
insufficient to meet ever growing and more complex humanitarian needs.
Objectives: The high-level panel aims to examine humanitarian financing challenges and
produce bold recommendations on reducing the gap between rising needs and the resources
available to meet them. It will also work on generating solutions around the issues of more
timely and predictable funding, as well as ways in which resources can be used more
effectively. The panel is expected to present its recommendations in November 2015, in order
to inform the negotiations ahead of the World Humanitarian Summit.
Scope: All aspects of humanitarian financing, with a focus on both meeting current funding
shortfalls and reducing demand for humanitarian financing.
9.
Climate Change; previous COPs [tbd]
Background: The international political response to climate change began at the Rio Earth
Summit in 1992, where the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change was adopted. The
convention set out a framework for action aimed at stabilising atmospheric concentrations of
greenhouse gases (GHGs) to avoid “dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate
system.” The UNFCCC which entered into force on 21 March 1994, now has a near-universal
membership of 195 parties. The main objective of the annual Conference of Parties (COP) is to
review the Convention’s implementation. COP3 adopted the Kyoto Protocol and COP17 in
Durban established the Green Climate Fund.
Objectives: In December 2015, COP21 will for the first time in over 20 years of UN
negotiations aim to achieve a legally binding and universal agreement on climate, with the aim
of keeping global warming below 2°C.
Scope: All aspects that impact on or are affected by climate change.
14
Final 13 October 2015
10.
World Humanitarian Summit (WHS)
[ongoing process]
Background: With the increased scope, intensity and length of humanitarian crises worldwide
in the past decades, it is paramount to seek new ways to more effectively meet the
humanitarian needs of people affected by conflicts and disasters. The World Humanitarian
Summit is not an intergovernmental process, but rather a multi-stakeholder initiative that
reflects the nature of humanitarian action, in which multiple actors interact, such as NGOs,
governments, local respondents, the private sector, diaspora groups, religious organizations
and the UN system. Ahead of the Summit, various regional and thematic consultations have
been undertaken. Four broad themes served as a framework for these consultations: 1)
humanitarian effectiveness, 2) reducing vulnerability and managing risk, 3) serving the needs
of people in conflict and 4) transformation through innovation. The Summit, which will take
place in Istanbul in May 23-24 2016, will be the first ever of its kind and scope.
Objectives: Set a new agenda for global humanitarian action.
Scope: All aspects of humanitarian action.
15
Final 13 October 2015
VII. ANNEX 2 Matrix of commonalities among key post-2015 reviews, processes and frameworks
Identified
common
elements
Global Agendas
Sustainable
Development
Goals
Sendai
Framework on
DRR
FfD
UNFCCC
COPs/IPCC
AGE report
HIPPO report
WHS synthesis
report (draft)
HLP on Hum
Financing
(Summary of
meeting)
Common problem statements/assessments of the changing operational landscape
More
intractable
and frequent
(or protracted)
crises globally
“Global health
threats, more
frequent and
intense natural
disasters,
spiralling conflict,
violent
extremism,
terrorism and
related
humanitarian
crises and forced
displacement of
people threaten
to reverse much
of the
development
progress made in
recent decades. “
Para. 14
“Disasters, many of
which are
exacerbated by
climate change and
which are
increasing in
frequency and
intensity,
significantly impede
progress towards
sustainable
development” Para.
4.
“Shocks from
financial and
economic crises,
conflict, natural
disasters and
disease outbreaks
spread rapidly in
our highly
interconnected
world.
Environmental
degradation,
climate change,
and other
environmental
risks threaten to
undermine past
successes and
future prospects.”
Para. 4.
“Recent climate
changes have had
widespread
impacts on human
and natural
systems” IPCC
assessment rep,
synthesis.
Institutional
fragmentation
“The SDGs and
targets are
integrated and
indivisible, global
in nature and
universally
applicable”
“ enhance
coherence across
policies,
institutions, goals,
indicators and
measurement
systems for
implementation,
while respecting
the respective
mandates. Ensuring
credible links, as
appropriate,
between these
processes will
“… align activities
with national
priorities,
including by
reducing
fragmentation,
accelerating the
untying of aid.”
Para. 58.
References to the
fragmentation of
the world’s
climate
governance are
ubiquitous in
specialized
literature, but not
referenced in the
COP outcomes.
Deterioration in the
quantity and quality
of water, due to
climate change,
pollution,
privatization and
inequities in supply,
have also proven to
be conflict drivers at
both local and
regional levels. Many
trans-boundary
water basins are
located in regions
with a history of
interstate tension,
threatening that
water might become
a significant causal
factor in future
regional conflicts.
Para. 16
“several principal
intergovernmental
Organs, and
especially the
Security Council,
hold pieces of the
peacebuilding
“puzzle,” each from
the vantage point of
their particular
Charter
responsibilities. The
fragmentation
between them is
reproduced
16
The emergence
and spread of
violent extremism
is adding to the
already complex
threats faced by
states, societies,
communities and
UN peace
operations,
including its
mediators. Many
of these violent
extremist groups
have grown by
exploiting local
grievances and
other governance
deficits. Para. 79
“We face an era of
enormous
humanitarian
challenges. Today,
more people are
affected by conflict
and disaster, more
frequently, and for
longer than in
previous decades.”
“more missions
are being
deployed into
increasingly
demanding
environments;
they are
struggling to fulfil
their protection
obligations and to
close a widening
gap between
what is asked of
them and what
they can provide.
“there is a need to
expand partnerships
to diversify
humanitarian action.
Humanitarian,
development, climate
change and, where
appropriate,
peacebuilding actors
should agree to
manage
crises collectively”
Global
Challenges
are increasing
the need for
humanitarian
funds and
stretching the
capacity of
the
international
humanitarian
system to
raise the
required
funds to
respond to
them.
1325
review
(ongoing)
High level
Panel on
Global Health
Emergencies
(ongoing)
Final 13 October 2015
contribute to
building resilience
and achieving the
global goal of
eradicating
poverty.” Para. 11
Exclusion of
Women and
Girls
“Gender
inequality remains
a key challenge.”
Para. 14
“Realizing gender
equality and the
empowerment of
women and girls
will make a crucial
contribution to
progress across all
the Goals and
targets.” Para. 20
“Empowering
women and
persons with
disabilities to
publicly lead and
promote gender
equitable and
universally
accessible
response, recovery,
rehabilitation and
reconstruction
approaches is key.”
Para. 32
throughout the UN:
within the
Secretariat, between
the Secretariat and
the rest of the UN,
and in operations on
the ground, where
peacebuilding
actually takes place.”
Summary
“Women,
representing half
of the world’s
population, as
well as indigenous
peoples and the
vulnerable,
continue to be
excluded from
participating fully
in the economy.”
Para. 4
“The role of
women is key to
the response to
climate change,
and needs to be
strengthened.”
COP20 Summary
“The changing face
of global conflict has
had a particular and
dramatic impact on
women. Gender
inequalities are
deepened and
exacerbated by
violence. Half the
world’s 59.5 million
forcibly displaced
(19.5 million
refugees, 1.8 million
asylum seekers and
38.2 million
internally displaced
people) are women.
Sexual violence is
used as a tactic to
displace refugee and
IDP populations,
while the ideological
opposition of many
extremist groups to
17
In the worst
circumstances,
missions with
protection of
civilians mandates
struggle simply to
protect and
resupply
themselves. In
some instances,
missions have
failed, for a
variety of reasons,
to respond to calls
for assistance,
leading to
perceptions from
nearby
communities that
although the
United Nations is
present on the
ground it is not
present for
them.” Para. 89
“Sexual violence
remains a
pervasive tactic of
modern war.
Women and girls
are subject to
mass abduction,
as well as forced
conversion,
marriage and
sexual slavery.”
Para. 9
“the
gender gap must be
closed: humanitarian
action must address
the specific needs of
women and
girls of different ages
and backgrounds, and
empower women to
be equal partners.”
Women are
disproportion
ately affected
by
humanitarian
crises while
research
shows they
are an
important
part of the
solution. The
Panel should
explore how
to leverage
financing
towards
greater
inclusion of
gender
aspects in the
financing,
design,
development
Final 13 October 2015
Need for
political
solutions
Collective
action
“As we embark on
this great
collective journey,
we pledge that no
one will be left
behind.
Recognizing that
the dignity of the
human person is
fundamental, we
wish to see the
Goals and targets
met for all nations
and peoples and
for all segments of
society. And we
will endeavour to
reach the furthest
behind first.”
Para. 4
“The realization of
this outcome
requires the strong
commitment and
involvement of
political leadership”
Para. 3
“strong political
commitment to
address the
challenge of
financing” Para. 1
“The realization of
the new framework
depends on our
unceasing and
tireless collective
efforts to make the
world safer from
the risk of disasters
in the decades to
come for the
benefit of the
present and future
generations.”
Declaration, Para.
3.
“We underline the
important role
and comparative
advantage of an
adequately
resourced,
relevant,
coherent, efficient
and effective
United Nations
system” Para. 74
“Climate change
has the
characteristics of
a collective action
problem (…)
Effective
mitigation will not
be achieved if
individual agents
advance their own
interests
independently.
Cooperative
responses,
including
international
cooperation, are
therefore
required to
effectively
mitigate GHG
emissions and
address other
climate change
issues.” IPCC 5th
assessment rep,
synthesis.
girls entering public
spaces, including
educational
institutions, is
placing them more
generally at a
heightened risk.”
Para. 14
While capacity
building, state
building, institution
building and
development all
demand
considerable
technical expertise,
first and foremost
peacebuilding must
be understood as an
inherently political
process” para. 7
“serve as a wake-up
call, helping to
strengthen the
collective resolve to
deal with
peacebuilding in a
more comprehensive
and determined
way.” Para. 3
18
and
implementati
on of
humanitarian
assistance
programs.
“humanitarian action
must not be a
substitute for political
solutions to prevent
armed conflict, build
peace, address the
root causes of
suffering and
bring an end to the
situation.”
“UN peace
operations can
and do make
important, and at
times decisive,
contributions to
conflict
prevention and
resolution, but
they cannot and
should not be
asked to respond
to all threats”
Para. 17
“transform our
collective approach to
managing new risks
that these changes
bring, and to working
together to empower
and support the
planet’s poorest and
most vulnerable
people.”
Securing
more private
funding to
joint appeals
through
stronger
national and
global media
alliances;
Final 13 October 2015
Insufficient
partnerships
“the new Agenda
requires a
revitalized Global
Partnership to
ensure its
implementation.
We fully commit
to this. This
Partnership will
work in a spirit of
global solidarity,
in particular
solidarity with the
poorest and with
people in
vulnerable
situations” para.
39
“require an
enhanced provision
of means of
implementation,
including adequate,
sustainable and
timely resources,
through
international
cooperation and
global partnerships
for development,
and continued
international
support, so as to
strengthen their
efforts to reduce
disaster risk.” Para.
38.
The post-2015
development
agenda, including
the sustainable
development
goals, can be met
within the
framework of a
revitalized global
partnership. Para.
19.
“An important use
of international
public finance,
including ODA, is to
catalyse additional
resource
mobilization from
other sources,
public and private.
ODA providers
reaffirm their
respective
commitments,
including the
commitment by
many developed
countries to
achieve the target
of 0.7% of ODA/GNI
to developing
countries and
0.15% to 0.2% of
ODA/GNI to least
“The total
economic loss was
more than $1.3
trillion.” In
reference to
disasters between
2005 and 2015.
Para. 4
“We recognize the
need for the
coherence of
developmental
and humanitarian
finance to ensure
more timely,
comprehensive,
appropriate and
cost-effective
approaches to the
management and
mitigation of
natural disasters
and complex
emergencies.”
So great is the
challenge of
peacebuilding in
political, technical
and financial terms,
though, that building
effective
partnerships is
essential – first and
foremost with
domestic actors, but
also with new
groupings, regional
and international
players, and
nongovernmental
organizations. Yet,
this review identified
some serious
impediments to the
UN’s ability to
partner for
peacebuilding. Para.
94
The United
Nations must play
a leading role in
forming a vision
for a stronger
global-regional
partnership for
peace and
security to ensure
that the Security
Council is able to
call upon a more
resilient and
capable network
of actors in
response to future
threats.
“The WHS is an
opportunity to (…)
develop new
partnerships and
new ways of
working;”
In order to maximize
the PBF’s potential
and predictability,
the General
Assembly should
consider steps to
ensure that core
funding representing
US$ 100 million or an
approximate and
symbolic 1 per cent
of the value
(whichever is higher)
of the total UN
budgets for peace
operations
(peacekeeping and
Special Political
Missions together)
be provided to it
annually from
assessed
contributions under
“ the UN Country
Team need a
better set of
financing
arrangements
that help them to
deliver together
and to deliver
more effectively,
including scaled
up support for the
Peacebuilding
Fund, better
capitalized pooled
funds at the
country-level,
and, within
mission budgets,
programmatic
funding for
mandated tasks in
support of peace
consolidation.
“The cost of
humanitarian action
has also risen
dramatically – the size
of UN led appeals
grew by 550 per cent
in just over ten years:
from
US$3.4 billion in 2003
to $18.7 billion in
2015.3 At the same
time, the gap between
the scale of needs
and the resources
available to meet
them is growing: the
UN‐led appeal for
2015 may reach a
record
$20 billion, but
remains less than 30
per cent funded as of
the time of writing.”
Financing
Financing/
economic
costs
In the context of
meaningful
mitigation actions
and transparency
on
implementation,
developed
countries commit
to a goal of
mobilizing jointly
USD 100 billion
dollars a year by
2020 to address
the needs of
developing
countries.
Copenhagen
accord, Para. 8
19
Securing
greater
flexibility in
funding and
harmonizatio
n of reporting
from
traditional
donors in
exchange for
greater
efficiency and
transparency
from
humanitarian
agencies;
Final 13 October 2015
developed
countries.” Para. 43
While the costs of
implementing the
agenda haven’t
been fully agreed,
estimates range
from $3.5 trillion to
$5 trillion a year.
the UN budget. The
assessed
contributions should
be provided in a way
that ensures
necessary oversight
without undermining
the Fund’s
comparative
advantage as a fast,
un-earmarked,
flexible and
prepositioned pooled
fund working under
Terms of Reference
approved by the
General Assembly.
The PBF should then
leverage such
funding to catalyse
additional voluntary
contributions
Para. 141
“If the central goal of
sustaining peace is to
be achieved, it needs
to be understood as
a key shared
responsibility across
the entire United
Nations
Organization: a
thread that must run
strongly through all
of the UN’s work in
prevention,
peacemaking, peace
enforcement and
peacekeeping, as
well as through postconflict recovery and
reconstruction.
Improving UN
performance in
sustaining peace is
truly a systemic
challenge, one that
goes far beyond the
The UN System
too must pull
together in a
more integrated
manner in the
service of conflict
prevention and
peace. All of these
partnerships must
be underpinned
by mutual respect
and mutual
responsibilities.
Exec Summary
Common recommendations and proposed action
Concerted
and coherent
action to
manage
global
challenges
holistically
“The challenges
and commitments
contained in these
major conferences
and summits are
interrelated and
call for integrated
solutions. To
address them
effectively, a new
approach is
needed.” Para. 13
“International,
regional,
subregional and
transboundary
cooperation
remains pivotal in
supporting the
efforts of States,
their national and
local authorities, as
well as
communities and
businesses, to
reduce disaster
risk.” Para. 8
“National
development
efforts need to be
supported by an
enabling
international
economic
environment,
including
coherent and
mutually
supporting world
trade, monetary
and financial
systems, and
strengthened and
enhanced global
economic
governance.”
Para. 9
20
“the World
Humanitarian Summit
can reinforce a shift to
a collective
approach to crisis
management. This
shift will require a
strong emphasis on
planning beforehand,
securing firm political
and financial
commitments to
respond, managing
disaster risk, and
reducing
vulnerability to
humanitarian stress.”
Advocating
for more
appropriate
financing
instruments
to respond to
protracted
crises and
displacement
situations,
more
particularly a
change in
eligibility
criteria for
Multilateral
Development
Banks (MDB)
concessionary
financing
funds and
facilities;
Final 13 October 2015
Focus on
prevention
and
resilience
“We must redouble
our efforts to
resolve or prevent
conflict and to
support postconflict countries,”
Para. 35
More
seamless
“transitions”
Reflecting the
integrated
approach that we
have decided on,
there are deep
interconnections
and many crosscutting elements
across the new
Goals and targets.
Para. 17
“Enhanced work to
reduce exposure
and vulnerability,
thus preventing the
creation of new
disaster risks, and
accountability for
disaster risk
creation are
needed at all
levels.” Para. 6
“We will develop
and implement
holistic disaster
risk management
at all levels in line
with the Sendai
Framework. In
this regard, we
will support
national and local
capacity for
prevention,
adaptation and
mitigation of
external shocks
and risk
management.
“We will step up
our efforts to
assist countries in
accessing
financing for
peacebuilding and
development in
the post-conflict
context. We
recognize the
need for aid to be
delivered
efficiently through
simplified
mechanisms”
“Recognition that
National
Adaptation Plans
(NAPs) offer an
important way of
delivering
resilience.” COP
20 Summary
limited scope of the
entities created in
2005 that have been
labelled the
“Peacebuilding
Architecture”. Para.
6
“A change in mindset is needed: rather
than waiting until
crisis breaks out and
then making a
default recourse to a
crisis response,
timely efforts to
prevent conflict and
then sustain peace
need to be
embedded across all
sectors and phases
of action.” Para. 123
The UN system
needs to pay more
attention to the
timing and
management of
transitions between
different forms of UN
engagement:
between different
kinds of mission, and
from UN Country
Teams to missions
and back again.
Summary
21
Reference to
prevention is
made above.
“There is an urgent
need to tackle the
growing consequences
of disasters caused by
natural hazards; to
reduce people’s
vulnerability and build
their resilience; to
address the needs of
people living through
armed conflicts”
Peace processes
do not end with a
cease-fire, a
peace-agreement
or an election.
Such events
constitute merely
a phase, rather
than the
conclusion, of a
peace process. In
fact, they may be
times of great
vulnerability,
when belligerents
“Countries that move
away from fragility
and conflict often do
so not through one
decisive “make or
break” moment—but
through many
transition moments.
There is therefore a
need to go beyond just
providing assistance
…”
There is
increased
progress on
contingency
planning and
crisis
preparedness
for natural
disasters,
however, the
number of
countries
with
adequate
levels of
preparedness
is still low.
More work
needed on
how to reflect
use of
financial
insurance
products by
governments
and aid
agencies.
Creating
incentives for
humanitarian
and
development
actors to plan
and work
more
together;
Final 13 October 2015
Para. 67.
“explore coherent
funding
modalities to
mobilize
additional
resources,
building on
country-led
experiences.”
Para. 12
Better
interconnecti
on and
sequencing
of financing
requests
among the
UN family
The
centrality of
politics,
addressing
root causes
of crises at
all levels
“The new Agenda
recognizes the
need to build
peaceful, just and
inclusive societies
that provide equal
access to justice
and that are based
on respect for
human rights
(including the right
to development),
on effective rule of
law and good
governance at all
levels and on
transparent,
effective and
accountable
institutions. Factors
which give rise to
violence, insecurity
face the
uncertainty of
making the
transition to
peaceful politics
and when spoilers
mobilize. Para.
127
“More Predictable
Peacebuilding
Financing: Despite a
decade of focus,
financing for
sustaining peace
remains scarce,
inconsistent and
unpredictable. Here
also, strategic
partnerships and
pooling funding
between the UN,
World Bank and
other bilateral and
multilateral financial
institutions will
maximize impact and
share risk.” Summary
“Sustaining peace
should span an
essential
combination of
actions across the
diplomatic, political,
human rights,
economic, social and
security areas, with
particular attention
to addressing root
causes.” Para. 122
22
“Provide adequate
finance to build
resilience, and
guarantee life and
dignity when crises
strike”
The primacy of
politics should be
the hallmark of
the approach of
the United
Nations to the
resolution of
conflict, during
mediation, the
monitoring of
ceasefires,
assistance to the
implementation
of peace accords,
the management
of violent conflicts
and longer-term
efforts at
sustaining peace.
Para. 43
“there are no
humanitarian
solutions to
political problems,”
there must be greater
political action to
prevent and end
armed conflicts and to
enhance respect for
international
humanitarian law
(IHL).
Final 13 October 2015
Localizing
response
through
renewed
focus on
nationally or
locallyowned
processes
and injustice, such
as inequality,
corruption, poor
governance and
illicit financial and
arms flows, are
addressed in the
Agenda.” Para. 35
“will also work
closely on
implementation
with regional and
local authorities,
sub-regional
institutions,
international
institutions,
academia,
philanthropic
organisations,
volunteer groups
and others.” 45
“While the
enabling, guiding
and coordinating
role of national and
federal State
Governments
remain essential, it
is necessary to
empower local
authorities and
local communities
to reduce disaster
risk, including
through resources,
incentives and
decision-making
responsibilities, as
appropriate;” Para.
19 f
“Strengthening of
the capacity of
local and national
institutions as a
priority in conflictaffected and
postconflict States
while stressing
the importance of
country
ownership and
leadership in both
peacebuilding and
development”.
Para. 8.
“It has become a
commonplace to
insist that the
success of
peacebuilding
fundamentally
depends on “national
ownership” This is
generally taken to
mean that peace
cannot be imposed
from outside, but
must be genuinely
and gradually built
by a process of
accommodation on
the part of domestic
stakeholders, public
and private. These
are best placed to
understand the local
dynamics that
condition the
achievement of
peacebuilding goals.”
Para. 41
23
“support local coping
strategies, systems
and self‐protection
mechanisms, reducing
dependency and
vulnerability; increase
their accountability to
affected people.”
Advocating
for more
appropriate
financing
instruments
to respond to
protracted
crises and
displacement
situations,
more
particularly a
change in
eligibility
criteria for
Multilateral
Development
Banks (MDB)
concessionary
financing
funds and
facilities;