IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/diebps/62015.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Post-2015: recharging governance of United Nations development

Author

Listed:
  • Helgason, Kristinn Sv.
  • Weinlich, Silke

Abstract

The post-2015 development agenda will constitute a different mission for UN Development than the current one driven by the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). Unlike the MDGs agenda, the new sustainable development goals (SDGs) aim to integrate the economic, social and environmental pillars of sustainable development while emphasising global challenges to a greater extent. The growing interconnection between local and global development challenges will be a key feature of the SDGs. Current governance arrangements of UN Development, however, impose a constraint on the organisation’s ability to meet the integration requirements of the SDGs. To deliver on the post-2015 development agenda in an integrated and coordinated manner, UN Development will require governance capacity that can foster policy coherence and interoperability in programming and operations. This means that governing boards will have to be able to coordinate their work more effectively than in the past, with a view to balancing agency and system-wide interests, as well as the local and global perspective in their decision-making. Such changes required in the capability of governing bodies also offer Member States the opportunity to rethink what constitutes legitimacy in governance. Three options are particularly proposed to address the governance demands of the post-2015 development agenda: ECOSOC as a system-wide governing body: On the basis of a system-wide strategy, the UN Development Group (UNDG) becomes formally accountable to ECOSOC and the General Assembly for the implemen-tation of system-wide objectives. This would strengthen horizontal governance of development operations; Fulltime Joint Executive Board: Merging the four executive boards of the funds and programmes with major development operations; and Fulltime Development Board: A single board for the governance of operational activities of the 19 funds and programmes reporting to the central bodies of the General Assembly and the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC). In making the governance of UN Development “fit-for-purpose”, Member States would fundamentally recharge multilateral cooperation, whose appeal is withering, despite the reality of growing interconnectedness, complexity and uncertainty in today’s globalising world.

Suggested Citation

  • Helgason, Kristinn Sv. & Weinlich, Silke, 2015. "Post-2015: recharging governance of United Nations development," Briefing Papers 6/2015, German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS).
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:diebps:62015
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/199747/1/die-bp-2015-06.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Charlotte Streck, 2001. "The Global Environment Facility-a Role Model for International Governance?," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 1(2), pages 71-94, May.
    2. Wennubst, Pio & Mahn, Timo Casjen, 2013. "Post 2015: what it means for the United Nations development system," Briefing Papers 13/2013, German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Baumann, Max-Otto, 2016. "Reforming the UN Development System: can North and South overcome their political differences in making the UN fit for purpose?," IDOS Discussion Papers 14/2016, German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS).
    2. Loewe, Markus (Ed.) & Rippin, Nicole (Ed.), 2015. "Translating an ambitious vision into global transformation: the 2030 agenda for sustainable development," IDOS Discussion Papers 7/2015, German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Christopher Pallas & Johannes Urpelainen, 2012. "NGO monitoring and the legitimacy of international cooperation: A strategic analysis," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 7(1), pages 1-32, March.
    2. Julian Clifton, 2011. "Agriculture, Land Use and Conservation Initiatives in Indonesia: Implications for Development and Sustainability," Chapters, in: Matthew Tonts & M. A.B. Siddique (ed.), Globalisation, Agriculture and Development, chapter 11, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. Steffen Eckhard & Vytautas Jankauskas, 2020. "Explaining the political use of evaluation in international organizations," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 53(4), pages 667-695, December.
    4. Kristinn Sv. Helgason, 2016. "The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development: Recharging Multilateral Cooperation for the Post-2015 Era," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 7(3), pages 431-440, September.
    5. Miller, Daniel C., 2014. "Explaining Global Patterns of International Aid for Linked Biodiversity Conservation and Development," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 341-359.
    6. Tareq K. Al-Awad & Motasem N. Saidan & Brian J. Gareau, 2018. "Halon management and ozone-depleting substances control in Jordan," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 391-408, June.
    7. Azusa Uji, 2019. "Institutional diffusion for the Minamata Convention on Mercury," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 169-185, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:diebps:62015. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ditubde.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.