Published by the International Institute for Sustainable Development
(IISD)
Vol. 23 No. 04
Thursday, 18 October 2001
FFD PREPCOM HIGHLIGHTS:
WEDNESDAY, 17 OCTOBER 2001
Delegates gathered for the fifth and
sixth sessions of the resumed Third PrepCom for the Financing for
Development (FfD) process . In the morning, delegates met in Plenary for
a presentation and then continued with informal consultations throughout
the day on the Draft Outcome’s first and second sections.
PLENARY
At 10:20 am, Co-Chair Jacoby convened
the PrepCom and introduced Lennart Båge, President of the International
Fund for Agricultural Development, who spoke on behalf of the World Food
Programme and the Food and Agriculture Organization. He underscored the
significant drop in ODA, and said that without the mobilization of new
resources, the agencies’ quest for a world free of poverty and hunger
is unattainable. He called the Draft Outcome not "sufficiently
specific" in mobilizing resources for food security, poverty
reduction and sustainable development.
INFORMAL CONSULTATIONS
GLOBALIZATION AND DOMESTIC RESOURCES: In
discussions on section one (globalization) and the first chapter of
section two (domestic resources), SOUTH AFRICA specified more emphasis
on multilateralism, international partnerships and the issue of capital
flight, and proposed adding transparency and predictability to the
global governance principles in paragraph four. On financing and
conditionalities, he stressed adjusting goals and standards to national
conditions. JAMAICA, on behalf of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM),
asserted that despite a favorable domestic environment, countries who
have agreed to conditionalities have not benefited from external
financing. She said that mobilization of resources cannot be primarily
internal because economies are interrelated. The RUSSIAN FEDERATION
stressed the responsibilities of national governments for providing
favorable conditions for FDI as well as social support for the needy. He
suggested adding references to liberalizing national financial markets
and donor assistance for mobilizing domestic resources.
The US dismissed key parts of the text
as "woefully inadequate" and rejected it as a basis for
discussion. He said that globalization is a fragile process that depends
on continuous will and that one cannot enjoy its benefits without paying
costs. He rejected numerous references in the text, including, inter
alia, notions of inequitable globalization, increasing polarization,
asymmetries in the system, international responsibilities for
development, and global economic and social governance. He stressed that
the goal of this process is not to strengthen multilateralism but to
stimulate national actions in meeting country responsibilities. Noting
that the market should determine investment flows, he objected to
notions of a government role in income distribution and providing credit
for all. He said opportunities for country participation in
decision-making are adequate.
The CZECH REPUBLIC called for
clarification on country responsibilities for resource mobilization, and
proposed elaboration of: specific nationally-driven poverty reduction
goals and development strategies; linkages among economic, social,
fiscal and trade policies; and coordination and partnerships at the
national level. INDIA suggested clarification on global public goods
(GPGs) and taking into account different development needs. CHILE
underscored the importance of equity in development. MALAYSIA proposed
further elaboration of poverty eradication, equity and
co-responsibility. NIGERIA preferred references to the "global
economic system" over globalization; and said that peace, good
governance and accountability were necessary for ownership of
development. THAILAND emphasized, inter alia: socially
responsible macroeconomic policies and technical assistance. He noted
that regional cooperation can strengthen surveillance efforts and
supported financial crisis recovery measures. SWITZERLAND called section
two a crucial pillar of the FfD process, and in paragraph eight
proposed, inter alia: adding reference to medium-term frameworks,
strengthening budget management capabilities and tax structure
simplification. Benin proposed that the FfD form a "mechanism"
for mobilizing resources for LDCs. Ethiopia opined that good governance
promotes "sector investment programs" and FDI. Describing how
ODA shortfalls have posed problems for developing countries, he
suggested trade as a tool for improving their economic outlook. The
PHILIPPINES emphasized being "fully inclusive" as stated in
paragraph one. Regarding paragraph nine, he contended the integration of
gender in all financial sector aspects contributes
"significantly" to advancing FfD goals.
INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE RESOURCES: In
the second chapter of section two (international private resources), the
G-77/ CHINA said that the group would comment on each paragraph. In
paragraph 11, on private flows, he contended: economies in transition
don’t share the same status as developing countries; and FDI should be
directed toward a greater impact on development. He specified adding
reference to the volume of FDI and dropping reference to investment
agreements in paragraph 13, on promoting FDI. In paragraph 14, on
measures to encourage FDI, he suggested clarifying domestic constraints
and adding measures for addressing capital flight. In paragraph 15, on
support for private investments, he proposed references to, inter
alia, development banks and other financial institutions
facilitating private sector interactions in FDI origin and target
countries. In paragraph 16, on business obligations, he supported
dropping references to socially and environmentally responsible
investment and to good corporate citizenship. He said paragraph 17, on
predictable financial flows, should underscore that ODA can play a vital
role in expanding private sector investment.
The EU suggested separating principles
from concrete initiatives. Boosting entrepreneurship is paramount, he
said, but the text should have a pro-poor orientation and consider
rights in the workplace. In paragraph 12, he said a true partnership
encompassing all aspects of development and financing had to be more
than just a bargain of certain policies in exchange for ODA. While
noting that ODA is an essential financial source for the poorest
countries, he maintained attracting direct private investments is the
primary responsibility of developing countries. In paragraph 13, he
supported reference to further analysis on FDI triggers and obstacles.
Paragraph 15, he maintained, should give more attention to
private-public partnerships, and paragraph 16 should include references
to international accounting standards, the OECD guidelines for
multinationals and the UN Global Compact. He proposed that paragraph 17
should include measures to discourage harmful competition for FDI and
underscore that a stable domestic environment is key to a stable
international system.
JAPAN called for de-emphasizing the
BWIs and stressed the importance of providing a favorable environment
for investment by sending clear messages to the private sectors. The
REPUBLIC OF KOREA acknowledged linkages between private resources and
development, and stressed the importance of corporate responsibility.
MEXICO noted mobilization of resources required consistent macroeconomic
policies, called for distinction between short and long-term capital
flows, and said structural reforms are important for attracting direct
private capital. PERU proposed development and updates of practical
financial solutions and tools in the Draft Outcome and called for
regional and multilateral institutions to establish a dialogue among
institutions and companies. On behalf of the SIDS Pacific Island Forum,
FIJI stated that developing countries should redouble their efforts in
infrastructure development of information and technology projects.
Switzerland supported public-private partnerships to boost technology
transfer and competition, and said ODA should serve as
"leverage" complementing other financial flows. South Africa
called for improving policy and regulation networks to facilitate
private sector decisions related to FDI. New Zealand said FDI and
private capital flows are a means for long-term development, and an
environment conducive to FDI emphasizes the rule of law, intolerance for
corruption and good governance.
Norway underscored innovative
public-private partnerships, special investment funds and improved
market access. China stated that of US$127 billion of FDI, US$100
billion flows into developed countries. He challenged the PrepCom to
move FDI to developing countries. Malaysia maintained that strengthening
the host country’s capacity to manage flows of FDI would, inter
alia, reduce leakage from the host country. UKRAINE addressed FDI in
facilitating transitions to a market economy and called for a separate
paragraph reflecting the specific needs of countries in transition.
CHILE noted differences in national circumstances, discussed the
shortage and volatility of FDI, and identified mutual interest as a key
to investment. BRAZIL noted the importance of making changes in national
regulations, maximizing the mutual benefits of investments, and taking
advantage of investment opportunities with the help of international
institutions. INDIA said multilateral institutions should respect
sovereignty. The BAHAMAS, on behalf of CARICOM, said that FDI is
concentrated in a small number of countries and that creating enabling
environments is necessary but not sufficient for ensuring FDI. She
called for creating more investment agreements, arrangements for smaller
economies, and government offices to facilitate investment. PARAGUAY
said that FDI is something more than external resources and includes
technology, marketing and organizational capacity. He stressed the need
to open developed country markets to developing country products.
GUATEMALA noted that FDI is just one type of capital flow and not all
FDI is desirable. He suggested references to: the quality of investment;
stimulating capital flows in both directions; and setting universal
rules to ensure a level playing field and avoid competition among
countries that depletes domestic public savings. HONDURAS advocated
linking the FfD process to the World Summit on Sustainable Development,
proposed inviting regional development bank representatives to
participate in the Conference and stressed transparency and ethics. The
PHILIPPINES urged analysis of FDI schemes in paragraph 13 and
highlighted holistic approaches in paragraph 17. BELARUS stressed the
role of stakeholders, including recipients of private investment, in
paragraphs 15 and 16; and enhancing concepts of private sector and
government cooperation.
PAKISTAN noted that private capital
flows can build up inflationary pressures and that short-term capital
flows are destabilizing and require technical safety nets. He called for
mechanisms to ensure partnerships that benefit both donors and
recipients. BOLIVIA said that implementation requires follow-up to the
Conference and called for a political statement that defines such
machinery. The RUSSIAN FEDERATION proposed multilateral institutions use
international standards, accounting and reporting that is clear to
investors. INDONESIA noted unclear ideas on the concept of GPGs,
proposed reference to good public and corporate governance in paragraph
seven and requested appropriate avenues to discuss "corporate
citizenship." Algeria listed tax incentives, land grants,
communications, and human resources as incentives for FDI. The Dominican
Republic stated that mobilization of resources should include: greater
stability of the economy; capital flows that encourage privatization;
and a transfer of financial resources from private banks, regional
banks, and bilateral and multilateral resources.
PARTNERS AND STAKEHOLDERS: The
WORLD BANK proposed discussion to clarify the role of private capital
flows, and stressed the necessity of a good climate to attract FDI. At
the national level, he encouraged "bridge-building" to help
lubricate private capital and advocated investments "at home"
that contribute to growth in a socially meaningful way. The IMF
emphasized that peace and security are essential for investment. He
supported evaluation of capital account liberalization and tailoring
policies to the needs of individual countries in market liberalization.
He said liberalization can raise investment levels but entails big risks
if policies are inconsistent.
The ILO highlighted sound industrial
relations that respect human rights, raise productivity and reduce
poverty, and supported references to social security, pension schemes
and workers� rights. The UN Industrial Development Organization
(UNIDO) stressed the important role of small and medium enterprises and
mobilizing partnerships. The UN Conference on Trade and Development
(UNCTAD) proposed the UN create an ongoing forum to discuss FDI flows to
developing countries, examine best practices and minimize negative
impacts.
The Women�s Environment and
Development Organization said FfD could play an important role toward
fulfilling the commitments of past UN conferences. The Rural
Reconstruction Movement, on behalf of the NGO Working Group on
Mobilizing Domestic Resources, called on delegates to emphasize social
issues including health, education, and gender. The INTERNATIONAL
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE supported maintaining fiscal discipline, combating
corruption and guaranteeing property rights.
IN THE CORRIDORS
A few delegates from capitals hoped
that negotiations might take a break from politics and get down to the
technicalities of financing for development. Others were overheard
confiding their intentions for an ideological campaign, even as they
consented to dip into a bit of line-by-line. Is it back to the 1980s,
wondered an observer? Some delegates fretted that their negotiating bloc
might be so busy on tactics it won�t ever get around to strategy. A
few delegates in a smaller bloc felt constrained by its conservative
focus�
THINGS TO LOOK FOR TODAY
PLENARY: Delegates
will meet in Conference Room 2 at 10:00 am to hear a presentation from
Rubens Ricupero, the Secretary-General of UNCTAD. They will then
continue discussing the Draft Outcome document, focusing on chapters in
section two on trade, international financial cooperation and debt.
|