(4th meeting) UNICEF Executive Board, Second regular session 2026
Economic and Social Council
Date: 3 September 2026
Language: English
Transcript: https://transcripts.un.org/en/asset/k1d/k1d82u571c
Transcripts available through this tool are created by using automatic speech recognition and are not official records nor official documents of the United Nations. Official records and official documents are available on the Official Document System of the United Nations.

---

Estonia · President [15:35]:

Good morning. Good morning, everyone. Please take your seats. Thank you. Colleagues, please take your seats. I hope that entertaining music will, will be turned off now. No, no, no, it's okay. Yeah. Good morning. Colleagues, please, uh, take your seats. Don't panic, don't panic. It's a free seating arrangement today. You are still welcome. I'm very happy, privileged to open the special focus session, innovation in education, EdTech, AI, and the learning revolution from promise to proof. This special session we were preparing for quite some time, cooking behind the scene with UNICEF. And of course, with the valuable help of UNICEF, we were able to gather here absolutely fantastic panel. But we are going to do-- we have one and a half hours, more or less. I'll do a little intro, and then we will have keynotes, and then we will have a distinguished panel. And panel will be managed by dear colleague, Isabel Howe, Executive Director, Stanford Accelerator for Learning, Stanford University. And then at the end, I very much hope that we will still have a little bit of time if we will be disciplined, dear panelists, so that you can ask questions and make comments. But all in all, we hope that we'll manage in one and a half hours. So with this, I'll say the following. Executive Director Russell, Minister Ratnik, Minister Abdel Latif, distinguished colleagues, partners, educators, young people, and friends, again, warm welcome and thank you for joining us for this special focus session conducted Indeed, in very close cooperation between UNICEF and Estonia. The new global learning crisis is affecting education systems and schools around the world as we speak. On average, seven out of 10 children cannot read a simple sentence these days. It is becoming increasingly difficult to bring young people into classroom that in many respects still resemble a relic of industrial age. Learning outcomes remain fragile while education continues to suffer from underinvestment. To turn the tide, we need something bold, perhaps even revolutionary. Is AI the answer? We don't know yet. AI is developing at extraordinary speed, much faster than governments can regulate it and much faster than education systems can adapt it, and that is understandable. By the very nature, both regulation and education require caution, evidence, and time. When children are involved, risk must be carefully accessed and mitigated. Speed cannot replace judgment, evidence, or responsibility. But the question is, can we afford not to try AI in education? I believe the answer is no. Frankly, when I went to school, I did not know how to read properly, and my math was really embryonic. And that was precisely the reason, frankly, why kids were going to school, to learn to read, write, and calculate. My children, however, had to take a test demonstrating their reading and mathematical skills just to enter the first grade. I think it's frankly ridiculous, but This is the reality. And now I have witnessed how quickly youngsters embrace AI. They turn to agents while I was still reflecting which model to use. So we should ask ourselves, how have we been able to equip them to use AI critically, safely, creatively, and how we equip the teachers to guide them in this new AI-enabled world? This is also a question I have been reflecting on under my second hat as a co-chair of the first global UN dialogue on AI governance. One lesson from that process is very, very clear. Global discussions on AI become meaningful for people only when they address their real needs and their everyday lives. Few places make that connection more tangible than the good old classroom. which itself, of course, needs to undergo, if not a total transformation, then at least a solid facelift. One thing is certain, no government, UN agency, education system or technology company can address this challenge alone. So we need teachers, young people, governments, researchers, the private sector and organizations such as UNICEF around the same table. Estonia's experience tells us that digital transformation in education is not primarily about devices, technology, software. It is about people, trust, and long-term choices. It means investing in teachers, building digital and AI skills, creating the right infrastructure, giving schools the opportunity to experiment, learn, and innovate. And the main goal of Estonia's AI Leap program is not to replace teachers with AI, nor to put AI into classrooms for its own sake. It is about helping teachers rethink how they teach using technology, building their own AI literacy and strengthening students' thinking and learning skills through the purposeful use of AI. Today, we will hear about the first results of this ambitious project. But Estonia is not here to present one national model as a universal answer. Contexts differ and what works in one country, frankly, may not work in our context. So that is why I'm really very happy and pleased that today's discussion brings together such different perspectives. On the Finland side, what we want is to share our experience with our global partners, including under the UN roof, to exchange best practices and to learn from all of you as we work together to address the learning crisis. So from promise to proof, for me, means sharing our practical experience, including what works, what does not work, what still requires further evidence, and what may already be useful to adapt elsewhere. Let us hope that this conversation makes a real difference. With that, I'm honored to hand over to Edie Russell for her statement.


UNICEF · Executive Director · Ms. Russell [24:37]:

Well, thank you so much, Mr. President, and thank you for your leadership on this issue. I think, you know, you have really pushed us at UNICEF to consider the all the very challenging issues that are included in this conversation today. Also very delighted to have Deputy Minister Ratnik of Estonia, Minister Abdel Latif of Egypt. distinguished representatives of member states, partners, experts, young people joining us today. I think I always love these special sessions because it brings together a different group of people at UNICEF. And I think we all benefit from hearing the views of people outside UNICEF and outside sometimes the UN bubble and understanding what the implications are for everyone in the interest at bay. So thank you so much for being here today. I also very much want to thank the governments of Finland and Egypt and our other partners for their long standing partnership with UNICEF and their leadership on digital education and learning innovation. As I said in my opening statement, the world is facing a terrible, really terrible learning crisis right now, and it's something that all of us need to be concerned about. I think, you know, I say this all the time, but we have hundreds of millions of children who are out of school in the world, and we have millions more who are in school and not learning. Everyone needs to worry about that because what happens to those kids, what happens to those communities, those societies? At the same time, we have artificial intelligence and other digital technologies developing at extraordinary speed. So obviously it creates real possibilities and we're looking carefully at those possibilities, but it also creates real risks. And I think on the one hand, technology can help us reach children who have historically been excluded from quality education. Importantly, it can help teachers tailor learning to individual students. It can help education systems identify where children are falling behind and why. can also help us overcome some of the barriers that continue to frustrate too many children and keep girls, children with disabilities, children affected by poverty and crisis, and those living in really remote communities away from the education that they deserve. But I think the important thing in my mind here is that technology is not an easy fix to these very big problems. Simply putting new technology into a classroom doesn't make it an educational innovation. I think the real test is whether it helps children learn better, learn safely, and that has to be our starting point. UNICEF's new strategic plan recognizes that digital technologies and innovation, when deployed equitably and based on evidence, will be increasingly important to how we deliver results for every child. Our role here is to help connect global ambition and innovation with what works in classrooms and communities. That means asking some very basic questions. Does technology improve learning? Can teachers use it effectively? Do they know how to use it effectively? Can it work at scale, including countries and communities with limited connectivity and resources? And we deal with that problem a lot. There are many places where The idea of connecting to the Internet is almost inconceivable. Does it reach children who are most likely to be left behind? And does it protect children's rights, privacy, safety and well-being? AI is moving at lightning speed. We see that every day in the press. And we must make deliberate choices about how it's designed, governed and used. We need evidence before we need scale. We need equity and inclusion by design. We need strong safeguards for children's rights and digital safety. We need governments setting clear policy and standards, technology companies designing products around the rights and needs of children, and teachers, children and young people involved in shaping those technologies and how they're used. UNICEF is calling on governments, technology leaders, educators, young people, development partners to come together around a shared vision of responsible AI in education through a new initiative we call the Learn AI Global Compact. The goal is quite straightforward, to ensure that AI expands learning opportunities for all children, particularly those too often left behind, while safeguarding their rights, safety, and well-being. To achieve that, we believe action is needed in three areas. First, We need standards so that governments and education systems can identify effective, responsible solutions and take them to scale. Second, we need sustainable financing so the benefits of innovation are not reserved for children in the wealthiest countries or communities alone. And third, we need a broader movement, bringing together governments, educators, technology leaders, researchers, civil society, and young people to build trust, strengthen political will, and turn principles into action. So today, we invite all of you to help define the compact's priorities and direction. We are at the dawn of a new technological age. Whether it will benefit or harm children is really up to all of us. We look forward to working together to ensure that the AI revolution becomes a learning revolution for every single child. Thank you very much.


Estonia · President [30:00]:

I thank Executive Director Russell for her thoughts provoking remarks. We will begin with keynote addresses by three speakers, as I said, which will be followed by a brief video. After the video, I'll pass the chair to the moderator, Isabelle. Thank you for agreeing to do it. But first, I invite Her Excellency, Ms. Marine Raetnik, Deputy Minister for Economic and Development Affairs from Tallinn, Estonia, to share my country's national vision for AI and education reform. Please, the floor is yours.


Estonia · Deputy Minister for Economic and Development Affairs · Marine Raetnik [30:39]:

Thank you, Ambassador. Excellencies, distinguished guests. First, allow me to thank UNICEF for collaboration of this event and organizing this focus session. As a long-standing partner, UNICEF is an organization that we as Estonia collaborate in several initiatives. and we appreciate highly the work and collaboration that we have, what UNICEF does supporting children and young people around the world. Estonia's achievements in digital transformation and cybersecurity are widely recognized internationally. And this foundation of the success has been a strong education system, at least one of the key elements here. This is combined with curiosity, openness to innovation, and willingness to make bold policy choices. Our experience has also shown us the value of strong national leadership in it, investment in digital infrastructure, and cooperation across society. Our education system has consistently performed strongly in international comparisons, and there is no single element that would explain this success. But we have learned some valuable lessons from our experience while recognizing that every country context is different. Let me give you a couple of examples. Our schools and teachers enjoy a high degree of autonomy, which encourages creativity and innovation in teaching. Nearly 90% of Estonian children attend preschool, where qualified teachers provide not only care about early education. All Teachers hold university degrees and benefit from continuous professional development throughout their careers. Digital tools are widely integrated into teaching and learning, while educational technologists support schools and teachers in using these tools. Above all, education is highly valued in Estonian society. Estonia's support for the education sector in our partner countries builds on these experiences. Estonia's Development Cooperation Education focuses on strengthening educational systems through practical partnerships. We believe that meaningful and lasting change begins with investing in people, sharing knowledge and learning from one another. We work along alongside with different partners and communities in our partner countries like Ukraine, Moldova, Armenia, Kenya, Uganda, and beyond. And we help to strengthen education systems across all levels, from early childhood, vocational, higher, adult, and non-formal education. Our projects support capacity building for education and education leaders, digital learning, education reforms and modernization, and greater opportunities for girls in STEM. We also help connect education closely with the knowledge and skills that children and young people need for further learning, employment, and active participation in society. As technology, including artificial intelligence, transforms education as well, we believe innovation must remain inclusive. and centered on the best interest of the child. Estonia contributes its experience in digital education, educational technology, and education reform, while recognizing that we also have much to learn from our partners. We believe that sustainable progress depends on local partnerships, national priorities, mutual learning, and long-term cooperation. In 1996, Estonia launched the Tiger Leap program, a nationwide initiative to bring internet and computers to the schools. It also provided teachers with training and helped equip them with the skills to use technology effectively. This helped lay the foundation for the widespread use of educational technology and digital learning that is commonplace today. As artificial intelligence is transforming the way we learn and we work, we are again exploring how new technology can best serve education while taking seriously both its opportunities and risks. So in autumn 2025, 19 years later, Estonia launched AI Leap, an education innovation program developed through public-private collaboration. The program gives students and teachers access to AI-powered educational tools while helping them develop the skills to use them responsibly and effectively. Students have now completed the first school year with AI as part of their daily learning experience. This has also required teachers to adapt their teaching methods and continue developing their skills as technology evolves. To learn more about this initiative, I have much better person as an expert here on my left-hand side, the CEO of Estonian AI Leap Foundation, Mr. Ivo Visak, who will give you a thorough presentation. But I wish us and you productive discussions today. And we, of course, as Estonia, look forward to learn from each other and work together continuously with UNICEF and with all our partners. Thank you, Mr. President.


Estonia · President [36:46]:

I thank her excellency, Ms. Ratnik for her remarks. Next, I invite Mr. Ivo Visac, indeed, CEO of AI Leap Foundation to take a floor. Sir, you have a floor.


AI Leap Foundation · CEO · Ivo Visak [37:03]:

I'm very, very happy to be here, but I have a lot of information to give you, so my introduction is rather short. Maybe first and foremost, before I start with my presentation, one thing to keep in mind is that before I started working on this program, I used to be a school principal for five years. I started my principalship at a very interesting year. It was 2020, early spring, so the first year was a closed-door school. But we very quickly moved online and really quickly also figured out how we can bring the students back into the schoolhouse. What started happening very quickly also as a school principal was that in early 2023, I noticed very quickly that my high school students suddenly write really good essays. I would even say that all of the essays were rather they started looking quite similar, even I would say. And it also means that at first, some of my colleagues were quite surprised of what happened in the winter of 2022. But it turned out that some technology happened to come out, which very quickly started creating the illusion that a big and seismic academic jump has happened over the passing of the year. The truth was that the tools by OpenAI and very soon by Google were very quickly taken in by the students. And the students were the first who started using them very quickly. So I would say that the students did their AI leap in 2023. What we are doing is we are making sure that the education system as a whole jumps also forward. in the idea that this technology is not really going anywhere and hiding one's head into the sand doesn't really help anyone. So thanks to the leadership of our president, in early 2025, he introduced the idea that Estonia has to take the bull by its horns and really start steering where it's heading. That meant a collaborative project between Estonian businesses, Estonian Ministry of Education and Research, but also making sure that we have an in-depth research project happening at the same time. So we also partnered up with University of Tartu and afterwards also with University of Stanford. So through that, we are also keeping an eye that everything that we do has measurable outlooks and we can really see where we are heading. We already have some findings of what we have found out, what's working and what's not. But if you came here in looking for all the answers, then I sadly have to tell you that I don't still have all the answers. But anyway, let's start. Maybe one of the key elements to keep in mind is that AI Leap is not a technological project, it's an educational project. If you frame these kind of projects as technological project, I would say you are already in the wrong place, in the wrong room, with the wrong people. This is a school problem. This is not a technology problem. The technology itself is here anyway. The question is, can we continue giving good education while this technology exists in the wild, so to say? So first and foremost, the goal of AI Leap is to support the development of students' thinking and learning skills through the purposeful use of artificial intelligence. How we are trying to do that are three main steps. First and foremost, we are looking at how to support the teachers. We support teachers with giving them also access to different models. But at the same time, constantly keeping in mind that general training of both how these tools work, but at the same time, even more broadly, what is critical AI literacy. So just have to tell you really quickly that these tools are really easy to use. So showcasing teachers how these tools work is very small portion of the training. The bigger element from the pedagogical side is to making sure that the teachers understand what are the real impacts. How is this technology impacting our environment? How is this technology impacting the way on how the ethical landscape is changing? How the training data is in these tools? And also how it is changing us as human beings. So it means that the teachers also have to get a very good understanding of not only the technological questions, but the wider picture of everything involving AI. And in EU, usually we sort of put this AI literacy into the framework of digital competences. One of the main aims is also to make sure that all of the teachers in Estonian high schools are in professional learning communities. So we the short-term PLCs, and people have very different understanding of PLCs. So those of you who have been in the teaching environment sometimes know that PLCs can be sometimes called the fun chat rooms. But in right moderation and with good leaders of PLCs, it can be a very powerful tool in having colleague-to-colleague training sessions. So this is something we are driving forward. and making sure that it's not only the question of how AI Leap can support the teachers, but how teachers can support other teachers in their own schools. The second part of it is the adapted model. So together with OpenAI, with Estonian researchers and our team, we have adopted a version of ChatGPT to behave differently, not giving out answers that easily, working more as an AI tutor, and really trying to make sure that we are not really aiming for something with what the education system already does pretty well. Estonian education system is very knowledge heavy. It means that we are not really supporting anyone by giving even more knowledge. What we really have to see is how we can support learning skills. Are there elements in these tools that can support students in more different patterns of how they learn? And also, especially for small countries, it's immensely important that our culture and our language is protected. So Estonia is a small country. There's 1.3 million of us, and we really have to take care of our language. Estonian language is a small Finno-Ugric language. Not that many people speak that, but at the same time, we have to take care that the level of Estonian in these biggest models is in such a high level that it also supports learning. So this is also an ongoing work with our partners in these different tech companies to see how, what is the real quality of the languages inside them. And in the end, we are aiming for a system level impact. So We are trying to make sure that all of the best practices get shared between all of the Estonian teachers, all of the Estonian schools. So it's not for the few, but it's for everyone. So how have we been doing thus far? One of the main things to keep in mind is that we have around 156 high schools in Estonia, 154 joined last year. So what happened with the two who didn't join might be the question. What happened? Well, what happened is that both of these schools turned into primary education schools. They decided that it's not that important for them. Well, they didn't really see that this year we are moving to the primary education, so we are still getting them. And one of the maybe key takeaways here is that we have really managed to capture all of the teachers who are working in Estonian high schools, but of course in different degrees. When we introduce these kind of programs into our education system, we really have to keep in mind on how many different reforms, other educational reforms are happening in the country. If it's really the aim of your country to make this kind of a program a success, you kind of have to immediately start thinking that teachers need time. Teachers need time to think about this. You can't have ten different reforms happening at the same time. So if you're serious about it, let's make it one reform a year. Another thing about it is that even though we gave access to around 20,000 students on our new version of the or the different version of the model, the general adoption was around 20% of students per week. Why is it like that? There are two caveats to that. All of the free models are, like I said, very freely available online. Estonian students have their Wi-Fi, their 5Gs in their mobile phone, and it's not really that hard to open another tab with a model that gives you all the answers. So it also means that you really have to take care for the students to understand that it is good, better for them than the stuff that might be freely available with unlimited resources. So we are now making sure that we're not only staying into the high school level, but we're moving also into the vocation education and we will start supporting our prime education teachers from grades five to nine. So from Estonian sense, we have basically covered the whole Estonian K-12 education system. You might be again asking, so why are you not giving this tool to the primary education students? We don't want to. We don't really-- we are not-- first and foremost, we are not sure that this technology is good for young, very developing brains, and secondly, there is not really one part of research that would say that it is something we can be sure about that kids in the age of nine, eight, ten, that it's any way good for them. It's very hard to hide this tech from a high school student or a vocational education student, but there is a lot more that we have to do in the primary education, and that is the build up of foundational skills, foundation and knowledge so that we would have a critical mind to work with. If we have the understanding that with this tech we can somehow implant critical mindset, we are in the wrong place. So some more technical things or more broadly on what we are aiming to do this year. We're making sure that we are developing more on our teachers literacy skills, digital competences, making sure that the teachers themselves have the necessary leadership trainings so that the school principals themselves are trained to understand what they're dealing with. And we are going more subject specific. So when we're talking about physics and AI, geography and AI, chemistry and AI, so really going every subject specific in understanding how these things work. We are also, when we're talking about students, one of the key things that our students have reported is that, and I don't know if it translates that well into English, but something that's allowed to Jupiter isn't always allowed to the pool. So there are teachers in Estonia who really love using AI, but they don't really allow any AI for their students. So it creates an interesting new situation where the students don't really understand. OK, OK, I understand the teacher has done some slides with AI, but I'm not allowed. So what does it mean? So one of the key thing also is to involve students really early on into these projects and really get the critical mindset from the students, what they think about it. It might surprise you that the students are often their most critical group around AI. They don't really want to see any AI slop at all. So it is something when you're thinking about these kind of programs and initiatives in your country, keep that in mind and involve students as quickly as you can. Also, involve parents. Without parents and without the understanding from the parents' side, there will be no program. Because if the parents don't understand it, they will vote it down. And of course, like I said, it is first and foremost an education program, but technology is part of it. We are testing out different possibilities for the teachers, different tools that they can use throughout to help their work. And what we have learned thus far is that around two hours is the time that teachers report getting more time per week. So it's around two hours to save time per week. And it might not sound that much, but of those of you who have been teachers, two hours is a big win. Now, Does this two hours mean that now you can put the legs up and not do any work at all? No, the teachers mostly work overtime. In summary, what I will tell you is that if you want to get like a very, very direct picture of what we're doing in Estonia, when you go into our ealib.ee site, you will find the reports of both what our students think, but also the first year general summary. We have been very open about the things that we succeeded in and about the things that we failed in. And I really do hope that these things help you also. Thank you very much.


Estonia · President [52:51]:

I thank Mr. Visak for his thorough presentation. And I now invite dear friend, Pia Brito, the UNICEF Director of Global Education, to share remarks on UNICEF digital learning and artificial intelligence. Pia. Thank you.


UNICEF · Director of Global Education · Pia Brito [53:06]:

Thank you so much. Excellencies, distinguished members of the executive board, colleagues, partners, friends, special welcome to our youth advocates. It's such a privilege to be here today. I think we meet at this very, very extraordinary moment moment of opportunity and the moment of responsibility both right now on us. As you said, our president said to us, artificial intelligence is already reshaping how societies are learning, teaching, working, solving problems. So as you said to us, the question is not whether it's going to enter our education systems. It has. The question is, how are we going to address the learning crisis? How are we going to use these technologies for children, communities that need them the most? For UNICEF, the starting point is clear. Equity and inclusion, that is at the center of the AI conversation to solve the global learning crisis. Innovation cannot be considered successful if it only reaches children in urban communities or stable contexts. It must reach those who are in remote classrooms without reliable connectivity, children with disabilities who need accessible learning tools, displaced learners in camps, teachers managing overcrowded classrooms, too few resources, and the millions of children who are not yet learning the basic foundational skills. We cannot hope to achieve and build on a 21st century moving forward with 20th century inequities. Which is why UNICEF is advocating around the world for countries and the wider education communities, let's push the boundaries. Let's push the boundaries to go beyond digital as usual. Let's prioritize that measurable gain we want to make in learning. Let's take evidence-based approaches, let's build on human-centered relationships, and close that digital divide that exists. This, as was mentioned by Executive Director, is aligned with UNICEF's strategic plan, which calls on us to enable 350 million more children and young people to learn and develop skills. This commitment means stronger national systems, better support to teachers, and visible results for children. We also believe equity alone is not enough. Every AI enabled solution must be anchored in evidence and child rights. No, we can't just afford to scale tools because they are new and exciting. We really have to ask, are they improving learning? Are they supporting teachers? They cannot replace the human connection. Are they inclusive, age appropriate, context relevant? We're pushing the boundaries to protect children's privacy and data, to reduce bias and discrimination, and keep children safe online and offline, because AI must augment teachers, not replace human touch. With UNICEF, for us, digital safety, human centeredness, ethical design, and child rights are non-negotiable. that is the way to go forward for any meaningful use of any technology, including AI in education, especially in low resource contexts. The promise is tremendous. We see we can personalize learning, we can empower teachers. We've heard the great story from Estonia, strengthen assessment. There's a lot in there, but we are also very cognizant of the risks. We are cautiously optimistic. We're paying attention to where we have systems that have limited infrastructure, or the governance is fragile, or the connectivity is limited. We have to be able to balance the risk and the potential. We have to be able to set the standards of what is good so that we move forward in the amplification of the positive, which is why responsibility is core in how we design and shape these technologies. As we've heard from Estonia's experience, this transformation was not built on technology. It was built on education. It was built on what we want for our children. What is this public offer? It was built on investment in teachers. The tool came along to support the direction we want to travel in. And that's what we want to propose to go forward. How do we take what we've learned from countries like Estonia across the world and shape it in a way that we are solving the problem at hand, which is every child has to have that right to education. And as you said, E.D. Russell, it can't be done by one institution alone. This is the beauty of coming together to solve the solution. We need governments to lead with policy, private sector to deliver tools, civil society, educators, teachers, we have young people to shape the direction to go forward. This community, this multi-sectoral community is what is going to bring the solution. And this is why we are promoting the AI Compact, Learn AI. We believe as UNICEF, we can bridge this ambition and delivery and our digital education strategy is our compass. We are working across the world in almost every country, supporting governments, accompanying them to advance the ambition countries have for learning. We're working to convene different bodies, different partners of the sector together, innovators, researchers, teachers, young people with this common belief that we sit at a new era. A new era where if with the right responsibility, the caution, the thinking and the opportunity, we can create stronger systems. So as we go into a very exciting panel discussion now, I would like us to think about what would an alliance look like? You will be hearing from many voices on the panel. What could an alliance look like that takes a commercial enterprise of AI technology and converts it into a global public good? We have done this in many sectors. This is the time now for education to take this commercial enterprise and break it a public good across the world so that we can lead a reformation in learning. We're going to turn to a short video to watch that, and then we're going to hear from a very exciting panel. Thank you so much.


Speaker 9 [1:00:12]:

I feel guilty using AI sometimes.


Estonia · President [1:00:15]:

I thank Ms. Prita for her remarks. Let's screen the video now.


Speaker 11 [1:00:20]:

I feel guilty using AI sometimes because I just don't think it's the right thing morally to do. My brain just automatically goes, let's use AI because you're used to this now.

I used to ask AI questions that I didn't understand.

AI helped me a lot.

Generating images, creating schedules of study, brainstorming ideas.

And it will get you an.

Answer in like three seconds.

AI can provide misinformation with a really good confidence and make you believe in it.

I think it can affect our critical thinking and creativity.

No one taught me how to use artificial intelligence.

I think the owners of AI and parents are now just letting their kids roam free on AI.

I think all students should have a different AI.

So it should be a tool that directs you towards the right path, but doesn't do it for you.

We, the students, should be a part in all of the decision making because we are the ones who are living with AI every day. And if we don't get to see in it, then who else will?

I feel guilty using AI sometimes because I just don't think it's the right thing to do.


Estonia · President [1:01:59]:

I feel guilty as well. I thank UNICEF Secretariat for this fantastic video. Now, without further ado, Ms. Isabelle Howe, I hand over to you and you will introduce our panelists and moderate the high level discussion.


Stanford University · Executive Director, Stanford Accelerator for Learning · Isabelle Howe [1:02:47]:

So thank you to both Estonia and UNICEF for the leadership and for the organization of this very important discussion. It's really my honor to be with all of you. And I'm Isabelle Howe. I work at Stanford University, where we have the great honor and privilege of partnering with the government of Estonia and Ivo that you heard from on the research of what what are we learning from from AI and where does it work, where it doesn't. So I wanted to frame this panel with three brief observations from where I sit in research and academia. The first observation is one that we already heard largely is that adoption of this technology is fast rising. So our data show that in the US, 84% of high schoolers now have used AI tools for homework. It's even higher for college students. So it's now anywhere between 92% and 95% of college students that have used some AI tools for their studies. And for teachers, it's also really high. It's generally in the 80% depending on different surveys. Outside of the US, the numbers are also really interesting. And OpenAI has released some data by country. And it's fascinating to see the list of the fastest rising adopters of AI technologies. And let me read that list because I was surprised myself to see those names on this list. Number one, Dominican Republic. Number two, Haiti. Number three, Japan. Number four, Mexico. And number five, Tanzania. So clearly this adoption of those AI tools is rising across our planet. It's not it's the numbers that I shared for the US are well happening everywhere in the world. My second point, and it's one that I'm working on actively, but research, what I do at Stanford and other universities, is actually significantly behind at this point adoption of this technology. We just published a report on this topic called the state of research in AI and education. Here is what we are showing. We are showing that there are approximately now a thousand research reports that have been published globally. on AI and education. So that's reasonably positive. Lots of researchers are getting activated globally on examining what is the impact of this technology. However, here is my concern, only 20, so it's not 21, it's not 19, it's very specific, 20 of those research are what we call causal. Causal research is the highest level of standards in research in academia. So at this point, it's a very, very small number of research. We are still very early in essentially understanding what is working for whom in what context with this technology. And then my third point is What we know so far is actually quite mixed from research. So on one hand, AI can support learning, tutoring, feedback, lots of actually really interesting positive outcomes in those three areas. But the effects really depend enormously on how the technology is being deployed. Versus very encouraged with all the efforts that are happening in this regard in Estonia. There are major questions that are arising on cognitive offloading, like we heard from some of the students on the video. Essentially, the question is, do students actually think deeper with this technology or actually outsource their thinking to those machines? And then there's another important questions that I'm studying closely, which is what I refer to as relational offloading. And let me give you an example from Stanford University. We are observing increasingly that our college students are not going anymore to office hours. Students are going more and more for their questions to AI. We are going number one use case of AI is now companionship and sometimes therapy. And so this big phenomenon that we need to understand better of this relational of loading and our future of human connections. So perhaps the big question that I'm hoping this panel, this very esteemed panel, will help us think through is how do we harness the potential of this extraordinary technology while strengthening the very people, the very human connections that are at the heart of learning? With this, let me introduce this incredible set of panelists that represent government, represent youth voices, represent technology, and incredible set of colleagues who are represented. First and foremost, we have His Excellency, Mr. Mohamed Abdel Latif, who is Minister of Education and Technical Education in Egypt. We have Mr. David Edwards, who is General Secretary of Education International. Chris Turner, Global Head of Knowledge and Information Products, Government Affairs and Public Policy at Google. Ebru Peraziani, who is a UNICEF youth advocate from Argentina, welcome. And Sirotti Kapu, who is Finland's UN youth delegate representing young people at the UN General Assembly. So welcome, and I've been tasked to, in a short while, get the voices of this esteemed panel. So I will turn directly into the questions, okay? And first, my question is for His Excellency, Mr. Mohamed Abdel Latif. So thanks to your leadership, Egypt has taken some meaningful steps in leveraging technology to advance education outcomes. Can you maybe bring us for what you are doing and what you are learning in Egypt thanks to your leadership?


Egypt · Minister of Education and Technical Education · Mohamed Abdel Latif [1:10:44]:

Thank you, Ms. Moderator. And let me start, the theme of this session is from promise to proof. And I think that distinction is very important. For years, we have spoken about the promise of technology in education. But for governments, the question now is not what technology could do. The question is, can we prove that it improves education at scale, equitability, and for every child? This is the approach we are taking in Egypt. For us, digital equity is not about giving a child a device and saying we have closed the digital divide. It is about the whole ecosystem, access, connectivity, child protection, teachers, digital skills, and using data to identify children who are falling behind and intervene early. And this is where partnership with the United Nations is so important. When governments and the UN align around national priorities, we can move beyond pilots and build systems at scale. In partnership with UNICEF, we have integrated digital literacy and online safety across subjects, reaching approximately 12 million students. Children learn in age appropriate ways about cybersecurity, data privacy, online bullying and harmful online behavior. With UNICEF and the Global Partnership for Education, we are also developing a national digital platform for teachers and students. Equity is built into its design. The platform will also help teachers manage assessments, attendance and student progress. But most importantly, we want to use technology not simply to collect data, but to act on it. By bringing together attendance, assessment results, and learning progress, we can identify students at risk of falling behind or dropping out and intervene early. That is where technology moves from promise to proof when data does not simply tell us what went wrong, but helps us prevent it from going wrong. And none of this works without teachers. This year we are beginning teacher development programs with Harvard and Hiroshima University, supporting teachers in modern teaching practices and the effective use of technology to improve learning. We are also making future digital skills part of education itself. Last year, approximately 700,000 students, grade 10 students, study JavaScript through an international digital platform. From September 12th, we are expanding programming, approximately 800,000 students, including JavaScript and Python, and extending it into technical and vocational education. We have also introduced zero rating, so students do not pay for the data required to access the programming platform. Students' opportunity to learn should never depend on whether their family can afford connectivity. The same principle applies to devices. Egypt already provides tablets free of charge to approximately 700,000 upper secondary students each year, and we are now expanding provision to technical and vocational education, bringing the total number of government provided devices to more than 1.2 million. So when we speak about moving from promise to proof, our measures of success is not how much technology we put into schools. It is what the technology changes once it gets there. Does it protect children? Does it empower teachers? Does it expand opportunity? Does it help us reach a child before that child falls behind? And above all, does it narrow inequality rather than widen it? This is the value of partnership. When international cooperation is aligned with national priorities, we can move beyond pilots and projects to system-wide change reaching millions of children and teachers. For Egypt, that is the learning revolution. Technology should not simply promise opportunity, it must prove that it can deliver opportunity at scale for every child. Thank you.


Stanford University · Executive Director, Stanford Accelerator for Learning · Isabelle Howe [1:15:14]:

Thank you. Let me turn to our two youth representatives and ask several maybe first, what are your ideal vision of how this technology could positively impact your generation? And what are your greatest hopes and maybe fears with both technological developments in education?


Finland · UN Youth Delegate · Sirotti Kapu [1:15:47]:

Thank you for the question. First of all, I always say this, but it's a privilege to be here and address this distinguished group of people. It's truly an honor. Thank you for UNICEF and for the Permanent Mission of Estonia for inviting me here today. It's such an important and crucial topic. And I think, well, since I'm also a previous enjoyer of the Estonian quality education system, It's also nice to be here as a dual citizen of Estonia and Finland, who I'm representing today as the UN Youth Delegate of Finland. Before answering your question, I just want to highlight a concrete example from personal life why education is so important for me personally. So I'm a... first born son of a cleaner and a builder and I grew up receiving mostly food aid and we didn't have much money when I was a child. One group of people that did help me a lot was teachers and yeah, it's because teachers didn't care about what my parents could afford to do or not, they just cared what I was able to do, what I aspired to do and what I wanted to become and because as a part of teachers, I am now a graduate lawyer, the first in my family. I'm able to speak in a foreign language to you guys here today and just based on that background, you can tell that education does miracles and enables these types of situations which I'm truly grateful for. But my story is not unique because during my UN delegate position, I've I've met with hundreds of young people and children who are in the same position in Finland and moreover in other countries in the world as well. So based on that, my my test for AI is really simple. Can we accelerate the amount of kids who are in the position like I am to make their dreams come true, make them access classrooms, make them access better education, or will it be the other way around? That's my test. I am pretty optimistic about AI. I do love using it, but I think optimism and joy shouldn't be overshadowed by the fact that we also need to be critical. as Evan on the video said, a brilliant kid from Australia, that we're as young people just roaming around with AI right now. And I think we don't want to be making the same mistakes we did with social media. Social media came around when I was eight and then everybody was suddenly surprised when we were addicted. So let's not maybe repeat that with AI. We still have time. I hope. So three things I would suggest. First is responsibility. We heard great examples from Estonia and also maybe to mention in Helsinki, there's a UNICEF learning hub, innovation hub. We should be gathering research, doing more to actually think what is good for schools and teachers and students before putting them on the market.


Stanford University · Executive Director, Stanford Accelerator for Learning · Isabelle Howe [1:19:10]:

I didn't pay him to say that, okay.


Finland · UN Youth Delegate · Sirotti Kapu [1:19:13]:

No, but I'm actually grateful because I've been hearing in people's speeches and Pia's and Isabel's, the same words are repeated, so we know what must be done, we just need to do it. I think that's the thing. The most important thing for me and the thing I'm mostly worried about is equity. I owe it to my younger self, I owe it to millions of other boys and girls in the world. to think that we need to implement the system in an equitable way so that human teachers and human teaching methods don't become a luxury that poor boys get AI and rich kids get personal teaching. So that's the second thing. And maybe, yeah, to conclude is literacy as well. We don't want kids or teachers using AI without knowing how it should be used and when it should not be used. So ultimately, AI is a tool, and it is a great tool, but it's still a tool. So we should have the steering wheel. And I hope we don't gather around and just watch AI steer us to the wrong direction. That's my answer. Thanks.


Stanford University · Executive Director, Stanford Accelerator for Learning · Isabelle Howe [1:20:25]:

Beautiful. Thank you. So, Ewel, do you share this optimism? And what are your views on AI? How are you using it? Where do you see the potential and the risks?


UNICEF · UNICEF Youth Advocate from Argentina · Ebru Peraziani [1:20:46]:

Thank you, thank you, Isabelle, and thank you everyone for being here today and listening to our youth voices, which I think is super important. So yeah, I share this optimism, but I also have like some, critical thoughts about how we can get AI to be good for children and young people. So I will open with a question, Anis, how do you machine education with AI 40 years from now? Because that's the question we asked children and young people around my country in a foresight game we co-created with UNICEF Argentina. So I'm a UNICEF youth advocate from Argentina and senior fellow with UNICEF Innocenti. And after all these conversations around the game we get to have with children and young people, there are three things that come to my mind when I think about what AI must get right for our generation and what worries me most. So the first one is that AI has to be a compliment, but not a replacement for formal education. In our game, young people picked as most likely a card called AI in the classroom. Technology playing a huge role, but teachers remaining essential to guide human learning. And that's the relationship we want. Technology supporting but not replacing schools and humans. What worries me is what happens when that balance breaks over reliance on AI. And our workshop with young people made that really clear. What matters when we are educating ourselves is the learning process, not just the final result an AI chatbot can give you. Because if you skip that learning process and that moment of confusion and real learning, what you get instead is an illusion of knowledge. So that's the real risk, not the AI itself, but losing the ability as humans to notice what we still don't know and what we still need to keep learning. And I believe that that risk is only accelerating. I can think about, for example, a child who is five years old now growing up with AI from day one. will they still get that same moment of confusion and real learning as I did when I was a child? So the second thing is AI literacy, as Kevor just shared. It has to start for me as early as children get access to a device. In Argentina, it's around age nine. But not because starting early is ideal, but because that's when the interaction begins regardless. So education and schools has to be there too. Without it, the risk is misinformation. My generation, it's forming its judgment with AI chatbots and AI tools at the same time that we are learning to understand what's real from what isn't, and often without any guidance. And the third one is inclusion and equity. AI has to be designed with equity from the start. Today, the gap is mostly about access and infrastructure, but in a few years, it might be about who knows how to use AI well and for its own benefit, development, professional career, and who doesn't. And that's the next inequality we need to get ahead of. And just to close up, uh, getting ahead of that gap means moving from consultation to co-creation and putting the voices of children and young people in the processes of creating. these tools and these AI literacy programs. That's exactly what I'm excited to share that I'm going to be part of UNICEF's new Children's Manifesto for Child Rights and AI. And I believe this is putting this principle of co-creation into practice. Because of this, I think member states, governments and companies should co-design AI literacy programs with children and young people and give them real tools to track the progress, because that's what real accountability and co-creation looks like, not a policy on a paper or a plan, but a habit of co-creating together. So just to finish, I think that the same young people who imagine through the game and the results that I shared a fader and better future for education and AI will be the ones checking with us years from now whether we actually built it or not for every child. Thank you.


Stanford University · Executive Director, Stanford Accelerator for Learning · Isabelle Howe [1:25:33]:

Thank you. When I hear those youth voices, I think the future is in very good hands. I have, I'm filled with optimism. David, can you maybe share first and foremost for the very few that may not fully know the scale of Education International, you know, the number of countries that you're representing and then share with us what you are hearing from teachers. What is teacher sentiment about AI? Where are examples of where AI has been helpful to support teachers and maybe also some of the concerns and fears that you are hearing from teachers?


Education International · General Secretary · David Edwards [1:26:18]:

Thank you, Isabelle. And good morning, everyone. So Education International, World Federation of Teachers, 33 million teachers in 180 countries, 400 organizations from early childhood to higher ed. We partner with UNICEF on a lot of different places. Nice to see some friends in the room. And if I could just say, Pia, and to everybody, and to executive director, it's really important that you're putting this on the table and to the Ambassador, it's really important that UNICEF continues from a rights-based perspective and a children's focus to stay in the education sector at a time when we're seeing a lot of different countries and a lot of different agencies recede in terms of their responsibilities. We need UNICEF. So I wanted to start with that. I also wanted to say that this is a pedagogically perfect in terms of design panel. I am so full of hope just listening to my fellow panelists in terms of -- and I'm not going to say what they said, but I will underscore a few of the things. And from the perspective of teachers and the 33 million teachers that elected me and I represent, we've been in different moments where there's been a lot of hype, a lot of promise. Just wait, this thing is going to change everything, teachers. We won't need you anymore. You won't have to grade papers, stay late. This is going to change everything. And then we wait for a little bit, and that blows over, and we get back to teaching kids. And I think that one of the things-- because I was thinking about a couple years ago, even, at the beginning of everything that was happening, and I was in-- I think it was in Davos or something, and there was a couple of people that were telling me, well, David, Well, content is over. You no longer need to teach content. AI will completely deal with all the cognitive stuff. Well, that didn't go so well. Content is still very much there. The other issue that's come up is a lot is that I think we've learned and teachers have learned through the hype to what is now, I think, a bit more humility in terms of listening to the evidence, even if the research isn't as fast as we'd like it to be, what we're learning from that research developmental research for children, pedagogical research for teaching and learning, is that education is fundamentally a relational activity. Relational intelligence is a bell of how. So it is not a transaction. What teachers do is not content delivery, right? And we are learning more and more that successful experiences with AI around the world are investing in teachers and co-creating with teachers so that they, much like when I was in Estonia with my friend Remo and AI Leap and other places where teachers, it's a pedagogical issue. So that's where you build the trust. I call it the trust infrastructure. We have to have the trust with the profession. And that means we're going to have to create a lot more spaces just like this. This what you see right now here in New York, you're going to need to see in your home countries and communities. This is a conversation about the future. And too often, I think, we put other people's children out of our mind. I call it OPC, other people's children. Everyone's very concerned and advocating for their own children. And I don't want too much screen time, and I want to make sure I have a highly trained teacher that's well paid. And I want to make sure that I have all sorts of different wraparound services and nutrition services. Oh yeah, but what about the hundreds of millions of kids that are out of school that Catherine was talking about? Those are other people's children. That's OPC. That's where EI, that's where you as UNICEF, people on this stage, that's where we need to focus. We need to make sure that what the promise and hype of AI is not to give them less, no relationship, more transaction, a less accurate type of AI. We need to make sure that we have a public good and a right and that we protect children's rights. We need to protect. We need to make sure we have professional discretion and professional autonomy and be listening to the profession because it does hallucinate and we do need to spend time. We need to personalize, absolutely. And I've heard a lot of good stories around the world of teachers saying, you know, this AI helped me sort of differentiate instruction for kids with this type of learning disability, right? Or from this language background, or from this indigenous background, or from these kinds of places. So we are cautiously optimistic, but we really think it's the student-teacher relationship. that relational piece is at the core of the future of education. I know UNICEF believes that too and I'm just really happy to be part of this conversation and I'm really encouraged to hear about the educational governance initiatives that you guys are putting forward. I think those are going to be absolutely revolutionary and important and thank you for your leadership.


Stanford University · Executive Director, Stanford Accelerator for Learning · Isabelle Howe [1:31:23]:

Thank you, David. So Chris, you are representing the private sector of the industry on this panel, but you have a big task. And I have a lot of questions, but let me maybe summarize three big ones for you into one. How do you think from Google's perspective about equity, safety for children, And then lastly, how do you think about partnerships? Because we are hearing from everyone that we need more of those partnerships between technology, teachers, youth voices, research, government. What are examples that are coming from your work?


Google · Global Head of Knowledge and Information Products, Government Affairs and Public Policy · Chris Turner [1:32:10]:

Thank you for the question and thank you for having me, Mr. Ambassador, Mr. President. Very much appreciate the ability to be with you all on this panel. Couldn't agree more that more of these that drive towards outcomes in all of your countries is the path forward. Teachers, learners, parents. That's the whole game here. And I'm telling you that as the representative of the entire technology industry, but I'll just say I'm speaking for Google, teachers, learners, parents. That's the heart of all of this. If you disrupt that triangle with a tool, AI or otherwise, you are doing a disservice to all three parts and a disservice to education writ large. If instead you are trying to empower the connections between those three entities on that triangle, Now you're actually leaning into solving human problems with a technology tool. That's the approach we take at Google. If you remember, our mission is to organize the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful. The world's information, not America's information. Universally accessible. Not just to those that can read English, not just to those that can read. Useful, to achieve a human end or goal. That is the fundamental reason for our company's existence, and I think it plays a lot into the question that you've asked around making these tools equitable, useful, and actually serving a human purpose of advancing education. So more boys from Estonia and Finland end up sitting on this panel and working as privacy and data lawyers. That's the objective. That is the metric. And I've seen this sort of play out a couple of different ways using a tool to achieve that end. We've seen it with some of our Google Notebook and our guided learnings in doing more personalized learning. Now, this gets to what you were talking about earlier, where in a classroom of 40 students, a teacher that is confident and capable of using these tools, that's been given the right level of training and access, can personalize a lesson for their student that is maybe has suffers from ADHD or that maybe has another learning challenge or that maybe is just not interested in the topic. The ability for the teacher to fine tune parts of a textbook or a lesson plan to hone in on that teacher while on that student, while not taking away from the other 39 kids in the classroom, but being able to dial in That's useful if done in the right way. Technology tools will help us get there. Not 100% there yet, will help us get there in your 40 years in the future vision, right? The other thing that we're seeing is as a learning partner, and I think we heard a lot of this from the kids on the screen and from some of the panelists today, this doesn't work if you just give the answer, right? Personal example, I've been working with my daughter this summer. She's 10, and she has to read the book, "Tuck Everlasting," before she gets back to school. Just getting kids to read over the summer is hard enough, but this is a relatively challenging book for a 10-year-old. So what's happened is I have read the book as well, and then I used our Google AI tools to come up with quizzes and quizzed both of us. to see how well we were learning, and then going back and doing close examinations of the texts together to figure out where we missed it, what we got wrong, what thread were we not pulling through. That did not save me any time. Great book, by the way, but it did not save me any time. It added more time on things I needed to do, but it created a connection between my daughter and I, and allowed for easy quiz making and pressure testing. being able to do that at scale for both teachers and parents, I think is an amazing and wonderful opportunity with these tools. Last, I'll say on the learning partner bit, we've actually been working on guided learning in Sierra Leone. And under the control and supervision of a teacher, we've seen students achieve significant learnings that are the equivalent between 1.2 and 1.7 years of progress. Great tool, but the key is that it was under the supervision of the teacher. right? That the teacher was involved and engaged in that to drive that 1.2 to 1.7 years worth of growth. It was the teacher being comfortable and able to use that tool, not giving the tool to the student and telling them, go have fun. Finally, it is about partnership. I think everyone here has said, has keyed in on this, co-creation from the beginning based on sound pedagogical insights and guidance. That is the way forward. We've been working extensively with UNICEF. Thank you very much for the partnership to help drive these across Brazil, Kenya, India, and Pakistan, and looking for more places where we can actually engage in this sort of pedagogical partnership. And that's gone with the Gemini tools I've talked about before, but it also focuses in on some of the both reading and literacy and AI literacy. that to to to address the challenges that we've heard from all of our students and our un representatives the ability to actually understand and use these not to get an answer but to drive towards an outcome whether that is in your career, that is in your job, in school, in your life, that how do you use the tools to achieve those ends, not to offload cognitive functions. And that's one of the things we're most excited about in our work with UNICEF and looking to continue more broadly.


Stanford University · Executive Director, Stanford Accelerator for Learning · Isabelle Howe [1:38:58]:

Thank you, Chris. So this has been an extremely rich discussion. I know that we want to engage with the audience. So I will turn back to-- well, first, let me thank our panelists one more time. Thank you for your insights. Thank you for this vision. Thank you for this vision that collectively we are hearing about how human centered AI could potentially drive deeper learning, deeper teaching and relational brains for this future that we are creating with this technology. So thank you again to my esteemed panelists. And then now turning back to our Ambassador and UNICEF President for an exchange with the audience. Thank you.


Estonia · President [1:39:57]:

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much for excellent moderation and of course to our very, very bright panelists. Fantastic job, fantastic input. Of course, I've completely failed as a chair, so we are running out of time. But nevertheless, I thought that we will take at least few questions. And please identify then whom do you want to answer your question. And I'll give a floor to Iceland first.


Stanford University · Executive Director, Stanford Accelerator for Learning · Isabelle Howe [1:40:40]:

It's green, so it should work. Try. Or do you want me to bring it? There you go.


Iceland [1:40:46]:

Yeah. Thank you, Mr. President, and thanks to the panel and for UNICEF and Estonia for organizing this very interesting event. I would like to direct questions to our youth delegates here, and perhaps if you could share from your personal experience how you have used AI in your education and how that has developed over the last couple of years and perhaps how, you know, assistance or guidance from a teacher would have helped you in the development of your use of AI.


Estonia · President [1:41:25]:

Thank you very much.


Stanford University · Executive Director, Stanford Accelerator for Learning · Isabelle Howe [1:41:26]:

Yeah, go first. Thank you.


UNICEF · UNICEF Youth Advocate from Argentina · Ebru Peraziani [1:41:27]:

Well, thank you for the question first. I'm studying my bachelor's degree finishing this year. And when I started the career, AI wasn't so popular here yet, like four years ago. So I started reading a bunch of texts and making the summaries myself. And I think what I noticed when I noticed the change change now is that I'm using it more for that when I don't have enough time, like to read through all the text. AI, mostly Gemini, helps me summarize the text and also before exams to do like surveys or different cards to practice possible questions, mostly when I have oral exams. But all of that, I did it without any guidance because at least in my experience in university, there has not been like a space to discuss and have a chance to learn how to use it from teachers and professors. So I think maybe if that would have been a possibility, it would have been positive for my journey and how to use it better for research and for this text and summarizing, et cetera. Thank you.


Stanford University · Executive Director, Stanford Accelerator for Learning · Isabelle Howe [1:42:37]:

Thank you. Do you want to?


Finland · UN Youth Delegate · Sirotti Kapu [1:42:39]:

Yeah, sure. I can add. Thanks for the question. So in youth measurements, I'm getting pretty old as well. So I'm 25. just turned 25 and uh but I'm a master's I graduated from my master's in uh one and a half year ago now so when I started I was still doing exams with pen and paper so and then when I was doing my master's thesis everybody was like consulting ChatGPT with it so it's crazy the shift of in of like five to four years of University but um yeah I like to ask questions my brain is really busy my head is really busy so what I what I do like to do is whenever Professors aren't available, so 2 AM Sunday night, for example, I might want to consult ChatGPT with like, I ask questions and then he asks me back or they ask me back and then I do like a... forth and back thing, which I like to do, and it kind of gives me direction to take whenever I want to write about something or think about something, but it's more of a consultancy tool for me at least. And then I do agree with Chris and Avril's examples of quizzes. They're really nice when you have a big mass of information and then you're like, okay, do you want to do me a 10 question revising plan? Those are the two most obvious ones. Yeah.


Estonia · President [1:44:07]:

Thank you. Thank you very much. Next, I'll give the floor to my dear colleague from Eritrea. Ambassador, you have the floor.


Eritrea [1:44:19]:

Mr. President, and thank you, panelists, for your presentations today. I come from a country that has limited internet connection. So I'm more concerned about AI and how to access this new technology for students who are nomadic, students in the mountains of Eritrea, and then also the rural education system. And we want this to be inclusive, we want it to be equitable, and how do we do this with this limited internet access that our communities have? And to thank you, and maybe this is a question for all the technical people here, Our children are educated in Eritrea's nine languages. How is AI with languages? Is it learning or is it has to be taught? Thank you.


Stanford University · Executive Director, Stanford Accelerator for Learning · Isabelle Howe [1:45:09]:

Thank you. Chris, this would be a really good question for you, I believe, on-- Yeah, on-- Yeah, on-- Yeah, well, and maybe the first one as well, like how does Google think about the access to AI for people who have low or no broadband access. Yeah.


Google · Global Head of Knowledge and Information Products, Government Affairs and Public Policy · Chris Turner [1:45:30]:

Being able to increase broadband penetration, Usually that is through other alternative means besides laying fiber in many of these communities. So Google has invested in a couple of different ways to try and scratch that itch without the financial barrier of laying fiber in all of these markets. There's satellites, balloons, et cetera, et cetera. None of these things come without a cost, though. So trying to drive as much cost out of the system of connecting broadband to areas that are not currently served It is an open and unsolved question to be sure. There are not clean answers. There are lots of experiments to try and drive cost out of the system to eliminate that as a barrier. That said, I do think the advances that have been made sort of in the wireless space, especially when you start clicking over 5G, the ability to push those signals wirelessly, is extremely promising as we start opening up the higher and higher bands. So that's, that's part one. Uh, for part two on language, uh, the question is sort of, uh, there's a lot of focus on multiple, multiple languages and getting language not just right, but getting linguistic context right. In Spanish, something that could be a joke in Argentina might be an insult in Mexico, and you have to know the difference between those two things, right? Getting that level of nuance right is very challenging, and the way you solve it is by making sure you are training on a diverse dataset that uses lots of different natural languages to be able to reflect the language and the culture that you're focused on. It again is not a solved problem, but I would wager that six of the nine languages that you're dealing with, most AI systems are above average at. the last three are always sort of the challenging bit in any market around the world. And part of that is just the availability of source material of volumes in that language that have the linguistic nuance that these that the tools can actually learn from.


Stanford University · Executive Director, Stanford Accelerator for Learning · Isabelle Howe [1:47:56]:

Yeah, thank you, Chris. Minister Latif, can I ask also for your inspirations on I know you're so focused on equity and rural areas in Egypt, so maybe can you share more about what you are doing in rural settings and are there any things that seem to be making an impact already?


Egypt · Minister of Education and Technical Education · Mohamed Abdel Latif [1:48:19]:

Okay, thank you so much, Ms. Moderator, and let me go to AI. I can tell you if we go to the grammar of AI, okay, it's coding. And if we go to the grammar of coding, it's physics and math. If we go to the grammar of physics and math, it's simple math and literacy. So foundation skills and literacy skills and simple math, I think that's the road to critical thinking. And if we cannot have critical thinking without good foundation skills. And if just the slide you shared a while ago about two thirds of 10 year olds, 10 year old students, face problems with literacy, this is what we worked on in Egypt. So we worked on overcrowded classrooms, we don't have any more overcrowded classrooms. We worked on shortage in teachers and it's already solved. And we worked on attendance in classrooms and in schools and it's 87% attendance rate in all over Egypt now. And we did this in two years without extra fundings. And that's, I think it's by changing policies, by working together with UNICEF and with, uh, international agencies, we can reach this without extra funding, and that's what we did in the last couple of years. hand in hand with UNICEF, we changed curriculums, hand in hand with UNICEF, we trained our teachers, and now we're working on developing our national platform, our national digital platform, which will support AI learning, will support dynamic intervention to students, to weak students, so we don't leave students behind. So this is what we're working on right now. I mean, you know, working with best practices and good practices and success stories in international communities with the support of UNICEF did make a huge change and a huge success story in our educational platform in Egypt. So that's what we're working on right now. We're teaching our students coding and AI as well on international platforms. This is, we have outstanding achievements coming out of teaching coding and AI, supporting our students to think algorithmically and that's something we also support, letting them know what's the rationale behind using AI, letting them understand what is AI. This is where they can think critically and support our community. So that's basically what we're doing.


Stanford University · Executive Director, Stanford Accelerator for Learning · Isabelle Howe [1:50:38]:

Thank you. So inspiring.


Estonia · President [1:50:40]:

Yes, thank you very much. So we're running out of time, but I'll take one more question. Ambassador, you have floor.


Equatorial Guinea [1:50:57]:

Thank you so much.

My question is addressed to His Excellency Minister Abdel Latif of Egypt.

Excellency, Egypt has pioneered the integration of AI in the new curricula, 201, 20. And in Tahir Master, digital platforms from Equatorial Guinea perspective as a country implementing our 2024, 2028 CPD with a strong focus on digital learning. How is Egypt ensuring that AI tools reduce, not widen, the equity gap for children in the rural and upper Egypt?

And what lessons could be transferred via South-South cooperation within UNICEF framework?

Thank you.


Egypt · Minister of Education and Technical Education · Mohamed Abdel Latif [1:51:50]:

Okay, actually what we're teaching right now, coding and AI on a digital platform, on an international digital platform. And what is happening right now, we have, I just mentioned in my word that we have more than 700 students in grade 10 learning coding and AI fundamentals and learning JavaScript. So actually we give our students tablets, all our grade 10 students tablets, and that's what expanding this to our vocational students as well. So we'll have 1.2 million tablets with accessibility to internet all around Egypt, all around our rural and And cities, so internet is not, and connectivity is very good in Egypt right now. We don't have it missing any place in Egypt. So it's a very strong support for our educational platform right now. And we're moving also, we changed our… our secondary education, we have now Egyptian baccalaureate, part of the Egyptian baccalaureate, one of the main subjects is programming and AI, so that's a core subject in our new system. So I mean connectivity in Egypt is not, it's all around the country right now, we have high speed internet and things are easy when it comes in terms of connectivity, so it's not something we face right now, thank you.


Stanford University · Executive Director, Stanford Accelerator for Learning · Isabelle Howe [1:53:20]:

David, if you could close us on what you are seeing with this very important question on access, equity, teachers globally, how can we elevate educators all over the world with this technology?


Education International · General Secretary · David Edwards [1:53:44]:

So according to the Secretary General's high level panel on the teaching profession, we have a 44 million teacher shortage worldwide. The majority of that is sub-Saharan Africa. Majority are also happening in a lot of rural areas. What we're seeing is when policies are put in place to ensure that there's equitable funding formulas that reach those areas, then we can actually see teachers stay or teachers go. When there are policies that deal with the fact that many teachers travel for hours to get to where their assignments are, or to learn their local language. When you can grow your own in terms of teacher education professional development, when you have investments like that. When you give up the idea that there'll be some technological solution for this. For the rural kids, we'll just have a robot. Ask Upstate New York, which you can Google this, but hey, Google Chris. You can look it up. I won't tell you. But they thought they were buying teacher robots, and they were buying a different kind of robot. So I think we have to be very, very careful, very purposeful. And I think the thing to do is talk to the communities themselves. visibility, work with the teachers, their organizations in those areas through social dialogue, bargain good contracts with them. If you have to put hardship pay and other kinds of incentives to get them there, you can do that. But I have seen all over the world very purposeful policies collaboratively designed with the profession and governments that have made teachers want to stay, young people want to be teachers, and see young people like these students come out of those communities all the time. So I have a lot of hope, but it's a big issue. One of the things you can think about in terms of a stretch indicator is if you pick the hardest to reach and you make that the target, everybody else comes along. So if you can only do one good thing well, get the most marginalized into school and learning, you'll be surprised what happens with everybody else as well. So thank you very much.


Stanford University · Executive Director, Stanford Accelerator for Learning · Isabelle Howe [1:55:58]:

Thank you.


Estonia · President [1:55:59]:

Thank you. Thank you very much to all speakers, panelists, and of course, member states, and especially to the young people and educators who have brought us back to what matters most, the experience. And I would still add, it's risky, but I'll still add joy of learning. If there is one message I take from this session, then it is the following one. We should never romanticize AI. nor fear it to irrelevance. AI is already shaping education. We all agree on this. Our task is to shape that change so that it improves learning and educational outcomes while protecting every child's rights, safety and well-being. And I very much agree with Pia that equity must remain at the heart of our ambition. If access to the benefits of AI depends on income, geography, language or connectivity, we risk using a powerful new technology just to widen an old digital divide rather than close it. And this is, of course, where UNICEF has a particularly important role to play. So finally, finally, finally, as co-chair of the UN Global Dialogue on AI Governance, I want to add a final point. I think that international cooperation on AI will ultimately be judged not by the frameworks we negotiate, but by whether they make technology work better for people and hopefully one day to become part of the public good. So education is one of the clearest places where we should prove that this is possible. So thank you very much to UNICEF and to all for making this a genuinely special session. I look forward to continue this work with all of you. Thank you, thank you, thank you. The special focus session is now adjourned. I apologize for going over time. Let's have a break, five minutes. Colleagues, I understand the excitement. The room is still full of excitement, but we would need to proceed with something a little bit less exciting called structural dialogue on financing the results of UNICEF strategic plan 22-25. So please take your seats and let us start. So colleagues, we will now start the plenary meeting. Before we begin, I will share a brief procedural note. As always, delegations are kindly reminded that their statements should remain within the agreed time limits, three minutes for individual delegations speaking in the national capacity, and five minutes for delegations speaking on behalf of United Nations regional groups or for joint statements of two or more member states. Microphones will start blinking to alert speakers one minute before the end of the allotted time, and speakers will be muted after their time has ended, either at the end of three or five minutes. So distinguished delegates, let us now turn to a structured dialogue. Indeed, on financing the results of UNICEF strategic plan 2022-2025 document E/ICEF/2026/27, which is being presented to the board for decision. The document is accompanied by additional documents for information. The funding compact progress against member states and entity specific commitments related to UNICEF. document UNICEF/2026/EB/11 and pursuant to Executive Board decision 2024/25, the annual joint report of UNDP, UNFPA, UNICEF and UN Women on the implementation of a joint cost recovery policy, including differentiated cost recovery rates and approved waivers. Ms. Kitty van der Heyden, Deputy Executive Director, Partnerships, will introduce the agenda item. We will then screen a brief video, which will be followed by remarks by Ms. Mandeep O'Brien, Global Director, Public Partnerships and Resource Mobilization Division. Kindly note that also with us in the room and available to respond to any questions on the Joint Cost Recovery Report is Ms. Diane Keppler, controller and director of the division of financial and administrative management Miss Carla Haddad Mardini director private fundraising and Partnerships division is also available in the room to respond to any questions on private sector engagement Miss van der Heyden you have a floor.


UNICEF · Deputy Executive Director, Partnerships · Kitty van der Heyden [2:08:20]:

Thank you, Mr. President, and it's a pleasure to be here for the structured funding dialogue. It may sound less exciting than the special session, but I can assure you that this is a very special session because this is our platform to dialogue with you, our member states, our friends, our supporters for every child on issues that matter on strategic funding, whether that is linking resources to results or advancing issues of common concern and interest. predictability, flexibility and transparency. This year is a very special year for us in the Structured Funding Dialogue because it will be the first year that we can report to you on the funding compact that was endorsed in 2024. What a year it's been, 2025. One of the most challenging and who knows, maybe one of the most consequential years for children's financing in recent memory. And it also closed a chapter. It was the last year of our strategic plan 2022-2025. A cycle like no other. A cycle that began with unprecedented emergencies. That drove an income over the total strategic plan period to a record level of over 34 billion US dollars. A remarkable, remarkable vote of confidence from you, our member states, but also from our many private sector partners. And then it ended in 2025 amid an ODA crisis without a precedent and the deepest contraction of ODA on record in the world, just as children's needs were rising to record levels. Amid all the growth that we have experienced in recent years, it was remarkable just how much of that came to us in tightly earmarked contributions. And what began as volatility in our income has now become a structural contraction, a watershed in global development finance. And yes, last year ended better than in our darkest projections and concerns. But let me be very clear that there is no reason for complacency. Public sector core contributions fell to one of the lowest levels on record for UNICEF. And yes, private sector hit a record, but the private sector can only cushion a blow It cannot become a crutch on which we limp forward to achieve our goal to be there for every child that needs us. The funding mix that we currently have, as you will have seen in the report, is increasingly misaligned with the funding compact targets and indicators that were endorsed in the General Assembly by all of us together. And for children, this is not an abstract thing. The lack of core and flexible funding has a price, a price in children's lives and well-being and a price for your wallet too. Because if that trend of declining core will persist, what it will do is restrain our ability to respond rapidly when a crisis emerges, to support chronically underfunded crises and fragile context where there is no earmarked funding, but also to sustain essential investments preparation, early warning, and system strengthening. And why do I mention your wallet? Because we know that prevention pays off. It's not just life-saving, it's also far more cost-efficient than an emergency response. Treating a severely wasted child will cost you $150 a child. Being there in time with early interventions to combat malnutrition, $35 per child. We can all do better. And volume of funding, important as it is, let me be very clear, without flexibility does not give us the muscle power that we need. Flexibility now is the binding constraint that we have for delivery for every child in every context. For us restoring a more balanced predictable funding base to do what needs to be done for children that need us is at the heart of today's dialogue. And it is a dialogue. It goes both ways. And we would like it to be as interactive and honest as we can be. We are not sitting here with a fundraising pitch. We are sitting here as your partners. This is your instrument. It is our instrument. And partnership is not how we fund our work. partnership to us is how the work gets done. And I would like to here be deeply grateful to the 117 governments that have provided resources to us, and also a shout out to the 32 national committees who supported us in 2025. Together with, and let me remark how unusual this is in the UN context, 10 million individual contributors to UNICEF, over 18,000 corporate partners that support us, well over 8,000 philanthropist foundations, faith-based organizations that support us. We have global solidarity. We know and we feel that. I would like to particularly give a shout out here to our top five RR contributors, the core contributions that make us flexible, agile to be there when it is needed. The National Committee of Japan, the National Committee of Germany, the National Committee of Korea, the National Committee of Spain, and the National Committee of France, as well as our top leading government core partners, Germany, Sweden, and Norway. Also, a shout out to the 16 government partners who in 2025 either maintained or increase their core contributions. And we know that in a year when budget is tight and contraction reigns, holding the line requires leadership. We have seen it, we've noted it, we've appreciated it. Thank you Netherlands, Australia, UK, Japan, Ireland, Luxembourg, Republic of Korea, Austria, and Switzerland. And before I hand over to Ms. Mandeep O'Brien, our global director from PPR, I'd like to show you a brief video of how we work with your colleagues in the field. I'd like to turn now to the video if I can, Mr. President. Thank you.


Estonia · President [2:15:24]:

Thank you. And let's, before I give a floor to Ms. O'Brien, we will review the video indeed, please.


Speaker 50 [2:15:49]:

Our partnership is based on a simple conviction: children cannot wait. That's why we support UNICEF's basic resources and provide flexible funding to your country programme.

The people, like the government of Korea, share a vision.

UNICEF and confidence in its professional capacity to generate concrete and sustainable results.

Every child, no matter where they are born.

Deserves the right to a safe and nurturing childhood and the opportunity to build a hopeful future. Through flexible funding, Germany helps UNICEF continue delivering life-saving support to children, even amid uncertainty.

And in the most challenging situations.

Flexible funding, known as core resources, is especially important because it allows UNICEF to respond where needs are greatest.

Whether in emergencies or in long-term efforts that strengthen the health, education, nutrition, and child protection systems.

By contributing flexible resources, we demonstrate our trust in UNICEF's global expertise local presence and ability to reach the most vulnerable children. Together we can make an impact and help ensure that no child is left behind. We encourage more partners to support core resources and invest in a better future for every child.


Estonia · President [2:17:41]:

I thank UNICEF Secretariat for sharing this video. And now I give the floor to Mr. O'Brien for the presentation of the report.


UNICEF · Global Director, Public Partnerships and Resource Mobilization Division · Mandeep O'Brien [2:17:51]:

Thank you. Thank you, Mr. President and distinguished delegates. Eighty years of what we have built together for children, we must protect. And this dialogue today is about investing in what lies next. Today is a moment of accountability, as Kitty mentioned, and not only another annual update. The funding model that member states themselves have endorsed is under strain and the lever to fix it is in this room. Against this backdrop, let me walk you through four key messages and one ask. Next, please. The first message, 2025 was a structural break, not a temporary dip. three points. First, 2025 marked the largest single year ODA decline since records began in 1961. 26 of 34 DAC donors cut with a further 5.8% decline projected by OECD this year. Second, more aid is moving to defense, and that is a sovereign choice. But our answer is not defense versus development. Children are very much a part of the security equation because there is no secure future built on insecure childhoods. Third, as you can see from the right side, the cuts landed where it hurts children the most. their education, nutrition, and protection. Next, please. The second message against this backdrop for UNICEF, our income held, but flexibility did not. Two points. First, we held $8.08 billion better than we had planned. And this was because of multi-year commitments one-off measures such as reimbursements from the previous year, delayed payments, as well as foreign currency gains, and importantly, record private sector results. Second, this resilience marks a historic imbalance, a record year in private sector core and the lowest public sector core in UNICEF's recent history. What you see on the slide is $353 million is what we got in core from the public sector. This was down by 30% from 2024, making up just 6% of our total public sector income and representing only 11% of the total contributions from member states against the funding compact benchmark. Thematic funding was at a decade low at 4% and 81% of all the funding was earmarked. Bottom line, every percentage point in this report and on this slide has a name, a face, and a future. Next, please. The third message, public and private, two engines, one mission for children. three points. First, both public and private engines are essential. They are complementary, but they cannot substitute each other. Private growth powers diversification, innovation, and public engagement. public core delivers scale, predictability, collective burden sharing, preserving the multilateral character of an organization this board itself governs. Second, we are highly diversified. 57% of the income comes from beyond traditional DAC donors. Of this, 21% came from IFIs and GPPs. and 27% from citizens and private partners. Even further, diversification cannot close this gap in core. And when both engines work, this is the exciting bit. This is what it looks like, as you can see from the right side on the slide, the example of Sweden, one crisis, two engines, one match. A $46 million contribution from the government matched by $82 million by the private sector, equaling $128 million in our response for Gaza, Sweden's largest ever contribution of this kind. This powerful example tells us this is about matching, not substituting. Third, the quiet shift. Public sector funding is 69% of UNICEF's total income. Private sector is 27% of UNICEF's total income, including a record $812 million in private sector core. For the first time, as Kitty has said, all top five core contributors are national committees. Just three of the top 10 are member states. bottom line, distinguished delegates, 10 million citizens have placed their trust in UNICEF. The next move belongs to member state to renew the core because a foundation carried by citizens alone is a foundation standing only on one leg. Next, please. Very quickly to walk you through the most recent example of Venezuela, where we see this funding mix playing out in practice. When the earthquake struck Venezuela, $2.5 million of core through the Emergency Program Fund moved teams and supplies within the first 24 hours before the first pledge arrived. $1 million from the Global Humanitarian Thematic Fund kept pace as needs emerged. Both these instruments together with earmarked and pooled funds helped us to deliver around 80 tons of supplies and medicines to 200 health facilities and safe spaces for children. For the children reached, the difference was measured in hours, and hours is what core helps us buy. Bottom line, from this example, $3.5 million in core and thematic became a catalyst for a $38.5 million response, which meant every flexible dollar that moved first unlocked $11 more. Next, please. Final message, flexible funding reaches children no other money can. three points. First, the logic of the funding mix is simple. Thematic funding buys speed, earmarking buys more focus, core buys speed, but it also importantly holds the map. The only funding allocated purely by needs under the formula this board itself has approved. Second, the proof is everywhere. On this slide, in the two handouts before you on the tables, apologies for violating the paperless norm, this entire dialogue summed up on a single page with field examples on the reverse side and the case for thematic funding, which we so desperately need under the new strategic plan. Third, Last year, you challenged us to make the impact of core funding and the partners behind it much more visible. We heard you. Since then, we are delighted to share that our country offices have reached 340 local embassies, recognizing partners and showcasing the results their flexible support makes possible. And you've seen a glimpse of in the video. Bottom line, every flexible dollar is a multiplier. It brings speed in emergencies and equity for the furthest behind. The most powerful thing a partner can do this year is untie the next dollar. Next, please. Let me conclude with the ask. The right mix at the right moment. Three points. First, the projected decline is not a reason to wait. It is a reason to act now because every year of delay compounds the erosion of flexible funding. Second, our proposition is two-dimensional. A, quantity, to grow contributions and restore core towards the 30% commitment, and B, quality, making it more flexible, thematic, and multi-year. Third, the funding compact is our shared blueprint for the new strategic plan. Bottom line, the right funding mix is the most powerful lever this board holds, and we ask you to kindly use it to commit core, go thematic, and pledge multi-year. Next, please. Distinguished delegates, just a last word. Last year, in this very session, we warned that we stand on the edge of losing in the next three years what took us three decades to achieve for children. This year, the edge is no longer ahead of us. We are standing on it. But nothing in this report for this session is inevitable. Every number we have shown you today is a decision. And the decisions before this board can still change the outcomes for children because budgets can recover, but childhoods cannot. Thank you, Mr. President, and back to you.


Estonia · President [2:28:54]:

I thank Ms. Sobhraj for the presentation and open the floor for discussion. I now give a floor to Luxembourg.


Luxembourg · Benelux [2:29:19]:

Thank you, Mr. President. This is my first time speaking, so hence the trouble with the microphone. Madam Executive Director, Excellencies, colleagues, I have the honor to speak on behalf of the Benelux, our longstanding union of Belgium, the Kingdom of the Netherlands, and my own country, Luxembourg. As we approach the 80th anniversary of the creation of UNICEF, the Benelux countries reaffirm our strong commitment to UNICEF and its mandate. We thank Executive Director Catherine Russell for her leadership and UNICEF staff around the world for their continued efforts to advance the rights and well-being of every child, including children in crisis settings and in persistently underfunded or lower visibility contexts. We thank UNICEF for its report on the financing of results under the UNICEF Strategic Plan 2020-25. The report provides valuable insights into UNICEF's funding structure at a time of constrained ODA, increasing humanitarian needs and growing demands on the multilateral system. Thank you for the presentation just now. It speaks a very clear language. The figures point to a deepening imbalance in UNICEF's funding structure with continued pressure on flexible resources and a growing reliance on earmarked funding. accounting for 80% of UNICEF's total income over the past two strategic plans. While earmarked contributions have an important role to play, the current imbalance in the funding structure constrains UNICEF's ability to direct resources where they are most needed. Maintaining a healthy funding mix is key. We underline the importance of predictable, flexible and multi-year core funding. Core resources provide the institutional foundation that allows UNICEF to deliver across its mandate, support country offices, invest early in resilience, respond rapidly when crises emerge, and plan for longer term challenges. We are therefore concerned about the decline of regular resources to only 6% of total public sector income, the lowest on record. We encourage all partners where possible to increase predictable, flexible and multi-year contributions in line with our collective commitments under the funding compact. We also welcome UNICEF's efforts to expand multi-year agreements. How is UNICEF working with partners to further expand their use and reduce implementation restrictions? This funding dialogue is particularly relevant in the context of the UN80 initiative. A more effective, efficient and coordinated UN development system requires a balanced funding structure. We would welcome UNICEF's reflections on its engagement in work package 18 on funding mechanisms. How does UNICEF see the outcomes of WP18 translating into tangible improvements in its own funding environment and its capacity to deliver results for children? We would also be interested to hear more about UNICEF's collaboration with the Joint SDG Fund and how this partnership is contributing to stronger results on the ground. We recognize that strengthening UNICEF's funding base cannot rest on member state contributions alone. We therefore welcome UNICEF's continued efforts to diversify its funding and strengthen strategic partnerships. and commend UNICEF for its strong private sector engagement, which has led to an increase in private sector regular resources. Finally, maintaining and increasing donor confidence requires continued transparency, accountability and demonstrated results. We encourage UNICEF to further strengthen the visibility of its results achieved through flexible funding by clearly linking these resources to tangible outcomes for children and sustainable development results. Madam Executive Director, as UNICEF looks towards its next 80 years, the Benelux remains committed to supporting an organization that can respond effectively to immediate needs while investing in long-term solutions for every child. We look forward to continuing our strong partnership with UNICEF and to supporting UNICEF in delivering on its mandate for every child today and in the years ahead. Thank you.


Estonia · President [2:33:44]:

I thank the distinguished representative of Luxembourg. Next speaker is Germany.


Germany [2:33:54]:

Thank you, Mr. President of the Executive Board, Madam Executive Director, distinguished members of the Executive Board. We would like to thank UNICEF for the report and presentation shared with us for the structured funding dialogue, which closes the strategic plan 2022 to 2025. We highly appreciate the transparent presentation of UNICEF's financial situation and commend the progress made on the entity-specific funding compact commitments. We also take note of the historic shift in the composition of core resources. We share UNICEF's assessment that private sector support cannot replace the foundational role of member states in preserving the legitimacy and multilateral character of the organization. Addressing the erosion of public sector core funding therefore remains a shared responsibility. In this difficult context regarding both the availability of funding and increasing humanitarian and development needs, we commend UNICEF for its demonstrated ability to mobilize diversified funding sources, including private funding, and thus creating a broad and comparatively stable funding basis to address the needs of children and their communities worldwide. We notably welcome the increased contributions from non-OECD DAC partners and international financial institutions as well as global programme partnerships, including UNICEF's accreditation to the Green Climate Fund. We encourage UNICEF to sustain this diversification while continuing to make the case for flexible and predictable core funding. Against this background, we would be interested to hear: First, on the decline of core funding, what measures does UNICEF see as most effective in reversing the decline in public sector core funding and increasing the flexibility of earmarked contributions? Then, in this context, how can the UNAD work package on funding mechanism best contribute to a more balanced and predictable funding base for the 2026 to 2029 strategic plan? Finally, we would also be interested in UNICEF's assessment of the reasons behind the decline of thematic funding and how this is being addressed as part of the discussions on the UNAT work package on funding mechanisms. We thank you for your insights on these questions and look forward to continuing our constructive dialogue. Thank you.


Estonia · President [2:36:28]:

I thank the distinguished representative of Germany. Our next speaker is United States.


United States of America [2:36:37]:

Thank you, Mr. President.

As time is short, we'll cut right to the chase.

The United States will not support language that places sole responsibility on member states for UNICEF's funding challenges while ignoring the organization's own accountability. Asking member states to better align practices by providing more flexible funding, as we read the document to assert, is essentially, to our minds, asking donors to give UNICEF more money with fewer strings attached without UNICEF having to demonstrate any improved stewardship in return. The United States voted against the strategic plan and will not endorse language supporting it. The United States, at the same time, remained the top public sector emergency funding partner in 2025. In June 2026, we committed an additional $218 million, demonstrating our continued support for child survival and child protection. Funding decisions reflect donor expectations for results, accountability, and mission focus. UNICEF has to demonstrate that it is responsible, that it, excuse me, is a responsible steward of resources through measurable outcomes and operational efficiency. The United States expects UNICEF to focus on its core mandates of health, nutrition, wash and basic education while eliminating wasteful spending and initiatives that distract entirely from frontline child survival efforts. We also want to take this moment to emphasize that strong private sector fundraising demonstrates public confidence in UNICEF's mission. We note, for example, in this regard, the success of the previous innovative UNICEF private funding and partnerships, such as the World Bank instrument. However, we have seen very few initiatives since the World Bank instrument. So perhaps rather than blame member states for declining core resources, UNICEF could undertake a renewed effort to bolster its private fundraising efforts. And then finally, as a purely technical governance matter, the US also urges the board to consider merging this agenda item with the private fundraising and partnerships report and budget proposal. We believe that the two items should be considered together to give board members the fullest picture of UNICEF's overall funding landscape. We thank you for your attention to our comments. Thank you, Mr. President.


Estonia · President [2:39:22]:

I thank the distinguished representative of the United States. Next speaker is Switzerland.


Switzerland [2:39:32]:

Thank you, Mr. President, Madam Executive Director, distinguished members. We thank UNICEF for the comprehensive report and for the transparent presentation of the evolving funding environment. While we commend the strong performance of private sector funding and encourage UNICEF to maintain its diverse sources of income, We recognize that this cannot compensate for the decline in public sector funding. We therefore encourage UNICEF to continue its engagement with member states through structured funding dialogues and to link core and flexible funding to intended and demonstrated results showing value for money. At a time when regular resources are under increasing pressure, it is all the more important to ensure that they are not used to subsidize activities financed from other resources. We therefore wish to take this opportunity to reiterate the importance Switzerland attaches to cost recovery. We welcome the joint report on the implementation of the cost recovery policy and appreciate in particular that this year's report provides information on the challenges that hinder the full implementation of the policy. As it notes, these challenges may lead to under recovery and potential cross subsidization from regular resources. For Switzerland, full implementation of the cost recovery policy is important to avoid such cross-subsidization and to ensure the financial sustainability of program delivery, transparency regarding the actual cost of activities, and equitable burden sharing across funding resources. We know that UNICEF's effective indirect cost recovery rate remained broadly stable despite a slight decline in 2025, and that the financial impact associated with differentiated rates and waivers remained significant. Against this background, we would like to ask to what extent does UNICEF consider that the measures to address the identified challenges described at the end of the report have been effective in overcoming obstacles to the full implementation of the cost recovery policy? I thank you.


Estonia · President [2:41:22]:

I thank the distinguished representative of Switzerland. I now give a floor to Sweden.


Sweden [2:41:31]:

Thank you, Mr. President, and thank you very much to UNICEF for the presentation. I would like to thank you for highlighting the Swedish government support to UNICEF's work in Gaza through the Humanitarian Thematic Fund in partnership with UNICEF Sweden and Swedish private donors. It was a successful effort of matching public and private funding and we will look for opportunities to do this again. The declining trend in income and flexible funding, both core and non-core from the public sector is of serious concern. Flexible funding is crucial for the efficient functioning of UNICEF and the ability to implement its mandate. This is what is at stake and we have a shared responsibility, Member States and UNICEF together, to reverse this trend in line with the commitments in the funding compact. This requires constructive and straightforward dialogue between UNICEF and the Member States. Such a dialogue should aim to be bold and innovative, to turn every stone in addressing what may be done to incentivize member states to provide flexible funding to a greater extent. It is important to explore to what extent factors such as increased visibility, traceability, demonstration of results, analytical reporting, strategic dialogue could play in the decision of each donor to provide flexible rather than tightly earmarked funding. Another stone that could be turned is reviewing cost recovery rates as a possible way towards incentivizing additional flexible funding. For instance, we can note that at present the cost recovery rate for thematic funding is only one percentage point less than for earmarked funding. As noted in the report for this agenda item, Sweden has piloted flexible thematic funding support to the implementation of UNICEF country program documents in four different countries. This modality is particularly well suited for promoting humanitarian development nexus. It enables agile programming, enhances cross-sectoral approaches and system strengthening. Even though it forms a very small share of UNICEF's portfolio, we see that it fits well in the new funding landscape and would be happy to share our experiences with other donors who might be interested. Finally, two questions, the first one, The fact that the strong contribution from the private sector to regular resources is encouraging. Are there any lessons learned from dialogue with private donors that could be transferred to public sector partners? And the second question, in many cases decisions on funding are decentralized and made at embassy level. Having structured funding dialogues with partners in program countries is therefore important. Would UNICEF be prepared to engage further in conducting such dialogues? Thank you.


Estonia · President [2:44:27]:

I thank the distinguished representative of Sweden. I now give a floor to a standing group of national committees.


Standing Group of National Committees [2:44:37]:

Thank you, Mr. President, Madam Executive Director, distinguished delegates, UNICEF and colleagues. Thank you for this important presentation and for this crucial and vital debate. National committees appreciate the continued efforts of Member States to strengthen both the quantity and the quality of financial resources available for children. However, the report is clear that financing environment is becoming increasingly difficult with public sector core or regular resources to UNICEF at historic low levels. This trend must be reversed. Core resources is the engine and the impact of UNICEF. National committees are proud to contribute to the need to increase core resources for children, as was heard, and in fact, in 2025, seven of the top ten largest regular resource contributors to UNICEF were national committees. These results reflect more than successful fundraising, successful resource mobilization. They reflect a public trust and a shared commitment to children's rights among millions of individuals worldwide. Through advocacy and public engagement, including with young people, national committees help build trust in UNICEF's mission and impact. However, individuals and private sector funding partners cannot replace public funding. As duty bearers under the Convention of the Rights of the Child and as key actors in the international system, governments have the primary responsibility to ensure predictable and sustainable investments in children's rights and well-being. As we have heard, an area of opportunity for more resilient and diverse funding base is public-private partnerships.

I would also like to highlight.

In March this year, the government of Sweden announced a 555 million Swedish crown humanitarian package for Gaza, including 400 million Swedish crowns for UNICEF. At the same time, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs partnered with the National Committee of Sweden to mobilize and match additional resources from the committee's private sector partners. These innovative partnerships illustrate this transformative potential of bringing public and private sectors together. And in practice, it became a huge investment in the learning opportunities for children in Gaza. National committees look forward to continue to work with governments, private partners and UNICEF to find new ways to deliver results for children.

Thank you.


Estonia · President [2:47:31]:

I thank the distinguished representative of the Standing Group of National Committees. I now invite the Secretariat to respond to the comments and questions we just heard.


UNICEF · Deputy Executive Director, Partnerships · Kitty van der Heyden [2:47:43]:

Thank you, Mr. President, and let me first acknowledge and thank all the partners that engage with us in a dialogue. This is at the heart of the Structured Funding Dialogue, to do this and be with that together. And let me perhaps start, I will not take them all in order, but with the first speaker on behalf of the Benelux that stated so well the case for CORE that I think my job is over. The imbalance is very real, as you said, CORE is the institutional backbone of how we function as a 100% voluntary funded organization. There's no other way we can deliver on our mission and our mandate. But to your question on how we work on multi-year agreements and reducing restrictions, let me give you a few bullet points. One, having learned the lesson from 2025, we saw just how important multi-year contributions are. That was actually how we held income to a relatively stable level. And so as we engage with our many, many partners here around the table in these discussions, how you would like to support the next strategic plan, the current strategic plan, we're hoping to build in multi-year contributions as the default, not as the exception to the rule. And that will be a big part of the discussions that we will have with all of you. On restrictions, we have tried to take this somewhat out of the UNICEF level and bring that to the system level and to engage with, for example, our peers in UNDP, WFP, and working through and building on the 2024 QCPR to see what is the interagency position on earmarked funding and how can we engage, you know, on behalf of the three agencies together with you on how we reduce. earmarking in a way that works for you, but also in a way that enhances our ability to deliver for children in need. Less restrictive, softly earmarked, preferably multi-year. And let me, I think it was Sweden who asked, what are lessons learned from the private sector? In this case, let me just give you one example. The private sector too often wants to give us tightly earmarked contributions where their supply chain is, where their customers are. And we are now engaging with each of these corporate partners, all 18,000 plus of them where we can, to ask if you give us tightly earmarked contributions, we understand that, but we're a global organization. We can't just meet some children at some point in time with some money. We should be for every child. Would you be willing to take a part of your contribution to a thematic fund? so that on the issue you care about, we can also meet the needs of children beyond where your customers or your supply chain is. And we have seen a resounding response and buy-in. It's one part of why our private sector RR has also gone up in core and thematic. On thematic, I mean, thematic is by design earmarked by the thematic area, but not by countries or tightly projectized. It's exactly why it is so flexible, and we very much hope to see more contributions to the thematic funds. Our thematic fund for humanitarian emergency that Ted will speak about later today with our colleague Lucia is in serious need of support, as are the thematic funds under our strategic plan. And thank you to our Benelux partners for raising this. I mean, if there are partners that can raise this with the credibility, it is the Benelux. Luxembourg is one of the part of the group that meets the 0.7 norm. Belgium is one of the only two top 30 partners that meet the 30% for core resources. So thank you for all of that. On work package 18, there were a couple of questions in different varieties. Let me be honest, if I look aged beyond my years, it is because of the many engagements I have in all of these work packages, but of course, including and predominantly so, work package 18 on the funding streams. We have engaged very, very actively, as I said day before yesterday, we are a co-architect. And we've really tried as a starting point not to look at our institutional interest, but in the collective interest in what works. So collectively, we deliver better, faster, and cheaper for people that need us. What we have been pushing in all of those discussions, one, is the quality of funding. And the way we deliver requires different typologies of funding. There's not just one funding stream that will make it work. Yes, we need core, as we have agreed, but we also need thematic fund, we need earmarked funds, we have our pooled funding, and it is within all these funding streams that we have to enhance predictability, flexibility, and preference for multi-year contributions. Reform should raise those issues across all the different funding streams and not just shift resources from one pot to another pot, certainly not if that leads to more earmarking. And the reason I'm saying that also is not just because it would help us, but we also see from the Joint Inspection Unit that the costs of all these earmarking actually comes back to you. In the last report of JIU, they are very clear about the costs of the increased financial reporting because of all the tightly earmarked funding. the onerous conditions and if I just I wanted to give you two figures the reports have gone up from 2018 to now 2025 by 113% that means we have now almost 11,000 reports that we turn out to our donors because of the many projects our financial reports a 73% increase in just a few years all of that comes with a cost at the expense of program. So flexibility makes us more agile, but it also helps us focus to deliver on the ground. Core funding in work package 18, we have written a large part of the paper recognized as one of the core, I would say foundational stepping stones for the UN to deliver across the board. Lastly, perhaps on the work packages and the reform, really the pooled funding. Pooled funding is and will remain absolutely critical, not just because it's in the funding compact, which we have agreed to together, but 86% of our country offices is in some way, shape or form engaging in a joint program through an interagency pooled fund. And it yields us more than $400 million in income last year over a variety of issues in a variety of countries. However, the pooled funding architecture is quite complex. There are many different elements and tools in there, and we are jointly looking how we rationalize that structure. I would like to say that where I hope we can find innovative way forward is the example that Sweden mentioned and repeated by both Mandeep and our colleague from the national committees, how we can find ways to match public resources with private resources so that it becomes a multiplier that in the end accelerates our ability to deliver on the ground. Perhaps a last word on innovative finance. We are strongly supportive, as you know, on innovative finance for children. And I wanted to highlight perhaps two additional ways in which we have done that in addition to the World Bank bond, it's the 500 million dollar contribution from the European Investment Bank to WHO and UNICEF to combat polio, to eradicate polio from the scorch of this world. It was a complex transaction, but it worked and it is actually being implemented as we speak. We have in recent years, for example, and I would like to call out Germany, on that, engaged in a debt swap, a bilateral debt swap together with WFP. Again, you see here how often we work together with our peers in the UN system to deliver a debt swap that helps children being educated in Egypt. There are many ways in which we engage in innovative finance. What innovative finance, however, very often doesn't do is yield core resources that gives us the flexibility and the predictability to be there where we need to be. With that, if I may, I would like to turn it, Mr. President, to Ms. Mandeep O'Brien.


UNICEF · Global Director, Public Partnerships and Resource Mobilization Division · Mandeep O'Brien [2:57:02]:

Thank you, Kitty. Maybe just to compliment a few things. I think firstly for Benelux and Ambassador, a very warm welcome to New York. It's a pleasure to see you. So just to say two things on one part of the question. On a practical note, firstly, on the multi-year core contribution agreements, I'm really pleased to share that for 2026 this year itself, we have landed seven of these agreements in and fully in sync with our new strategic plan. And we would like to thank Belgium, Iceland, Luxembourg, Sweden, Switzerland, UK and Netherlands and the Denmark one is almost getting over the finish line. So this really gives us the much needed predictability and agility to be able to respond and adapt before, during and after a crisis. The second point around just to complement on restrictions, wanted to highlight two things here. First is, you know, it's about improving the quality of earmarked funding and we are doing this together with you in co-creation mode. How can we maximize the flexibility within the parameters of earmarked funding and we have some excellent examples of doing so. If we look at the parameter of strategic alignment with the strategic plan, with the country program document, with the UN cooperation framework, the alignment at the outcome level is extremely vital and we see for example the joint program, global joint program on female genital mutilation and preventing child marriage as an example of this and as the distinguished delegate of Sweden gave the example of CPD thematic, which we really hope and thank you for championing that we hope based on the positive results in the last strategic plan we can actually grow this portfolio in this period with so many CPDs coming up. So thank you for that. And just on this first set of questions on the restriction, just to conclude, is the issue of donor conditionalities, because when we talk about restrictions, I know that we are also in discussion with many of you as we see and we have to collectively navigate a growing wave of conditionalities. Just to say that every condition requires a tailored monitoring, tracking, and reporting and compliance measure. And that does contribute to transaction costs, which are shifting frontline staff away from programming. So again, something that we look forward to continue to discuss with you to find some pragmatic solutions. The second area of question on the joint SDG fund. Thank you very much for raising that from Benelux. Just very quickly. First is so far we have actively engaged in this funding instrument. I have to say that it hasn't grown as substantially as we had expected and there are some good lessons learned in terms of how to make this more strategic. I think the second is the biggest lesson is that this is a catalytic fund. Its job is to make sure that it stimulates say for example, an integrated social protection response because a number of sister agencies are actually working in this area and bring their respective comparative advantage. And to conclude, most recently we got a catalytic funding from this instrument in Honduras, and together with UNDP, we were able to, under very difficult circumstances, get an additional 80,000 children into schools across 140 municipalities. But again, it's catalytic and it has now catalyzed more funding from other sources for this particular targeted program. To conclude on the joint SDG fund, we are pleased that the expertise on demand is being piloted in six countries and this is supported by the joint SDG fund and UNICEF is pleased to be on the steering committee of this funding instrument so that we can shape it going forward. The third and final area of questions that I will address is also was alluded by a number of distinguished delegates around visibility and donor confidence and allow me to say a couple of things here very quickly. The first is You know, this structured funding dialogue for us on an annual basis is incredibly important. It's a good moment to take stock of how we are doing. And it is very much complemented by the strategic dialogues that we have on an annual basis with many of you. And we have heard you, your suggestions, and what we have before us even ahead of this session, our flagship reports on core funding as well as thematic funding. For thematic funding, we've spotlighted through dedicated reports across the different thematic funding pools. And for core resources, we're very excited that we have the RR partner recognition companion, as well as the RR impact story companion, which captures the traceability of results up to the country level, both from public sector core as well as private sector core. The second concrete initiative is what I mentioned during my presentation and something that is really become a momentum, which is to give full recognition to the local embassies. So we honed in on the top 10 government partners and our country representatives have reached out, as I mentioned, across 340 local embassies and ambassadors. And we have a lot of rich content that has emerged over the recent months, which we are putting together. Maybe just to conclude, to say that the Global South, and I do want to acknowledge the efforts made by a number of program countries to actually contribute core resources to your respective country programs for children. The amounts have ranged from anywhere between 50,000 to a million dollars, but every dollar counts and for every program country to come forward, it does go a long way in terms of solidifying the commitment to children. And we wanted to thank Qatar, China, Saudi Arabia, there's also Malaysia, Turkey, Thailand, Morocco, we have the whole list the partner companion just to make sure that we are also looking at this in terms of collective burden sharing. Maybe a last word on transparency. We have for the fourth consecutive year now featured in the top ten on on the transparency index portal, which is in line with the IATI standards, and very pleased that this is among a total big database of over 50 major organizations, and we will continue to strive to improve. I thank you, Mr. President, and back to you.


Estonia · President [3:05:24]:

Thank you. Thank you very much for this. If now our delegation wishes to take a floor at this time. We shall consider the structured dialogue on financing the results of UNICEF strategic plan 2022-2025 under agenda item 13, the adoption of draft decisions. I hand over to my dear colleague from Eritrea, Wifis.


Eritrea · President · Wifis [3:06:19]:

Distinguished delegates, we will now consider item 10 of the agenda, UNICEF strategic plan updated financial estimates, 2026 to 2029, document E/ICEF/2026/AB/L.6. In accordance with Executive Board decision 2013/20, updated financial estimates for the UNICEF strategic plan are presented to the Executive Board annually. The estimates provide a basis for determining the level of regular resources expenditures, including for programme submissions for approval in 2026. The document includes information requested in Executive Board decisions 2021/19 and 2023-2021. It also includes an updated integrated resource plan and additional details on the resources for evaluations as requested in decision 2024/17. Ms. Hannah Suleiman. Deputy Executive Director Management will introduce the report, should be followed by Controller and Director, Division of Financial Administrative Management, Ms. Diane Keppler, who will present the report. I now invite Ms. Suleman to take the floor. You have the floor, Madam.


UNICEF · Deputy Executive Director, Management · Hannah Suleiman [3:07:45]:

Thank you, Madam President. Distinguished members of the Executive Board, it is my honor to introduce the UNICEF Strategic Plan Updated Financial Estimates for 2026 to 2029. When we presented the integrated budget one year ago, UNICEF was already confronting a rapidly changing financing environment. Today, these pressures remain significant. Declining official development assistance, fiscal constraints, and geopolitical uncertainty continue to affect both the level and predictability of resources available for children, as noted in the previous session. Against this backdrop, UNICEF continues to take a prudent and conservative approach to financial planning. Total income for 2026 is projected at 6.46 billion, 20% below the 2025 actual level, and it is expected to remain broadly stable throughout the remainder of the strategic plan period. While the overall funding outlook is challenging, the continued downward trend in regular resources is particularly alarming. These are UNICEF's most flexible funds, allowing us to direct resources where needs are greatest, sustain programs in underfunded contexts, and respond rapidly to emerging crises, as illustrated in the previous session. Protecting and expanding flexible, predictable, and multi-year funding therefore remains very critical. At the same time, UNICEF is adapting. Planned expenditure is being aligned with the lower income outlook while we continue to prioritize program delivery and maintain prudent liquidity. The Future Focus initiative is advancing organizational efficiencies and helping UNICEF operate more sustainably within this constrained financial environment. Importantly, even as resources become more constrained, we must preserve the viability of our country programs. We are therefore proposing to increase the minimum annual regular resource allocation for each country program from 850,000 to 1.1 million beginning in 2027. This reflects the cumulative inflation since the minimum was last adjusted in 2013. UNICEF will continue to closely monitor income, expenditure, and financial risks and adjust our plans as necessary while keeping the executive board informed. We remain deeply grateful to member states and all our partners for their continued support. Flexible funding is fundamental to our ability to reach the most vulnerable children and to deliver where needs are greatest. Thank you, Madam President. I now invite our controller, Diane Kepler, to present the updated financial estimates in more detail. Thank you.


Eritrea · President · Wifis [3:10:42]:

I thank Ms. Silverman for her introduction, and I now invite Ms. Keppler to present the report. You have the floor, madam.


UNICEF · Controller and Director, Division of Financial and Administrative Management · Diane Keppler [3:10:50]:

Thank you, Chair. Chair, distinguished members of the executive board, and colleagues, I am pleased to present UNICEF's updated financial estimates for the period 2026-2029. Just checking to make sure I have my PowerPoint. Yes, it's up. Okay. The document that you have before you presents a four-year financial framework, which forms part of the UNICEF strategic plan, and it is presented in accordance with the Executive Board decision 2025/23. The financial plan is reviewed and revised annually by UNICEF on a rolling basis. The present financial framework of income and expenditure estimates provides a basis for determining the regular resources program submissions to be approved by you in 2027. Next slide, please. Oh, sorry, go back one. Yeah, this is the slide of the key messages. I'll spend a little bit of time on this slide and then I'll pick up speed. So the key messages, these financial estimates, they're an update of what was presented to you a year ago in the integrated budget. This update reflects the actual 2025 performance and our updated assessment of our income projections. We continue to apply a prudent, risk-informed financial planning approach. Our total projected income of $26 billion for the period that we're in now is consistent with what we presented a year ago. However, as you've heard, this represents a significant decline from the previous quadrennium, our actual income was 34.6 billion for the year 2026 which we'll come to in a moment we are projecting total income of 6.64 billion which is approximately 20% less than the 2025 actual so the challenge for UNICEF as you've heard is not only the decline in total income, but in particular, the decline in flexible funding, which we need to sustain program delivery and more importantly, to effectively plan. Regular resources provides predictable, flexible funding to countries, and we apply the board-approved formula to determine each country's share. The current minimum annual share, as per your decision 2013/20, is $850,000. we are proposing to increase this to $1.1 million annually to partially offset the impact of cumulative inflation. Next slide, please. I won't spend too much time on this slide because we've talked a lot about the income trends, so you know the situation that we're in. And this slide is showing total income, but what you've heard already is that the biggest decline has been in public sector income, especially in regular resources. In early 2025, just to take a step back, we experienced an unprecedented external shock to our public sector income. The initial projections pointed to a 26% contraction relative to the 2024 actuals, with regular resources expected to decline by 50%. Despite these historic headwinds, we actually did better than we expected in 2025, which was fantastic news. the total decrease in income was only a 2% decrease from 2024. However, as you've heard, this apparent resilience largely reflects timing and one-off factors rather than a substantive improvement in the funding environment. And as you've heard, public sector regular resources fell to the lowest level in UNICEF's history. But as seen on this slide, regular resources income only declined about 4% from 2024 to 2025. And the actual was a little bit better than planned. Nevertheless, as you've heard, the public sector regular resource income declined sharply to only $353 million in 2025, down from $513 million in 2024, reducing its share to just 23%. Next slide, please. Now we're going to move to how we manage this declining funding situation. And just to reiterate, there's virtually no change in the projections from what was presented a year ago. But for the current quadrennium, we are projecting total expenditure will exceed our total income. And how do we do that? We will be funding that extra expenditure through accumulated balances. I mean, essentially coming out of the previous quadrennium, the funding situation was very different. So we have entered this current quadrennium with OR and RR balances higher than what was planned, but we will be drawing these down now in the years 2026 to 2029. And I think the most important point I want to make is that despite the projected decrease in RR income, we are projecting, we're projecting to keep the total country program regular resource allocation relatively constant. And this has not been easy. In fact, this has been extremely difficult, and I think I've shared this in other informal sessions, where as part of FFI, we made a very intentional effort to reduce as much as possible our headquarters and our regional office expenditure in order to preserve the country program RR as much as possible. So that's what the document shows. Next slide, please. This is also overall, I would say, a positive in our financial situation, which we have continued to make good progress on funding our staff liabilities. Our staff liabilities consist mainly of after-service health insurance and end-of-service entitlements, such as repatriation grants. And we have funded these to the level of 93% as determined by an actuarial valuation that took place at the end of 2025. Next slide, please. This we've already covered. It's just to repeat again that we are requesting your approval to improve the minimum country program allocation from 850,000 to 1.1 million. So I won't spend any more time on this slide. And then moving to the last slide, this is just to reiterate the draft decisions that are in the document. But I know that these draft decisions have been revised somewhat. So yeah, I think everyone is very familiar with the decisions in the document. So let me stop there and hand back to the chair. Thank you.


Eritrea · President · Wifis [3:17:47]:

I thank Ms. Keppler for her presentation. I now open the floor for discussions. And I give the floor to the distinguished delegate of Germany. You have the floor.


Germany [3:18:03]:

Thank you, President, Madam Executive Director, distinguished members of the Executive Board. Thank you for the comprehensive report and the presentation of UNICEF's updated financial estimates for 2026. to 2029. We appreciate the measured approach to financial planning in an increasingly constrained funding environment. We note that 20% reduction in income is materializing for the first time in 2026, and we welcome the conservative outlook for the coming years. We assume which assumes a relatively stable income level at this lower level. We also take note of the proposed increase in the minimum annual allocation of regular resources for country programs, which partially compensates for inflation over the same period. It is the first increase in 13 years. As per information in the informal briefing on this topic on 21st August, a regular review should be established in the future and be foreseen every four years. In the following, we have a few questions concerning the persistent challenge of securing adequate funding for evaluation activities, which is likely to remain relevant throughout 2026, 2029 period. We would therefore be interested to hear from management on the following questions. What does management consider to be the main factors that make it difficult to secure adequate funding for evaluation, despite the importance attached to evaluation in UNICEF's policies and decision-making? What concrete steps does management intend to take to improve the funding situation for evaluations, particularly in other resources-funded programmes? And lastly, how does management plan to work with the evaluation office to jointly identify and address the underlying challenges and ensure that evaluation is adequately resourced? Thank you very much.


Eritrea · President · Wifis [3:20:04]:

I thank the distinguished delegate from Germany, and I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Netherlands.


Netherlands (Kingdom of the) [3:20:15]:

Thank you, Madam President. Madam Executive Director, distinguished colleagues, and first thank you Ms. Suleiman and Ms. Keppler for your presentations. The Kingdom of the Netherlands thanks UNICEF for presenting the financial outlook for 2026 to 2029. We appreciate that UNICEF shares this on a yearly basis with us as Executive Board. We welcome that despite headwinds, UNICEF income in 2025 exceeded projections, and that private sector regular resources reached a record high, which we of course also discussed in the previous section. This underlines the strength of the UNICEF brand and the strong results of the net comms. At the same time, we are deeply concerned that public sector regular resources fell to their lowest level ever, with only 6% of public sector income going to core, far below the 30% funding compact target. We are also worried about the continued decline in thematic funding and the shrinking donor base. We acknowledge that the sustained decline in regular and thematic resources erodes the financial flexibility of UNICEF and impacts UNICEF's ability to deliver on its mandate. We thank you for having country offices reach out to our embassies regarding the results of core funding. This is appreciated. Looking forward, what measures is UNICEF taking to maintain and where possible increase both core and thematic funding in the coming years? We welcome that overall expenditure levels remain high. We note, however, that the regular resources balance at the end of 2025 was still significant at $853 million. While we recognize the need for prudence in these uncertain times, we encourage UNICEF to find a balance and to ensure the regular resource reserve doesn't further increase. This brings me to my second question. Could you share more on the expected pace of expenditure of these funds? We also appreciate the progress made on funding staff liabilities. And finally, we support UNICEF's proposal to increase the minimum annual regular resource allocation to country programs, and we would favor reviewing this minimum on a regular basis. I thank you.


Eritrea · President · Wifis [3:22:29]:

I thank the distinguished delegates from the Netherlands, and then I'll give the floor to the distinguished representative of the United States.


United States of America [3:22:45]:

Thank you, Chair.

As was mentioned under the.

Previous agenda item, the United States remains the top public sector emergency funding partner in 2025. In 2026, we committed an additional $218 million, demonstrating our continued support for child survival and protection. UNICEF must demonstrate that it can operate within available resources through rigorous prioritization, elimination of wasteful spending, and focus on core mandates of health, nutrition, wash, and basic education. The Future Focus initiative projects $640 million in savings through staff reductions and relocations. These are necessary steps, but UNICEF must go further. We expect elimination of unnecessary business class travel, streamlined operations, and mission-focused programming. UNICEF cites inflation since 2013 to justify the 29% increase in the minimum country program allocations, but it has not adequately demonstrated how these increased allocations will deliver measurable results or whether all country programs warrant continuation. UNICEF must demonstrate it can deliver results within current funding levels. With respect to the request to approve up to $1.5 billion in new country programming expenditure submissions for 2027, UNICEF has not provided sufficient information linking the requested amount to cost saving efforts, related to streamlining of country programs and quantified efficiency gains. We encourage UNICEF to provide the Board with more substantial justification so the Board may properly exercise its oversight role. The documentation provided in advance of this session asked the Board to approve the preparation of up to $1.5 billion in country program submissions for 2027. The board is asked to approve an increase also asked to approve an increase in the minimum allocation per country program from 850,000 to 1.1 million without clarifying that the increase is actually a real reallocation within the same budget level and UNICEF provided no useful context for members to consider. Going forward, this information should be shared in advance. Thank you.


Eritrea · President · Wifis [3:25:40]:

I thank the distinguished representative of the United States. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of the European Union. You have the floor.


EU · EU [3:25:53]:

Thank you, Madam President, Chair, Madam Executive Director. I am speaking on behalf of the European Union as a donor. We take note of the updated financial estimates for the current strategic plan, an important tool to guide UNICEF actions towards 2030. We appreciate that UNICEF has revised its estimates based on 2025 income and has been conservative in its forecast for 2026-2029. However, in light of continued funding constraints, we would welcome UNICEF's assessment of the likelihood that the projected income of $6.46 billion for 2026 which remains close to the originally planned level, will be realized by the end of the year. We would also be interested in hearing UNICEF's views on how the Executive Board and donors can most usefully support these efforts in the current context. We note that in 2025, due to a very challenging funding environment, the evaluation function suffered from worrying cuts and pressure on evaluation coverage and independence. While we welcome that the proposed budgets for the evaluation office and pooled fund remained unchanged from what was presented to the executive board in September 2025, we wish to stress again the importance of a solid and independent evaluation function, especially in the context of significant organizational reforms. We encourage UNICEF to maintain its target allocation towards evaluation at 1% of the program expenditure. We welcome the continued implementation of the Future Focus Initiative and UNICEF's efforts to increase efficiency and proximity to program delivery. As the figures contained in the document before the Board have not been updated since March 2026, we would welcome reassurance that the operationalization of the FFI has progressed as planned in 2026 and that the projected savings remain on track to be achieved. Despite significant funding challenges, We trust that this strategic plan will serve as an important vehicle for advancing towards the 2030 objectives. We are encouraged by UNICEF's continued efforts to broaden partnerships with new donors and to consolidate its private donor base, which is particularly important in the context of constrained public funding. The European Union has been and will remain a major donor to UNICEF, and we look forward to continuing working with you to deliver a better future for children. Thank you.


Eritrea · President · Wifis [3:28:14]:

I thank the distinguished delegate from the European Union. I want to take this opportunity to thank the translators and release you. Thank you. And I invite the Secretariat to respond to the questions and remarks we have heard.


UNICEF · Controller and Director, Division of Financial and Administrative Management · Diane Keppler [3:28:31]:

Thank you, Chair. Thanks, distinguished members, for the excellent comments and questions. I'll do my best to answer them in the order in which you asked. Starting with Germany, I note the many questions you had on funding for evaluation. I'm sure, I mean, in the document, we do have a few paragraphs there which are in the document at the request of the executive board. And just to briefly summarize, you know, the document does explain that the funding of the evaluation office, as well as the pooled fund, has been, you know, we've done our best to protect it despite these difficult funding situations. So it spells out what it is and I think says we continue to fund from core funding 33 evaluation positions at headquarters and the regional offices. And it also notes the challenge, that the biggest challenge is making sure that for other resource contributions, that we have sufficient funding set aside for evaluation. And yes, that does continue to be a challenge. I think it's something that we need to continue to work on. But just to make the point, when it comes to the core funding, which is the pooled fund and the institutional budget, it's at the level that was agreed or that you approved a year ago. And it is, I would say, roughly in line with the same reductions that were borne by all headquarters and regional offices, if anything, maybe a little bit less. But yeah, the big challenge has been to make sure that we get sufficient funding for evaluation from other resources. And we will continue to work on that, as noted in the document. And the 1% target, we, again, it's, I don't know if I dare use the word aspirational at this point, but it's, you know, we're very keenly aware of it. It comes up every year, and we always question ourselves as management and working with the evaluation office, you know, what more can we do to get closer? But at the same time, I think we also recognize that 1% is not necessarily a magic number that will solve all the issues, that we have to also look at how we can be more efficient, how we can do evaluations more efficiently, more cost effectively, and still get the results that we want. So this will be an ongoing dialogue that management will have with the evaluation office. From the Netherlands, Thank you for your comments about our regular resource balance. It is, in fact, $853 million at the end of 2025. And I'm never sure whether to be, you know, happy that it was higher than planned or whether I should, you know, be upset that it was higher than planned. Because, of course, I mean, all joking aside, you know, we want to make sure that regular resources go to where the needs are the greatest. I mean, of course, that's our goal. But at the same time, we also want to make sure that we give our countries and our country offices predictable levels. So we are cautious when we do our country programs, and this links a little bit to the comments from the United States as well, that when we prepare, when we come up with our projections for the country programs, we are conservative, and that's quite by design, that we want to make sure that, you know, whatever country program we say covering the period of the country program, which is typically five years, that, you know, that the country, the countries can count on that, that these are predictable funding that they can count on. So we quite deliberately want to err on the side of being too conservative, but, and then if we find ourselves where our balances end up being higher than what was planned, We can always allocate more, and when we come to the end of 2026, the year we're in now, we can look at the option of potentially allocating more. And as I say that, I know the regional directors in the audience are getting quite excited. But, you know, it's a decision that it's within the executive director's authority. Ultimately, it will be the executive director to decide how much is affordable, how much is prudent to allocate to country programs. So to get back to the Netherlands, you know, how do we how do we plan to spend this, you know, we always have the option of when we review the income estimates at the end of the year, if we find that our balances are sufficiently high and perhaps could come down a bit, we can always allocate more to the country programs, which I know would be very well received by every country. So that's, I think, answering then. And how do we pick up the pace of expenditure? That's quite easy. But what we want to avoid doing is kind of this, to say, this year you get this much, next year it's down, next year it's back up again. We try very much to aim to make the funding, the RR funding, predictable, knowing that OR funding is always going to be unpredictable or tends to be unpredictable. Moving to the US. Thank you for acknowledging, you know, that we have achieved savings of 640 million over the quadrennium through our FFI initiative. It has not been easy. I hear you that, you know, we need to go further. And I think, you know, as a management team, we're constantly looking at what more we could do. One of the areas we are looking at is travel, but there's other areas too. We're looking at how we can, you know, reduce our cost of premises. Even in New York, as some of you may be aware, we used to have an office on Third Avenue. That's been closed down. So now we save the rent that we were paying there. So the cost of our New York premises have gone down quite significantly. So we're always looking at where we can do more. But just to repeat again, the savings of $640 million, which are on track, by the way, because most of those savings are staff, to be very honest. And I think that's in the document that, you know, we have separated staff, we've reduced our workforce, and that's how we know that we have achieved $640 million in savings. And the budgets that each office have got reduce that lower level, reflect, sorry, that lower level. But by making those reductions, that's how we've been able to sustain the country program RR at roughly comparable levels to 2025. And that, again, was a very deliberate decision. I mean, when we saw the decline in funding, we could have, you know, management could have made the decision, the executive director could have made the decision to, you know, reduce the country program RR across the board. But we felt it was important to, as much as possible, protect the country program. And that meant that regional offices and headquarters had to bear the most, had to bear most of the cuts in expenditure. And also appreciate your comments from the US again about that the decision in the document did not provide the full context for the decisions that you were being asked to approve with regards to the 1.5 billion and also the increases in the minimum. And thank you for your patience. I know my team and I have had quite a few discussions with you, and I hope it's clear now that we are our plans are very prudent, very conservative. And the aim is to have predictable levels of funding. But yeah, I think because we haven't had this increase for some 13 years, that was part of the challenge. And I appreciate the proposal from Germany, I believe, to have a more regular review of what should be the minimum that goes to a country program. Lastly, from the European Union, I think I've addressed the questions a little bit already in talking about the evaluation and the projected savings from FFI, and yes, they are on track. So with that, I'll hand back to the chair. Thank you.


Eritrea · President · Wifis [3:36:15]:

I thank the Secretariat for their response. Does any other delegation wish to take the floor? If no other delegation wishes to take the floor at this time, we shall consider the matter later under agenda item 13, the adoption of draft decisions. Before we adjourn for this morning, I believe the secretary of the executive board, Mr. Andres Franco, would like to make an announcement. Mr. Secretary, you have the floor.


UNICEF · Secretary of the Executive Board · Andres Franco [3:36:46]:

Thank you, Chair.

I've been asked by Grete from Estonia to inform you that the informal consultations will resume in this room in five minutes.

Thank you very much.


Eritrea · President · Wifis [3:36:59]:

I thank the Secretariat for his announcement. This brings us to the end of this morning's meetings. The meeting is adjourned. Do I get to go?