(7th meeting) 2026 ECOSOC Forum on Financing for Development Follow-Up (FfD Forum)

Excellencies, distinguished delegates, I call to order the seventh meeting of the 2026 sessions of the Economic and Social Council Forum on Financing for Development. Follow Excellencies, distinguished delegates. I now invite the Forum to resume its considerations of sub item D of agenda item two to hold an in depth review of the domestic and international private business and finance. The Forum will hold a panel discussion on private business and finance as drivers of sustainable development. I'm pleased to welcome our distinguished presenters for this morning. I also welcome our Moderator, Mr. Nabeed Hanif, Assistant Secretary General for Economic Development in the Department of Economic and Social affairs, who will conduct the discussions as usual. I look forward to an open, very constructive and very productive session and the exchange of views. Mr. Hanif, you have the floor now.

Mr. President, thank you for the opportunity to moderate panel discussions which I think is critical to the discussion on financing for development. And we have a very distinguished panel joining us this morning and one minister joining us remotely. The financing for development agenda focuses on four types of flows. Public, private, global, domestic. That is the crux of this whole conversation. And when we look at the private side, we look at business activity, financial flows. But there are two other things we also need to focus on. And that's where this panel discussion becomes so critical. Private sector not only brings money and business activity, it also brings innovation, entrepreneurship, and in most of the cases, lift society's ambitions. These soft layers of private sector's engagement should not be underestimated. But this conversation is happening at difficult times which arrive with challenges, but also with opportunities. We have repeatedly heard from the private sector. They are committed to help countries in energy transition, in digitalization, in building infrastructure. Infrastructure holds key to the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals. Today our discussion is going to focus on and this is one puzzle which if I think naively, should have been solved long time ago. Opportunities abound for return for development and capital is also in abundance. According to demand and supply rule, they should come together. But that's not happening. It hasn't happened so far at the scale and the speed that we need to attain very quickly. We have recently released the Financing for Sustainable Development report. In this chapter, chapter 4.2, Domestic and International Private Business and Finance has given analysis how to advance on the soye commitment actions on this particular aspect of financing for development. So our discussion today is we know largely what to do and we are committed to do it. But why aren't we doing it? What are the obstacles that we are confronted with? The report also clearly conveys it's not only by mobilizing greater volumes of capital, but by improving alignment, quality and development impact. That's what private sector's role should be in helping countries to achieve this 2030 agenda and also transition to sustainable economies. So with those comments, I just want to draw attention to to the audience and the panel members before I introduce them. We have also listed three questions for this discussion. Tell us and please focus on how the actions committed in the Sevilla commitment on financial, private sector development, enabling environment, how do we get there? What incentives, regulatory and financial levers policymakers can utilize to improve access to finance, especially for SMEs? In what role can investors, development banks and public finance play to make blended finance work for everyone because it is highly concentrated. So, with these three questions in my framing remarks and my request to panelists to please focus on how do we get there. We'll begin with a government representative Minister, His Excellency Mr. Malik, Minister of Climate Change, who is joining us from Islamabad remotely and he was also with us in Seville. He had brought projects from Pakistan seeking investment in areas which are essential for providing access to water and also energy transition. Mr. Minister, thank you for joining us this morning and I hope the connection will work and technology will not fail us. Could I invite you to share your thoughts? Because Pakistan has come to the SDG Investment Fair four times with significant number of projects. We want to hear from you. How have you been able to assess the progress so far and what are your thoughts in accelerating this process of attracting investment for countries who have come to the fair? Mr. Minister, you have the microphone. Thank you. Yeah. So has the Minister joined? Okay. Mr. Minister, you have the microphone.

Oh, yeah, I'm sorry, I couldn't. I couldn't hear anything. So I tried a couple of times. I'm online now.

Come to the investment. Can you hear me now? Mr. Minister?

Can you hear me?

So just three things I want to draw.

Your connection is very Patchy. Yes.

Yeah. Mr. Minister, you were with us in Seville and you had brought some projects also from Pakistan. Pakistan has also been to the SDG Investment Fair around four times with very important projects. So we want to hear from you what how far we have been able to meet your expectations and what are the barriers you have confronted with. You are confronted with an attracting investment, how to overcome those obstacles. I would welcome your reflections and we are focused on how to accelerate investment in the SDGs. Over to you, Mr. Minister.

Well, thank you very much. I really appreciate it. I was in Sevilla and I was blown away by the energy that I sensed in that hall and we were able to bring a handful of companies and they were also extremely charged by the time they went back and some of them got into initial conversations for fundraising. So I'm very grateful that you continue to invite us and continue to invite other countries to this forum. I would focus on some of the challenges and then and probably some of the solutions. As you guys already know, roughly 80 to 85% of the green financing of the world is going to give or take about 10 countries. And you can look at it from several lenses. I have chosen to look at it from a rather benign lens. And my belief is that maybe it is because of the perception of risk. Most of the developing economies, particularly a country like Pakistan, the perception of risk is pretty high. And therefore, even when windows are open, such as your institution, sometimes individual investors, they're very happy to meet with us in Seville or very happy to meet with us in New York. But when these companies, which are based in a small town about 35 miles away from Peshar, when they invite them to come over, it starts to get rather complicated and people start to compute the country risk and then the project risk and then all sorts of infrastructure risks and completion risks. And because many of these companies are global and they are not, some of them are not present or most of them are not present in Pakistan, they also don't quite get the sense of what it's like to do business in Pakistan. So one of my concerns is that there is probably a perception of risk which interferes with investments. The initial conversations are very enthusiastic, but in terms of actual deal flow and actual money flow, it starts to get stalled. That's one idea. The second is probably that the development sector of Pakistan was very heavily historically dependent upon multilateral funding and kind of got used to the idea of writing grants and getting money for developmental work where commercial considerations were not primary, developmental consideration and impact considerations were primary. But many a times it ended up creating, for the lack of any other word, and please don't read me wrong, I'm a development guy, created a lazy enterprise where you didn't feel that it was obligatory on you to make a strong case, a strong commercial case, for the investor to come and invest in a country like Pakistan. So this transition away from multilateral grant based kind of instrument to a commercial enterprise where the public sector and the private sector come together, they come up where try to find out areas which have not only high public rate of returns, which means public good, but they also have a high private rate of return. So that when an Enterprise or an investor kind of comes into play. They're able to create or meet the hurdle rate of impact investor because even investors don't work at zero return. So that may probably be the second challenge that we, we are facing. I think the third, third challenge that we are facing in terms of investments is that many a times when you work in the development sector, there are lots of projects which are viable in their own right, but sometimes there's a viability gap. And one was very hopeful, at least I was very hopeful that carbon markets would play a very big role in plugging in this viability gap. So if an investor has need or hurdle rate of 14 or 15% IRR and some developmental fantastic project is yielding 11% or 10%, then the carbon markets would play into it and throw it, or throw the project over the hurdle rate and we'll get financing. So the carbon markets are doing very well, but they're also growing rather slow. And there's no enterprise. These are not tradable goods. Most of the relationships are either bilateral or. So what I'm trying to say is that it's not like NASDAQ or it's not like New York Stock Exchange where the carbon market, carbon credits are getting traded and there's a lot of liquidity and you can get into the market and you can get out of the market. So probably that has also played a little bit into it. We are still very hopeful. I was personally very hopeful. I wanted to be in New York. There's some special circumstances, as you know, for which the Prime Minister has mandated that we stay in Islamabad. So as much as my heart is with you guys, my apologies that I couldn't be there in person. But these are the few things that have come to my mind. Now what can we do? I think we can do a lot in the area of de risking. I personally believe that novel instruments have been created by DFIs and by MDBs. These, these are insurance instruments. These are guarantees of sorts. These are first loss kind of instruments. And I think in a country like Pakistan and most of the developing world, Africa, Latin America and probably parts of South Asia, I think some kind of, you know, we need to, we need to see these ideas and probably the perception of risk needs to be lowered down. So some of these instruments, which are commonplace in the developed world, probably need to find the presence or find articulation in our ecosystem, particularly developmental ecosystem. So I think these de risking instruments are very important. I also think the presence of some kind of fund seeding, venture funds or angel funds, basically providing risk capital along the entire value chain is very important because people, very good hearted people talk about public private partnership and blended financing. But you know, the countries where the private sector is not as large or as robust or, or as big, where they have their own funds and they can do JVs, they can take position in smaller companies, the Bay Area or if you're, you know, within, like in New York or in 50 miles around Boston, you know, it might look obvious to you that you'd be able to get some kind of blended financing or you'd get into some kind of partnership with some person who is risk capital. But that's not all. Obvious, it's not out there. So I'm seeing some startup funds, some venture funds, some angel funds, some private equity fund that because these people, if they're present a perception of risk would be not just the perception you see on media, but the reality as we more recently you've seen. Many people have visited Pakistan and they found Pakistan to be a very different place. So if there were funds here and there were a bunch of entrepreneurs and investors who were present in Islamabad or Karachi or Lahore, I think their sense of perception would also change. They would also get confidence. At the end of the day when you're making investments, you're placing bet on the team and you need to have a connection with the team, you need to have faith that yes, these bunch of young starry eyed men and women are going to make that change. They're going to create that unicorn. And the unicorn could not just be dollar denominated, it could also be impact denominated. So my view is that probably that kind of presence would also help a lot in moving us forward. Now these are the kinds of things that the international community can do because we don't have those kinds of footprints or we don't have very strong footprints. And then there are a bunch of things that we have to do internally. We have to make sure that our Federal Reserves bank, we call it, fondly call it State bank of Pakistan, it creates regulations where the banks provide a certain percentage of the deposits, like community banks to SMEs and to startups and particularly to, to green startups or to sustainable startups. So that regulatory battle we are fighting every day in the cabinet and we have convinced our Prime Minister to move in that direction and we're pretty sure that that is going to happen very soon. Those are the kinds of things that we have to do. We have to change our bankruptcy laws, we have to make sure that we have differential taxation for startups and the ease of doing business improves. We have to make sure that the cost of capital is not very. And when you put all of these things together, the availability of the entire value chain along the value chain of green cluster creation or sustainable development cluster creation, if there's risk capital available, the perception of risk is mitigated through either instruments or the presence of people who are actual investors. And we create a friendly framework in developing economies, particularly in my case in Pakistan. I think we can see some startups. The last thing that I would say, and please stop me, my wife tells me that when I start speaking, I don't stop. So if my time runs out, you'll have to tell me and I wouldn't mind.

So please tell me when that time is over. Go ahead with your final point. Thank you.

Okay, so.

No, it's.

It's okay. I mean, I think let's have an interactive session. It's not a big deal. I think I've said most of what I wanted to say and I can come back and contribute later.

Thank you so much, Minister, your flexibility and for your excellent points, your analysis, your candid acceptance of factors which Pakistan needs to address and of course, very, very precise recommendations on the next steps. I'm sure the subsequent speakers will address these and please stay with us. We will certainly invite you back once you have heard other perspectives on mobilizing private capital and bringing private sector activity to developing countries. Our next speaker, Mr. Jose Vinayal, former Group Chairman of Standard Chartered bank and currently co chair of the Global Investors for Sustainable Development alliance, where I had the honor to work with him closely. Jose, please share with us your reflections and also comment on Minister's observations on how do we reduce risk perception. That is something we hear everywhere. And also how do we improve instruments which I must say have improved significantly in the last four years. But we can do a bit more over to you.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Mr. Assistant Secretary General, I think I understand well what the Minister means that sometimes from the distance risk looks much higher than on the ground. And a global bank like Sanda Charter, which has been present in Pakistan for many, many decades, certainly in many other emerging markets in developing economies and having deep local knowledge, understands the issue of misperception of risks by many institutional investors and asset owners around the world. But that's an issue that needs to be tackled. I want to focus on what I think is the central question and that is what will it really take for private capital to. To help close the Sustainable Development Financing gap. And we know the numbers. A multi trillion dollar shortfall every year at a time when public budgets are under severe strain and official development aid has substantially been reduced, if not collapse, in entire regions of the world. That gap shows up as power plants not built, digital and transport links not upgraded, small to medium sized enterprises which are the backbone of these economies, not finance and climate and social goals slipping out of reach. The Zevilla commitment was very, very important. But it was important also in one respect, because it recognizes that private business and finance are not peripheral to this challenge. They are also engines of transformation, job creation, innovation and growth. But private business and finance can only play that role at scale. If the enabling environment is right, both at the national and at the international level. Because only this environment is the right one. The opportunities which exist in sustainable development will become commercial opportunities that will draw money to realize the opportunities. So let me highlight three priorities in that regard. First, we need to focus where finance can have the greatest development impact. And I can see two key areas. One is infrastructures and the other is small and medium sized enterprises in emerging markets and developing economies. Quality infrastructure in energy, transport, digital, water, social sectors is fundamentals for the growth and development of these economies and the resilience to shocks and SMEs. Meanwhile, as I mentioned, at the backbone of these economies. Yet in practice we know they face the toughest barriers to credit. This leads to the second priority which I think is very important in allowing capital to flow to where it's most needed, which is getting financial regulation and financial policies right. The prudential regulations, the prudential frameworks which were put in place after the global financial crisis were designed to protect financial stability. And that was the right thing to do because financial stability is non negotiable. But one unintended consequence is that regulatory requirements for infrastructure capital requirements, for example, especially infrastructure investment going into emerging markets and developing economies, these requirements are often higher than for other asset classes. Despite the stronger performance of data that pushes up the cost of capital and discourages long term investment in infrastructure in emerging market developing economies, reinforcing the infrastructure gap. This is one case where regulatory misperception leads to barriers to investment. So if regulatory treatment and risk assessment do not reflect the true performance of of sustainable infrastructure and also of productive SME lending, private capital remain below potential. Thus the need to right size financial regulation in line with actual risk, not perceived risk. And the third priority is very important is that we need policies, institutions and instruments to work in tandem. Governments can provide predictability and the Minister talked About the importance of having that enabled environment at home. Predictability through sound governance based on stable rules, solid economic and regulatory frameworks, strong institutions and in the project of infrastructure, transparent procurement, credible transition plans and and clear project pipelines. Development banks and multilateral banks in turn can originate and structure projects, offer guarantees and first loss capital and crowding private investors by restoring the right risk return equation. And on the instrument side, we must keep a sharp focus on measurable development impact. And at the end of the day, the cruise of the matter is how to reconcile the the development impact that is sought with the commercial opportunities becoming part of the right risk return equation that would make that happen. If we align better national policies, supportive international regulation and effective and innovative scalable financial vehicles and instruments, private capital can move and will move from the margins to the mainstream of sustainable development finance. The potential opportunities that the private sector increasingly sees in emerging markets and developing economies investment will become a reality. The Sevilla commitment gives us the direction. The next step is implementation. Concrete regulatory adjustments, demonstrable transactions, including the field of blended finance and replicable models that can be scaled up. Our collective task, both private public collaboration is less about inventing new money and more about steering existing money, existing capital at scale towards assets that build resilient, inclusive and sustainable economies.

Thank you, thank you so much for this excellent point. It's not about creating more capital, it's steering it in the right direction. And I must Clarify when the 2030 Agenda was adopted, this was a clear understanding. It's not something that you do on the side that $5 trillion will go to the SDGs. 95 to $11 go to fossil fuels. Unsustainable activities and societies will continue on those pathways. The vision was SDGs are a business model and every business will be aligned with the SDGs. And that's how we should pursue it. Because gap filling approach gives a totally different impression from calling Sega an opportunity for the future of humanity to embrace sustainability. So thank you so much Jose for very clear messages and I couldn't agree more with you. It's all about regulatory certainty, policy predictability and clear message from the government that once capital comes in, it's secure. Returns are also repatriable and they are here to support those activities. Thank you. Our next speaker, Ms. Sylvia Carpetella, she's Chief Executive Officer, Citigroup Global Markets Europe. Over to you.

Thank you very much for these and a lot has been said. So I'll focus on items which I think are core to add to the picture. Referring to Sevilla, the call to action has been critical by many participants into that forum. And what this forum highlighted is how the three players we just discussed about are going to be fundamental in unlocking financial support to project and sustainable developments routed towards various countries and various initiatives. And the glue factor among the three players, which are definitely policies on one side institutions and of course private investor, is how do we balance risks and rewards. Each of these play a critical factor and has a key role from the ability to risk the investment to bring to the table extensive local and technical knowledge to structure the project as well as to bridge the gap in providing the famous funding that is so necessary and so required. And so it is really on the ability that we will need to sort of prove in the upcoming days and weeks and months on translating into action and facts this cooperation of the three players that we can measure and we can sort of obtain a higher extent of funding from the private sector as well, rooted towards the support of this project that ultimately are project that results in development and economic growth at local level and so are so fundamental for the global economy in general.

Thank you so much for your brevity also but very sharp point. Let me move on to Mr. Anderson Caputo. He's chief of the Connectivity Markets and Finance Inter American development bank. And Mr. Caputo also share with us because IADB is very innovative in mobilizing private capital on climate finance. And you're also coming up with practical proposal on re channeling the SDRs. So over to you,

thank you very much. And coming after the speakers, like what I get a sense is that indeed like as was mentioned before, we have a doubting challenge where the opportunities are there, the capital is there, but it's not flowing. And I think that the points raised before in terms of prioritization, how do you make this flow now, the use of de risking now, they all converge now. And actually the document not talks about all of these issues in the civilia and that we know that the big challenge and also mentioned before is really how do we move to action, right? How do we implement that? And that for us as MDBs and I tell as for us not only IDB because we are having really a lot of engagements with all the MDBs really scratching their heads like looking at the challenge ahead of us and seeing how can we play a role in making this match of the opportunities and the capital that is there. And that has led to several conclusions. I wanted to share some with you of direction that I believe it's been quite important. First realization is that the mobilization of capital it's really a chain. It's not like a single action that you should take because you need to get all the players involved to actually get that de risking the regulation in place. The enabling environment that was mentioned here and the starting point also reflected in the government in Seville, is that it will not work, as has been tried in the past, that you come with supply driven solutions to countries, right? Like you need a very strong country ownership. But then the country ownership is important when this is very well designed in terms of strategies that the countries have. Because that directs like what are the priorities that the countries have, be it like infrastructure. I fully agree on the topic. So of infrastructure MSME as the key engines of jobs of growth in these countries. But how the government themselves, they act together in organizing the framework that will give security for the private sector to actually say, okay, there is a governance behind there is a supportive regulatory framework, there is actually focus. Because one of the things that also kills investment is the lack of focus and continued changing of priorities in countries. And then you try to invest and then after a while that's not a priority anymore and then you're there with your capital. So these things are important. So the first step is that start with national strategies and the enabling environment. Private finance is not going to mobilize just by declaration. You need sector priorities, predictable rules, bankable revenue models, the infrastructure there. And that mdb, as I mentioned before, we reflect a lot because we step in as kind of an honest broker and then with capacity and what MDBs do. And then I tell that a lot to the staff that I work with, the finance team. And then I tell them, don't pretend that you are experts in health and education on infrastructure. But it's exactly in the MDBs that you have, Michael, you have the colleagues and expertise in house that the change in business models in MDBs is to work really together and offer a holistic offering to the countries that you can deal with limitations that are sector specific and then the financial engineering together. So that is very important. And then the other steps, just to move a bit quicker in my speech, is that the domestic financial intermediation for SMEs is very important. Sometimes we talk about capital markets, et cetera, but we need to realize that in many of the economies we work on, it's the banking system that is super important. And then it's not one or the other. You need to work on both because. Because like how MSMEs get their direct financing and then how this can be scaled and then yes, a lot of times this will be scaled through capital market solutions, but not directly to the SMEs themselves, but through banks and securitization, et cetera. And then with the enabling environment. Then we look into our own balance sheets as multilateral development banks and seeing like how do we use more instead of direct lending, how do we leverage our instruments to bring private capital. That very quickly leads then to a whole approach of using more guarantees, de risking mechanisms, et cetera. And then we realize that even if we do all of that, this is not enough. We need to also think about large scale initiatives that could actually promote more and larger capital mobilization with impact, which was the other theme discussed here. And then that we have. And with that I'll finish all this thinking that we are having. The last years have led to a multitude of initiatives. We need to look at those that are working because this also gets us lost, but not spend the energy like let's improve those that are already showing good signs. Let's invest on them and let's scale them up. And here I have an example that is the echo invest in Brazil because in the IDB we are doing some initiatives that I wanted to highlight. One is the Reinvest plus program which basically is going through the banks that have that misperception of risks. But the local banks or those that are there like they know the risk, they have the projects some of them are performing. You're not going to get the capital directly there. But what you could do is to package those projects that are already performing and de risk a bit and reach the investors that would create space in the balance sheet of the local banks to reinvest. So this is the concept of Reinvest plus like you package that creates space and those that are no more the reality on the ground can reinvest in new opportunities directed by countries in their priority sectors. But Equinvest in Brazil has mobilized 23 billion so far in terms of commitments of investments through branded financing mechanisms where we also trying to hedge affects risks. And then that led us to launch an initiative that is to internationalize this concept. And the vision of our President. Elon said we were saying let's internationalize this in Latin America. And the President said why Latin America, Anderson? I said that's our mandate, President.

That's what I thought.

But he said no, we need to work with the other development banks to get the lessons learned and get this really international. So that's the mindset that we are having is implementing these initiatives but for the good of other regions and that others can implement. Thank you.

Thank you so much. Mr. Kabuto. In the second round, when we come back to you, I want to flag two points. If you could reflect on those and respond. You know, when you talk to ministers from small because you have the Caribbean, small island developing States, fine, they can do everything that you ask them to do. And yet investment will not come because of the market size, because of the vulnerabilities of islands and climate change risks. So how do you address those challenges which are binding constraints for these small countries? And unlike LDCs, they will never graduate because they are islands and they will remain islands. So what can we do for those countries and also low income countries. Blended finance doesn't go there. So MDBs and there's also a lot of talk last week in Washington also originate to distribute, originate to share. If you could also draw some light on those ideas because small island developing States have a real challenge in getting investment flowing in their sectors beyond tourism, because tourism is a very heavily dependent industry on international conditions for people to travel to those places. Let me now move to Ms. Carolyn Shriver. She's executive member of the management board of dsgv. Over to you.

Thank you very much. And let me pick up the thoughts that already said and continue on that. So the financing gap we are discussing today is obviously and not primarily a question of insufficient capital. It is moreover a question of how effectively capital reaches the real economy. In practice we see that many viable investments do not fail because of a lack of funding, but because the connection between capital and local demand does not work well enough. And this is in many cases, and my said it already a structural issue. If we want to address it, we need to strengthen the link between international capital and domestic financial systems. International institutions, including multilateral development banks have an important role role to play. They can help reduce risk, provide, structure and mobilize private capital. But capital will only have an impact if it can be channeled through institutions that are close to the market, close to the regions and especially close to the people. Local and regional financial institutions are essential in this regard. They understand the clients, they understand local conditions and they are able to assess risks in a way that cannot be easily standardized. Strengthening these institutions is therefore a key part of the solution. A central challenge remains the missing middle. And the missing middle is getting bigger and bigger. Many small and medium sized enterprises are economically very well sound but do not have access to financing that matches their need. Closing this gap requires practical instruments. It's risk sharing mechanisms, guarantees and blended finance that is workable. And especially scalable. And regulation is also a very important part of this financial stability. And we heard it already is the foundation of our entire system. And at the same time, regulatory frameworks need to reflect different business model and different risk profiles. Proportionate regulation is essential to ensure that those institutions which are closest to the real economy can continue to fulfill the their role. And finally, financial infrastructure matters, efficient payment systems and reliable cross border transactions are prerequisite for functioning markets and for the mobilization of capital. Let me conclude we do not lack capital. What we need is a better connection between capital and real economic activities. That means strengthening local financial institutions, making better use of risk sharing and risk management instruments, and ensuring that regulatory frameworks support rather than constrain these investments. If we get this right, we can make a real progress in mobilizing private finance for sustainable development.

Thank you, thank you so much for, for your very focused points. Let me invite our three lead discussants, starting with the Assistant Secretary General for United Nations Global Compact, Ms. Sanda Ojambo. Sanda.

Distinguished panelists, delegates, participants, Excellency in the room and real pleasure, SG Naveed to join you. From this perspective, I think it's been very interesting to listen to the distinguished panelists, many of whom, including Jose, that we partner with through the GISD and with the UN Global Compact. I just wanted to share some perspectives. I think it has been said by all the panelists, it's very clear the challenge is not the lack of capital. The challenge is perhaps the asymmetry between where the significant amount of capital exists and what is really needed to make economies thrive. I think between the United nations governments around the world and private sector, what is clear also from our perspective is the distinct convergence between the priority and the need to build resilient economies. That is one of the things that I think we're all aligned around and there is no challenge. So what does this mean? You know, public budgets alone, we know, cannot meet the development needs for the $4 trillion annual financing gap for the SDGs still remains. I think. Where does the opportunity lie? It lies simply in ensuring that development is investable. And I think there's a real opportunity to make sure. As you said, SG, when the SDGs were formulated, it was about investing in the goals, not simply financing them, but investing in the goals so that they also become tangible private sector opportunities and economic growth pillars. Investing in these solutions across food, water, health, climate and many other areas could unlock close to $10 trillion in business opportunities and create nearly 400 million jobs by 2030. Now I know the challenge before us and before 2030 is to make these figures real, make them make sense at market level, make them make sense for economies, for small and medium enterprises, for the youth and women for whom economic resilience is so critical. What does this mean? It means expanding the circle within which we dialogue. How do we take this kind of important dialogue down to the country level, down with real economy players and those who are actually in touch with what it means to drive economic progress forward? We've talked about a number of key pillars. Predictability, the right regulatory frameworks, the enabling environment, access to capital, you know, the convergence of needs and demand that I think is truly important. The UN Global Compact works towards this and I just like to cite some examples. Our Chief Financial Officer coalition for the SDGs supports financial leaders to align strategy, capital expenditures, capex and market engagement around the Sustainable Development Goals. We've seen progress in a converting momentum into market signals and market signals into transactions for sustainable development growth. So really great to hear the discussion, the keen focus on real economy players and where public and private meets. Thank you very much.

Thank you so much Asgambo for sharing your thoughts. Let me now invite Mr. Thomas Asare, Assistant Secretary General from the World Meteorological Organization. Mr. Asare,

Thank you for giving me the opportunity. I think we all recognize that businesses can provide innovative, accessible and affordable products and services that support development objectives. However, the central challenge before us is not just availability of private capital, but also whether conditions are sufficiently conducive for mobilizing that capital scale, deploying it productively and delivering sustainable development impact. Regarding the the guiding questions, I think this severe commitment rightly underscores the importance of policy and regulatory framework. At the same time, effective enabling environment depend on credibility, predictability and institutional capacity. Investors do not only respond to incentives, they also respond to stability, regulatory consistency and the availability of reliable data to assess risk. In many emerging and climate vulnerable economies these conditions remain uneven. Regarding access to finance, the constraint extend beyond availability but intermediation Small and medium sized enterprises continue to face barriers to former to finance due to elevated risk perception, limited collateral and weak supportive financial system. Addressing this requires a combination of instruments like said by colleagues. Credit guarantees digital financial inclusion. This is important because on the continent of Africa it is not the high street banks that really facilitate SMEs. The mobile network operators through their digital financial system becomes a very good enabling environment and at the same time we also require adaptive regulatory approaches. Regarding scaling of finance, blended finance have shown potential but remains fragmented and insufficiently aligned with context. Achieving scale will Require greater standardization alignment with replicable instruments anchored in national system. Please allow me to make a very critical observation. Many financial instruments used in climate exposed contexts, including parametric insurance, catastrophic bonds, climate risk facilities, rely on global weather and climate intelligence as a public good. Yet the observational system that underpinned this data remains structurally underfunded. Despite the essential role in risk assessment and pricing of fiscal risk, this is also important. This data is also important for broader private sector including aviation, agriculture, insurance and logistics. At the World Meteorological Organization, we are trying our best to ensure that this platform and the sharing of data are essential for private sector continuing to operate and that the global weather and climate intelligence is available. As we consider the next generation of climate finance mechanism, sustained investments in data systems that underpin risk informed decision making we will be essential. In conclusion, private finance operates most effectively with a strong ecosystem of policies, institutional data institutions and data and risk sharing mechanisms. Thank you very much.

Thank you Mr. Asari, for bringing the very important perspective. A sound way of fighting risk perception is data transparency, dissemination of information and engagement with potential investors. Thank you so much. Our Last discussant is Mr. Alain Biovila, Director for Strategy, Policy and Innovation, Green Climate Fund.

Mr. Chair, Mr. Mooreto Excellencies, Colleagues, thank you very much for inviting the Green Climate Funds to this very important timely discussion. The premise of this session is exactly right. Public finance alone cannot bridge the climate finance gap. This has been clearly highlighted in the new targets set at COP 29 in Baku and stressed again at COP 30 in Belem. The message is clear. To achieve our ambitions and to protect the most vulnerable, public finance must be leveraged strategically to mobilize and catalyze private capital at scale. The critical elements to enable private sector flows are well known. They were mentioned this session. We need predictable and favorable regulatory environments. We need transparency and better evaluation. Risk level. And the recently released Global Emerging Markets Risk Database, the so called GEMS brings additional transparency in this field and actually tells us that investment risk in emerging markets are lower than commonly perceived. We also need bankable pipeline. The shortage of investment ready projects remains one of the most persistent bottlenecks in developing countries, especially for adaptation in the most vulnerable regions. The Green Climate Fund is very well positioned to unlock this potential. It has been designed to support the paradigm shift in developing countries with balanced approach both on mitigation and adaptation. Today we have a portfolio of more than 20 billion, leveraging additional $60 billion in CO financing across more than 250 projects in more than 130 countries. And so far these projects have benefited nearly 250 million people in developing countries. Private sector is at the core of the fund representing about 30% of our current portfolio. Just in 2025, the GCF committed over 900 million US dollar in private sector project, leveraging further 8 billion US dollar in CO financing. With a commoditization ratio of 1 to 9, GCF can deploy catalytic capital with high risk appetite to help domestic and international public and private finance work better together in developing countries. To do so, GCEF can deploy a wide variety of instruments including grants which represent 45% of our portfolio, concessional loans, equity and guarantee that can help de risk and scale up private sectors and this capital is deployed on the ground through a very broad and diverse network of public and private international, regional and national entities that also include private equity funds like Acumen, Pegasus, Mirova or Meridian. Even more importantly, the GCF puts capacity building at its core. The GCF Readiness Program is one of the largest grants enveloped with US$500 million dedicated to technical assistance capacity building. It helps strengthen institutions, improve planning, coordination and translate NDCN NAPS into actionable investment pipelines. With this program, the GCF also supports country platforms which are critical mechanisms to align national ambitions with tangible pipeline of policies and projects and to better coordinate in a programmatic way the various public and private players around the current pipeline. Finally, GCF helps create new markets and bring private sector in region of sector they would not enter alone. For instance, the concessional climate finance we deploy significantly help attract private finance in adaptation which represent today one third of our private sector portfolio. Recent projects in this area include water and waste management, resilient infrastructure and agribusiness. My concluding points are therefore very simple. The implementation of the Sevilla commitment should focus on building international domestic financial systems that can attract and leverage private capital at scale scarce. Concessional public finance should be deployed strategically to reinforce local capacity. A developed pipeline and bankable project and reduce the cost of capital in there is the private sector and country ownership is key to ensure blended finance remains aligned with national priorities and contribute to systematic transformation. As a member of the United Nations Interagency Task Force on Financing for Development, GCF is pleased and proud to have contributed to FFD4. We're also very encouraged that the FFD4 outcome document, the Compromiso de Sevilla explicitly calls for the provision mobilization of means of limitation of the Green Climate Fund. A well capacitated and adequately resourced GCF will be better positioned to support developing countries in addressing climate change and translating ambition into action. Thank you so much

Ella.

And I think you are the only speaker on the panel who finally brought the issue of pipeline Project Pipeline. I was surprised no previous speaker mentioned that. And the reason I want to highlight the Global Investors for Sustainable Development Fitness Fair, the alliance and then the fair that have started it has a pipeline of opportunities you can turn into projects. Around $73 billion worth of portfolios are available. So we also need to MDBs and private sector need to come together to help these governments. Over 25 of them have come to this fair over the last five years since 2018 and they genuinely believe these opportunities are viable. So we should help them to turn those into pipeline of projects which you just mentioned and that I think the UN can bring every actor that is required to be around the table to make that pipeline viable, feasible and eventually implementable. Thank you so much Mr. President. After this rich discussion, I hand it over to you for the interactive part and please give us 10 minutes to come back to the panelists. They have thoughts to share with the member States. Thank you.

I thank Mr. Hanif for moderating the panel discussions. I now open the floor for the interactive discussion. I would like to remind the speakers that in order to keep as many speakers as possible, the opportunity to the flow time limits of 2 minutes for individual interventions and 3 minutes for the statements on behalf of the groups will apply in order to enable the interpreters to do the best job. Please deliver statements at a normal speaking speed. With this. I would like to now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Nepal speaking on behalf of the least developed countries.

Thank you Mr. President. I have the honor to deliver this statement on behalf of the group of least developed countries. Across 44 LDCs, vulnerabilities are compounding, climate shocks are intensifying, debt burdens are rising and exposure to global volatility keeps swearing. Amid geopolitical uncertainty, shrinking global ODA and business model shifts. Private investment continues to bypass most LDCs and remains concentrated in handful of countries and a narrow set of sectors. This reflects three persistent constraints. First, high cost of capital driven by risk perceptions that often exceed fundamentals, discouraging long term investment in infrastructure, resilience and productive transformation. Second, limited pipelines of well prepared bankable projects especially in energy access, connectivity and productive sectors that can unlock value chains. Third, structural barriers such as small markets, remoteness, transit dependency and limited diversification. The implication is clear. Private capital will not scale without public intervention. In some LDCs, only about 2.6% of GDP is loaned to SMEs compared with 11.9% in the richest countries. Concessional finance guarantees and blended instruments backed by coordinated MDB DFI engagement therefore remain essential. Public finance must be catalytic it cannot be replaced. For LDCs, three elements are critical. First, build pipelines of investable projects aligned with national priorities. Second, reduce real and perceived risk through de risking tools and policy support Ensure finance support structural transformation not only isolated deals. The operationalization of International Investment Support center for LDC should be accelerated to strengthen enabling environments, build capacity to attract and retain FDI and support the negotiation of complex investment contracts to turn commitments into projects. We also urge partners to reduce remittance cost for LDCs below 3% before the end of this decade, including by supporting digital solutions and stronger competition among money transfer operators. Mr. President, any new paradigm that places greater weight on private financing will be judged by one question, can it deliver at scale in the most vulnerable countries that need it most? We remain committed to policy reforms and call for continued targeted support to address the unique challenges and opportunities in mobilizing private finance for sustainable development. The LDC group looks forward to working constructively with all partners to realize the ambitious provisions of the SEVIA commitment. Thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Nepal speaking on behalf of the least developed countries of Now I give the floor to the distinguished representative of India, to be followed by Croatia, Republic of Korea, Sweden, South Africa and armenia.

Thank you, Mr. President. Private business and finance have a key role to play in supporting sustainable development, but their full potential remains far from realized. Despite growth in sustainable investment and financial inclusion, many developing countries continue to face significant challenges in mobilizing private resources at scale, with the cost of capital remaining disproportionately high. At the national level, strengthening enabling environment is critical and this includes streamlining regulatory processes, strengthening legal protections for investors, ensuring fair competition and providing fiscal incentives for sustainable projects. Public private partnerships can help leverage private sector efficiency, while stronger support for entrepreneurship and innovation remains essential for fostering private investment, improving access to Finance, especially for SMEs, is equally important. Expanding access to financial services through digital technologies alongside financial literacy initiatives can empower individuals and businesses. At the global level, addressing structural constraints remains key. MDBs, development finance institutions and regional development banks can play a catalytic role through de risking measures, credit enhancement guarantees and local currency financing to attract long term investment. Blended finance offers significant potential to mobilize private capital by leveraging concessional and philanthropic resources, but such approaches must remain aligned with country priorities, deliver tangible outcomes and reflect national circumstances. We also highlight that sovereign credit Ratings continue to constrain access to affordable market finance for developing countries. Greater transparency and improved methodologies are needed to better reflect country realities and support increased private capital flows.

The challenge ahead is not just mobilizing

private capital, but ensuring it flows at scale, at the right cost and towards sustainable development outcomes. I thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of India. Now I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Croatia,

Mr. President and we would like to thank the panelists for their insightful interventions and I would like to stress a few points from Croatia's own experience. Croatia underscores that private business and finance are essential drivers of sustainable development, complementing public policy and multilateral action in delivering the 2030 Agenda as an open EU state and Eurozone economy. Croatia continuously implements measures to encourage private capital innovation and responsible finance to accelerate green, digital and inclusive growth which are our priorities. In this regard, let me underline the following three points. First, Croatia is mobilizing private finance for the green and digital transition through the National Recovery and Resilience Plan. Private companies are co investing in renewable energy, energy efficient buildings and sustainable transport.

Large solar and wind projects driven by

private developers are exploiting expanding our clean energy base and reducing emissions. SMEs are digitalizing operations with support from innovation grants and private venture capital. Second, Croatia's technology and tourism sectors demonstrate how business innovation advances sustainability. Our growing tech ecosystem, supported by incubators and EU backed accelerators is developing digital solutions for energy management, mobility and public services. Tourism companies are integrating sustainability standards and from an energy efficient infrastructure to circular economy waste systems, strengthening resilience and competitiveness. And third, creation financial institutions are embedding sustainability into decision making. Banks are aligning with the EU taxonomy, integrating climate and environmental risks and expanding green loans for clean energy, water management and low carbon transport. Emerging green bonds and sustainability linked instruments further broaden financing options. Croatia remains committed to working with partners and share its experience to ensure that private business and finance act as engines.

I thank the distinguished representative of Croatia. Now I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Republic of Korea.

Thank you Mr. President. As we work to implement the severe commitment, particularly on private capital mobilization, there is now broad recognition of the important role of blended finance. However, this has not yet translated into broader acceptance among private investors. The key question in our view is how to build a market structure that lowers barriers to entry for new investors while enabling repeat participation by existing ones. In this regard, Republic of Korea would like to highlight three points. First, we need to strengthen the sharing of blended finance track record data. One of the biggest barriers for new investors is the lack of comparable information that allows them to assess the risk returns and development impact of project across diverse country contexts. Better knowledge and information sharing By Member States, MDBs and other relevant partners informats accessible and useful private investors would help narrow the gap between private investors perceived and actual risk. Second, we need to strengthen and scale up the standardization of blended finance structures. Many blended finance transactions remain highly complex and take a long time to structure, discouraging first time investors and repeat participation. More replicable and scalable structures and risk sharing frameworks across SDG sectors would help blended finance move beyond isolated transactions and evolve into more predictable and scalable market. Third, we need to strengthen project pipeline development and catalytic capacity in vulnerable countries. Private capital mobilization has tended to be concentrated in middle income countries and sectored with higher commercial returns rather than in LDCs LDC North Seas Expanding Banco pipelines in vulnerable countries through the targeted ODA support is therefore essential not only to broaden the geographic reach of blood.

I thank the District Representative of Republic of Korea. Now I give the floor to the District Representative of Sweden.

We are in a challenging landscape where crisis and conflict also put strains on donors budgets and require difficult prioritization. As the financing gap is widening, we need to do what we can to mobilize additional resources for sustainable development. We also need to ensure efficient use of already existing resources. We welcome the approach reflected in the civilia commitment in the ambitions to scale blended finance and the use of risk sharing instruments. Our key priority is to showcase how and where ODA can act as a catalyst to mobilize additional resources for sustainable development and to do this at scale. The green and digital transitions are key to driving economic growth and sustainable development. Sweden is actively reforming development assistance to focus on synergies between development cooperation, private investment and trade and innovation. This includes a guarantee instrument with a frame of US$3.6 billion in 2026 to mobilize private investment for sustainable development in contexts and sectors where financing would otherwise not incur. The instrument supports risk sharing with partners to catalyze additional capital aligned with development priorities. The close partnership with private business is crucial. We underline the need to strengthen the effectiveness of development cooperation, including through national ownership and responsibility to create enabling conditions for sustainable investment. By ensuring strong transparent institutions, respect for the rule of law and freedom from corruption, Sweden stands up for fundamental norms and values and will work to maintain agreed language including on the respect for human rights and freedoms, rule of law, democracy, climate 2030 agenda, gender equality and SRHR. These are all key for global sustainable development. Sweden stands prepared to continue developing our toolbox and to working with partners.

I thank the distinguished representative of Sweden. Now I give the floor to the distinguished representative of South Africa. South Africa, you have the floor.

Thank you, Mr. President. Apologies for that. We would like to share a practical example from South Africa on an innovative instrument being established to de risk infrastructure investment. And that's our Credit Guarantee Mechanism. It responds to a very real constraint. The scale of investment required to expand our transmission network for far exceeds available public resources. South Africa requires over $20 billion in transmission investments over the next decade, with around 6 billion needed in the next five years and a backlog of approximately 14,000 kilometers of new lines to connect the grid. In response, the national treasury, together with the World bank and other partners is establishing a credit guarantee vehicle to de risk this investment. The Credit Guarantee Mechanism will provide payments and termination guarantees and other credit enhancements on a commercial basis, reducing reliance on sovereign guarantees and limiting pressure on the public balance sheet. It will operate as a privately run regulated non life insurance company. It is being capitalized through a blended structure of $350 million from the World bank and around $100 million from the national treasury, creating an initial capital base of approximately $500 million with additional partners expected to join. The structure allows public and concessional capital to absorb risk upfront, enabling the CGV to issue guarantees at scale and improve the risk return profile of private investors. In doing so, it can mobilize up to $10 billion in private investments, particularly into transmission. Ultimately, this mechanism is catalytic. It helps unlock private capital, accelerates grid expansion and enables integration of renewable energy. Thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of South Africa. And now I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Armenia, to be followed by Peru, Zambia, Mexico, Indonesia and uk.

Honorable Chair Excellencies, Dear colleagues, Private investment remains indispensable for closing the sustainable development financing gap. However, as clearly reflected in Sevilla commitment, current levels and patterns of private finance remain insufficient, uneven and often misaligned with sustainable development priorities. From Armenia's perspective, three priorities are key. First, strengthening enabling environments for investment. Sustained private sector engagement requires predictable policy frameworks, strong institutions and competitive markets. Armenia continues to advance reforms aimed at improving the business environment, enhancing transparency and strengthening competition, including through ongoing cooperation with international partners. Second, mobilizing private capital at scale through de risking and innovative instruments. Blended finance guarantees and local currency financing can play an important role in crowding in private investment. However, these instruments must be designed to ensure development. Additionally, fair risk sharing alignment with national priorities. In particular, Scaling up support for project preparation and bankable pipeline remains essential to translate investment opportunities into tangible outcomes. Third, addressing structural barriers faced by countries in special situations. For landlocked development countries, high trade costs, limited connectivity and constrained access to finance continue to hinder private sector development and integration into global value chain. In this context, investment in infrastructure and regional connectivity is critical. Armenia's Crossroad of Peace initiative reflects this approach, aiming to unlock transport links, enhance trade integration and improve the investment climate. Finally, we underline the private finance cannot substitute for public investment and international support.

I thank the District Representative of Armenia. Now I give the floor to the District Representative of Peru.

Thank you, Chair. Distinguished Delegates, Peru wishes to point to an internal regulatory instrument we have designed to improve the financing of small and micro enterprises. It's called the Grow Fund. It was created through a legislative provision dated September 2008. Its goal is to improve access to finances and to champion the development of production and of enterprise among small and medium sized enterprises as well as of exporting businesses. Given their relevance to our national economy. This fund was designed as a long term programme. It would last 30 years. It primarily operates through credit guarantee instruments channeled through businesses within the financing system, such as savings banks, banks, cooperatives and factoring businesses. The goal is to facilitate the operationalization of this GROW Fund. And now to do that we've been working on a legislative provision designed to improve its implementation. Consequently, we intend to adopt nine additional legal provisions in order to optimise the functioning of this GROW Fund and to improve the financing conditions given to small and and medium sized intro enterprises. We're going to do this through the incorporation of grace periods lasting two months. We're going to have credit guarantees using mechanisms that reduce interest rates and we're going to strengthen oversight functions. This includes extending guarantees when misinformation is detected. We're also training SMEs to undertake impact assessments via third parties. This is President Something Peru is doing by way of a reflection of its commitment to the principles enshrined in the Sevilla commitment and their implementation. Thank you.

I thank the distinguished Representative of Peru. Now I give the floor to the distinguished Representative of Zambia.

Chairperson, Excellencies, distinguished Delegates, we are confronted with a clear and urgent reality. Public resources alone will not sufficiently close the widening financing gap for sustainable development. We cannot deliver the SDGs without significantly scaling up private investment. In this context, domestic and international private and finance must play a central and catalytic role in driving inclusive growth, economic transformation and resilience, particularly in developing countries. The issue is not a lack of Opportunity in developing countries, but a lack of sufficiently aligned and accessible capital. Zambia, like many other resource rich countries, offers strong investment potential across sectors such as mining, agriculture, manufacturing and tourism. These sectors are central to our economic diversification, job creation and resilience. What is required is to translate this potential into bankable scaled investments. Zambia is taking concrete steps. We are expanding public private partnerships and joint ventures, particularly in energy transport and digital connectivity infrastructure as these are essential enablers of productive economies. Through such partnerships, we seek not only to mobilize capital, but also to facilitate extra technology transfer, build local capacity and improve access to affordable financing for domestic investors. Furthermore, Zambia has also prioritized the creation of a conducive and predictable policy environment for both domestic and foreign investors. Through our Public Private Partnership Forum, we have established an inclusive platform that fosters structured investment between government and the private sector. But national efforts alone are not enough. At the global level, we call for collective action to confront structural barriers that continue to constrain private finance flows.

I thank the distinguished representative of Zambia. Now I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Mexico.

Thank you, President. Mexico recognizes that no narrowing financing for development gaps. In a context in which we're seeing the reduction of international development funding and as a complement to the work of States, it is vital to decisively involve the private sector. Their capacity for investment, innovation and dynamism is a crucial component of the response we require. In terms of the rest of what we need to do, we need to attract capital, but also provide conditions which which make it possible to scale up productive investment, particularly in strategic sectors such as sustainable infrastructure, energy transition and industrial development. To that end, it is vital to improve the risk return profile of projects and build the trust of investors through clear frameworks which are consistent and predictable. Mexico has made progress with concrete tools which align incentives and reduce risk. Mexico sustainable taxonomy not only classifies green activities but also labels social enterprises and gender balance friendly enterprises and establishes key thresholds which attract substantive contributions. In terms of sustainable development. Our work is some of the most advanced on a global level because we provide clear and standardized definitions. That means that our taxonomy combats greenwashing, reduces uncertainty and improves the offering of financial instruments. That improves the risk return profile and makes it easier for states to take better informed decisions. This approach complements a broader sustainable financing agenda, one which seeks to widen markets, ensure harmony across the investment system and ensure that investment is more competitive. A critical area of work is access to financing for SMEs. These account for more than 29% of our economy.

Thank you I thank the distinguished representative of Mexico. Now I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Indonesia.

Thank you, Chair. Indonesia experience shows that effective public finance, inclusive system and strategic risk sharing must go on in hand, which translates into several key considerations. First, expanding financial inclusion through targeted risk sharing. The government program of People Business credit implemented through national banks has significantly dependent financial penetration, particularly in rural areas. This has enabled many small entrepreneurs to assess formal credit for the first time, demonstrating how guarantees can extend finance while maintaining stability. In addition, the government will develop a financing facility to support decarbonization projects. This includes the provision of soft loans by blending concessional financing firms, multilateral development banks, grant resources and government support. Second, strengthening blended finance through effective resharing and national ownership. Development partners alongside private investors play a catalytic role to guarantee unconstitutional finance. With clearly defined national priorities and institutions such as Indonesia Investment Authority, mobilizing capital financing gaps can be addressed in a more targeted and effective manner. Indonesia has established a nation led platform to strengthen country ownership in developing financing. This platform aims to create a common language among project owners, investors and technology providers while also communicating a clear pipeline of projects to the market. Project de risking is a key priority. The government provides guarantee to accelerate project implementation and offer viable gap funding as a form of concessional support. Thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Indonesia. Now I give the floor to the distinguished representative of United Kingdom to be followed by FPO.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. The UK strongly agrees with the assessments set out so far by the panel. The challenge is not a lack of global capital, but how that capital is channeled with finance concentrated in a small number of markets, risks often misunderstood and too few investable opportunities across many developing countries. And there are three issues that I wish to highlight and that these requires a collective system wide effort to address these. So first we need to work together to address risk perception as well as risk itself. Tools such as guarantees, insurance, foreign exchange hedging and first loss capital already exist. But they are not always deployed early enough, locally enough or at sufficient scale to change investor behavior. And this will require better coordination to help ensure these tools are used where they genuinely unlock investment. Second, there is a shared need to focus on on building credible pipelines. Many high impact development sectors still lack commercially articulated investment opportunities. And closing the viability gap will require sustained support for project preparation, early stage and venture capital and scalable platforms rather than a continual search for new instruments. Third, collaboration is essential to best effort link international capital with domestic financial systems, strengthening local banks, capital markets and institutional investors. It's fundamental to long term resilience and cannot be delivered by a single actor alone. Overall, the UK sees mobilising private capital as a process that depends on national ownership, predictable regulation and sustained collective effort. Thank you.

I thank the distinct guide representative of United Kingdom. Now I give the floor to the distant representative of fao.

Thank you. Private sector investment is fundamental to cover the financial gap required to transform towards more efficient, inclusive, resilient and sustainable agri food systems. Capturing said financing is not without its challenges considering the risks associated with agriculture production. Moreover, this investment requires evidence of profitability. Key to de risking and demonstrating return on investment is robust data and analysis. Similarly, innovative financial instruments such as blended finance and partial credit guarantees among others are essential to de risk agri food systems and encourage the mobilization of private commercial capital towards interventions that bring about positive socio economic and and environmental benefits, particularly for the poorest and most marginalized people. At the same time, there are no one size fits all solutions. Holistic approaches that engage a range of stakeholders from resource partners to multilateral development banks and international financial institutions are required. Concessional finance is critical to reduce the risk associated with weaker enabling environments in some low income countries that raise the cost of capital capital and hinder the scaling of innovations. Accelerating agri food systems transformation demands targeted investment underpinned by solid evidence accompanied by country ownership and alignment to national priorities. To this end, FAO developed the Hand in Hand initiative which uses advanced data tools and geospatial analysis to identify key areas with the greatest needs and the most agricultural cultural potential. Supporting members to pinpoint and build the case for investments that transform their agri food systems.

Thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of fio. Now I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Society for International Development and this will be the last speaker in this session.

Thank you. We're standing here today in the context of deep crisis and escalating wars, essentially dealing with the failures of an international financial system that was designed in a way that extracts wealth and resources from global south to North. It is surprising to say the least, that we continue doubling down on the myth that deregulating economies and offering hard earned public resources in the form of guarantees to attract more private finance is the way to go about advancing sustainable development. De risking strategies might indeed attract some investors. But what kind of investors and what kind of development and whose interests does it serve? As we gather here in this intergovernmental and international space which is facing many attacks in the context of a major crisis in multilateralism and recognizing how interconnected our global economy is, we cannot pretend that the solution is to shift the burden to national level policies to attract private capital. So I agree with previous speakers in their mention of the need for an international enabling environment for sustainable development and on the importance of regulations, not just voluntary standards. In the interest of connecting this debate with what has been discussed throughout the week, as well said during the special high level meeting with the Bretton woods institutions, orienting investment towards sustainable development and protecting our country's policy space requires putting an end to the investor state disputes settlement system. This also means an international trade system that enables countries to pursue their own sustainable industrial strategies and value additions. It means a global debt architecture which works for every country in a just manner with fair borrowing costs that are

informed by unbiased credit ratings, which could

take a form of reforming the current credit rating methodologies and possibly creating a public international credit rating agency at the un. It means continuing to advance on the UN tax convention process. With these types of measures put in place in the international level, hopefully we can rely much less on the good.

I thank the distinguished representative of Society for International Development. I now invite Mr. Hanif, the moderator, to invite key takeaways from each of the finalists and also make his own closing remarks.

Thank you, Mr. President, for finding time for us to come back to the panelists. Mr. Minister, thank you for staying with us. I know it's relatively late in Islamabad. I appreciate your patience. We are beginning with you this time. You have just one minute, Mr. Minister, to share your reflections and key takeaways.

Yeah. To me that in this discussion there are two worlds. One world where capital is not important, just efficiency of deploying capital is. And the second is the world where I belong and probably Zambia belongs and society for international development belongs. Where capital is a problem. I mean, when we do allocations, we struggle. When we seek funding and capital, we struggle. We have to create a demarcation between private rate of returns and public rate of returns and deploy public money. Whatever little we have to public high public rate of returns and hope that private rate of returns would attract the private sector. But sometimes it does and sometimes it doesn't. So is capital a problem? Of course, when multilateral funding is going down, when debts are rising, when social outcomes and sustainable goals are going down, when growth is stagnating. Given the geopolitics right now, funding is a problem. And what is more important is the quality of funding. What you hear in the marketplace are repurposed loans. What are repurposed loans? Repurposed loans are loans taken away from health, education, food, Agriculture into some kind of managing devastation. So what are we going to do with health and education, infant mortality, maternal mortality, dropout rates, agriculture, food security? What are we going to do? If we're going to have these repurposed loans, we're going to take the money out from those areas and deploy them into new areas.

Mr. Minister, sorry to interrupt you.

We also hear a lot about.

Sorry to interrupt you, but very powerful message from you. Thank you so much and once again, thank you for staying late with us. Let me invite Mr. Jose Vinal for his reflections.

Thank you very much. I think there was a significant degree of alignment in most of the interventions earlier on. But I just want to make one point which is that if we really want to scale private capital going say into infrastructure, which is one of the big needs of for sustainable development, we really need to put in place the conditions that makes infrastructure an asset class. And that means size. And I come back to the issue of project preparation. $1 invested in project preparation crowds in $276 of private capital down the road. That's a very powerful multiplier. Third, one needs to stop thinking about specific projects in different countries to think about portfolios of projects. And infrastructure would not become close to an asset class if we cannot amalgamate those projects, viable projects, into structures across countries, across projects. And this portfolio of projects that carefully securitize with the intervention of first loss guarantees, et cetera, can achieve the risk return equation, which then can be sold to institutional investors and asset owners. And unless you get to the big pools of investment of investors, those who really have the trillions, hundreds of trillions of dollars to invest, there would not be scalability. So that is critical.

Thank you so much. Mr. Jose Weno, Ms. Sylvia Capitella, over to you for a minute.

Sure. Thank you. And adding to what has been said, I mean, we think we all have consensus that three stakeholders are critical, each for their specific profile to sort of boost the support to sustainable development project. We talk about the policymakers that are ultimately set the rules on the scene. We talk about financial institutions that. Sorry, institutions in general that are able to de risk the structure. But we talk as well about the financial instruments and a lot has been said. But I really would like to drive your attention on one element that is so fundamental to drive scale, which is standardization. Standardization of documentation of contractual terms, even steps in the processes and the scale. And actually the standardization would be a prerequisite not only to enable or widen access of private capital, but even more for one second, more. But Even more to open it up to the secondary market. We talked about securitization and potentially trading.

Thank you and sorry to interrupt you.

Absolutely.

You were very brief in your first intervention, but I have limitation. Mr. Anderson, Caputo, over to you.

Okay. I think that the conclusion here is not only that we need more private finance, but the question is how to make private finance usable for development. And we talked about country ownership strategies, stronger domestic financial systems, risk sharing instruments and platforms that can scale. We have a few examples that are working. Standardization is important, is how to scale them. And you ask me about like small island developing States and also low income countries. Three things that are very important. We need to work also on resilience for them, disaster risk, but also ways that they can manage like a fiscal and create space. Like we have examples of debt swaps, et cetera. And on PPPs, developing pipelines, working in supporting frameworks that are credible and then de risking again so that capital will flow.

Thank you so much, Mr. Caputo and Ms. Caroline Schur, over to you.

Yeah, thank you. So I would say make MSME a key priority for sustainable development globally. And therefore that means strengthening local financial institutions and create a stable regulatory framework for trust and connectivity between capital and domestic people and enterprises.

Thank you so much. I can't do justice if I say I can summarize such a rich discussion and so many perspectives in this room. But let me capture quickly two headline messages and that does not mean I am ignoring the fine print. The challenges that countries are facing in getting capital one, which is, I think in this room we have heard repeatedly that there's no dearth of capital, there's no lack of opportunities. We need to bring them together. But that is easier said than done. It requires both targeted actions, but architectural changes too. So let's not underestimate the complexity, but acknowledge opportunities abound. Second headline message. And that is all hands on the deck. It's not one individual, one sector that can solve this problem. It's the private sector. Governments, UN system, MDBs and civil society and other stakeholders need to converge in solving this problem. So speed and scale we can only achieve if everyone comes in with their strengths to deploy. Because public sector was risk averse four or five years ago, they were not using the capital to let the MDBs use balance sheets to mobilize capital. They have come a long way. Private sector also needs to assume these risks to deliver development for people. You can't pretend it's my objective is only profit maximization. That is your role and you should perform it. But please look at the impact that you need to make in a society for a society to become a place for people to thrive, for environment to be saved. Let me end it here. Mr. President, thank you again for the opportunity. It was an honor to be with this panel.

Thank you. Thank you so much, Mr. Hanif, for guiding this very important discussions this morning. I also thank our distinguished panelists and the presenters and for your very substantive contributions in this very important subject and all the delegations for participating in a very productive exchange of views. I now briefly pause the meeting to allow for the podium to be reached, to be rearranged, and then we will soon start the next sessions. Thank you so much. Excellencies, distinguished delegates, the forum will now hold a panel discussion on strengthening sustainable business and finance for development impact. I am pleased to welcome our distinguished presenters for this discussion. I also welcome our Moderator, Mr. Namdi Igbokwe, Director of SRI Blended Finance at Columbia University, who will conduct this discussion. I look forward to a very open, very constructive and very productive, extensive views. So, Mr. Nammang D. You have the floor now.

Thank you very much. Excellencies, distinguished delegates, colleagues and guests, good morning. It's a privilege to moderate this session on strengthening sustainable business and finance for development impact. I'm Dr. Namdi Bokwe, Director of Blended Finance at Sustainable Investing Research Initiative at Columbia University. I would like to begin by thanking the President and Chair and UNDESA and the organizing partners for convening this discussion at a particularly important moment in the financing for development process. At the heart of our discussion is a real policy paradox. In recent years, we've seen a rapid expansion of sustainable finance standards, disclosure frameworks and related regulatory measures. And yet the central question remains, why does greater framework density still not reliably translate into greater development impact? This session sits within the 2026 in depth review of domestic and international private business and finance. Fundamentally, it is about how policy and regulatory frameworks can help mobilize private capital in ways that are better aligned with sustainable development priorities, particularly in developing countries. At its core, the session addresses a simple but increasingly important question. How do we ensure that sustainable business and finance frameworks do more than signal intent and ambition and instead support credible, coherent, effective and measurable development outcomes? That question matters because sustainable finance has become far more prominent across global capital markets and business practice. At the same time, its development impact has remained uneven. We have seen progress, but we have also seen fragmentation. We have seen growth of standards and disclosure frameworks, but also increasing scrutiny regarding credibility, comparability, implementation and impact. And in some jurisdictions, political headwinds have made this agenda more contested and in some cases more difficult to advance. For the Financing for Development agenda. This is not only a technical issue. Weak coherence can weaken market signals, increase burdens and make implementation harder across jurisdictions, especially in developing countries where institutional capacity and market conditions vary significantly and where the practical usability of these frameworks is just as important as their technical design. This is why the Sevilla commitment is so important. It pushes discussions beyond whether frameworks exist and towards whether they form a policy and regulatory ecosystem that is coherent, interoperable and usable in practice. The Seville Platform for action on paragraph 34 is relevant because it is intended to help turn that commitment into action by supporting better informed policymaking, greater coherence across standards and regulatory frameworks, and stronger dialogue between member states and the expert institutions working in this space. Its logic is very straightforward. Interoperability, capacity building and implementation have to be treated as connected parts of the same agenda. Importantly, that architecture extends beyond disclosure alone. It includes taxonomy, transition and planning and the broader market incentives that shape how capital is allocated. That, in many ways is the central challenge for us today. So our discussion will focus on four linked issues. First, credibility. Where can standards and regulatory measures set clearer expectations for business responsibility, particularly in the context of political headwinds? Second, interoperability. What approaches can promote greater connectivity across standards and regulatory measures to avoid fragmentation? Third, country level implementation. How can capacity building help ensure that sustainable finance frameworks are not only technically sound, but actually deliver measurable development outcomes? And fourth, the practical role the SBA initiative on paragraph 34 can play in moving this agenda forward. We are fortunate enough today to have a distinguished panel bringing perspectives from investment practice, banking and financial institutions, country implementations, disclosure and reporting, and global standards setting. I will introduce each speaker briefly as I turn to them and encourage all speakers to be as concise, concrete and action oriented as possible. And with that, let's get started. Our first panelist is Ms. Amanda Feldman, managing Director and Head of Impact Engagement at Sonan Capital, with a deep experience in impact investing, impact management and global work on harmonization and transparency. Ms. Feldman, let me begin with you and the investor perspective. Where are you seeing real investor appetite for sustainable finance despite the backlash in some markets? Has that backlash materially changed investment behavior, or is it still more rhetoric than reality? And along with that which policy and regulatory signals give long term investors the confidence to stay engaged?

Thank you very much. Pleasure to be here among these panelists talking from the perspective of private capital, there has been a Lot of rhetoric about where and why it's moving and whether there's going to be a pullback in the current market environment. More than anything, we are seeing private capital stay focused and committed on sustainable development outcomes. That is happening in a number of ways. And I'll go into first, something you mentioned on stage.

Standards.

It has been a complex few years in terms of standards design adoption, sustaining those standards, and then communicating what they're actually trying to achieve. Private investors are also struggling to keep up with the pace of change. I don't think that from our perspective, that means investors are pulling back, but it does mean we can all work in our local context to explain what matters right now and what might change in the future. Consistency on these standards and a focus on the interoperability rather than trying to design something new, has proven successful for investors who have already put money into impact or sustainable finance vehicles. That's often for private capital. 10 years, 15 years of capital sort of locked up to create change. And therefore during that period, they want to know whether that is remaining compliant and supportive of ongoing regulation or holding it back. And we are seeing more and more that the standards, disclosures and regulation that is being rolled out is helping investors take steps, stock of what is possible, but also remain committed to the outcomes that they want to achieve. You talked about credibility as a key theme of this session. One of the things I would suggest for all of us is to focus on the consistency we're seeing between standards, how they're implemented, and the types of reporting that are most insightful for both private investors and public entities. This is not all about reporting. Right? But it can start to feel like that. And so also when we look at private capital, we are excited about the improved reporting that are coming from private fund managers and also from companies and SMEs and organizations on the ground. That does require a strong commitment to capacity building, because at the end of the day, what we need to see is capital flowing to those who are doing it most credibly. That might not be the most detailed reporting from day one, but it does need to be informed by local experience and translated, if you will, into a way of communicating what's happening with investors and other stakeholders. Translating lived experience of these social and environmental outcomes that we're all here to see happen and making sure that capital can continue to flow to support those are creating the most change in those outcomes. That's what the standards and disclosures are trying to do. And sometimes that's lost in the complexity of reporting, even for private Capital that's trying to move. You also talked about more about capacity building. I think what that means is also designing more effective vehicles, fund vehicles and investment vehicles that can receive this capital and get it to where it's needed most. This isn't just about talking about the right buzzwords that are coming up in the regulation or standards or reporting frameworks. We're looking for changes in incentives in the fund managers. For example, how are carry mechanisms designed? We're looking for patient capital where it's needed, maybe longer time frames. So the private capital that is moving in is looking to see this come to life in private investment vehicles and do that in a way that's supporting the organizations on the ground to achieve that. It could mean different also, not just the traditional vehicles. And sometimes in the standardization and attempt for interoperability, I think there's a reliance on what we have been doing and not on the innovative types of financing and vehicles that could be designed. So I'd encourage all of us to also think about what hasn't been done yet or what is not mainstream in sustainable development finance vehicles, and how can we incentivize new ways of thinking about that in terms of a platform for action, Private investors do need to remain encouraged to go to areas that are underdeveloped, impact outcomes that are not receiving enough capital, and do that with confidence. And so all of the work as a result of Sevilla and some of the other efforts that we're going to hear about in this room today is to bring that confidence to private capital, mobilize, show how that can be amplified with other types of capital, nonprofit government capital, and make sure that it stays until the work is done, until we make tangible progress on these social and environmental outcomes. Thank you.

Thank you very much, Ms. Feldman. That's a very useful way to open this discussion. It helps distinguish between shifts in the public narrative and actual capital allocation, especially thinking about credibility and reporting and some of the issues that you raised there. Let me now turn to Mr. Eric Usher, head of UNEP Finance Initiative, who has long worked at the intersection of sustainable finance, financial sector development, development and the design of major industry frameworks. Mr. Usher, what trends are you observing on the banking side, including banks? Adherence to principles for responsible banking. If you could elaborate on the role of banks in relation to sustainable development and what policy or regulatory needs you see for this particular audience, that would be a great place to start. And additionally, if there are any voluntary principles that are most helpful in shaping regulation and in thinking about how the spa on paragraph 34 can help guide the adoption of interoperable regulation grounded into the existing ecosystem standards.

Great, thank you very much. And thank you for asking about the role of the banking sector, which I think perhaps is less discussed than the role of investors in capital markets and development banks. But although funding of developing country players increasingly includes non bank finance such as investment funds, hedge funds and others, commercial banks continue to have a dominant role as lenders. Roughly about 90% of financing in developing countries comes via the banking sector and bank funding remains less sensitive to global risks and shocks, which arguably I think is an asset in the current context. Back in 2019 here during UN General Assembly, Secretary General Guterres and 130 banks launched the UN Principles for Responsible Banking, the framework that today just over half of the global banking system uses to define their purpose and deliver on their role in financing the needs of society and community. At unepfi, we're very privileged in our role as secretariat of these Principles, working today with over 350 banks on their application. In the context of this year's Finance for Development forum, we're pleased to launch a paper to clarify the role that banks can play in relation to sustainability and sustainable development. It explores what contribution means in a banking context and how banking contributions can be measured and assessed. Now the ratings agencies MSCI and SMP have assessed the performance of this responsible banking community and have found the following this half of the banking industry globally today are demonstrating stronger average alignment with sustainability goals and benefiting from greater investor confidence. Now these are not incidental outcomes. They reflect deliberate efforts to embed sustainability into strategy, into governance and risk management. Almost all PRB banks, signatory banks have embedded sustainability at the board, CEO or senior executive levels and nearly half have embedded sustainability performance in their executive compensation. They've been adopting sector specific environmental credit risk policies which influence what they will and won't finance at twice the rate of non PRB banks. 90% offer sustainability related financial products, half of public sustainable finance targets, with for instance 14 of the largest alone pledging $6.5 trillion US for sustainable finance in their markets. And the business case for sustainability integration has never been clearer. MSCI's analysis found that banks integrating sustainability pay a lower cost of capital, so lower cost financing to the banks means they can deploy more effectively to their clients and customers. The PRB signatories saw 100 basis points or a 1% lower cost of capital as compared to non signatories. S and P found that these banks are less volatile, which part partly explains the lower cost of capital and awarded them stronger credit ratings. So I think there's an important message here. Sustainability integration is about prudent risk management and the capital markets are rewarding those who are taking it seriously. So what's the role of voluntary sustainability initiatives and standards? Sustainable business and finance has been promoting and defined has been promoted and defined by such initiatives and standards for many years, including the likes of the Global Compact Principles, the B Lab Certification for Corporates. I spoke about the prb. We also have the Principal Sustainable Insurance, the Principal Responsible Investment plus GIN for the impact Investors. The UN Guiding Principles on Human Rights and the OECD Due Diligence Framework are further cross cutting examples. And then there are the reporting standards, mostly voluntary, not entirely, such as the gri, the International Sustainability Standards Board, the ISSB and the thematic counterparts, the Task Force on Nature Related Financial Disclosures and now most recently the Task Force on Inequality and Social Related Financial Disclosures. Now such initiatives create the enabling environment that private sector needs to finance development and the SDGs. However, as the number role of such initiatives grows, it's important that coordination between them be fostered. As paragraph 34B of the Sevilla Commitment points out, the interoperability of voluntary sustainability impact standards and terminology needs to be enhanced so that practitioners from both governments and the private sector can more efficiently and cost effectively integrate sustainability issues. Now, as a representative one of these voluntary initiatives, I'm very pleased that we, along with those that I've cited, have started to come together as a community something something. It's called the Impact Management Platform. We get together to foster collaboration and interoperability between our organizations, but also to gradually develop common definitions and to provide clarity to the market and foster interoperability by design. In closing, sustainability integration is not a nice to have, but rather a core aspect of prudent risk management. A business or their financier, understanding the impact that their products and services have on the planet on social factors is a compass towards what is or is likely to become financially material over time. Thank you very much.

Thank you very much Mr. Usher for those key insights. Thinking about integration, how promising it is based on the data that you shared, the prudence behind it, lower cost of capital, higher ratings, et cetera, marks well for the progression of sustainability and being integrated into those institutions institutions. So we started with investor demand and moved over to institutional behavior. Let's continue on to what things look like in practice on the country level. Mr. Harold Coopers, I'm going to turn to you here. Mr. Harold Coopers is the Sector Program Manager of Sustainable Development Financing at giz, who has worked on the post Sevilla Financing for Development Process with long experience in development cooperation and public finance. Mr. Kuppers at a country level, what does it take for sustainable finance to work in practice, especially in developing countries where capacity and market conditions vary widely? Where do you see the biggest implementation gap today? Whether it's policy, design, infrastructure data and what kind of capacity building is GIZ providing? In this regard,

Thank you Nandi and thank you for allowing us to share some experience experiences particularly on capacity building. Making sustainable finance work at country level

entails deep engagement with local market conditions and jurisdictional needs. For many developing countries, a phased approach is important. Depending on country needs such as A phased approach may include sequencing sustainable finance regulation or moving from voluntary to mandatory

requirements, focusing on the outside in perspective

first before including an inside out perspective

in disclosure regulations and starting with disclosure

requirements for the largest companies first. One successful example of such a phased approach is Rwanda, where we worked on

a Green Taxonomy, sustainable sustainability Disclosure and sustainable bond guidance regarding sustainability disclosure. Rwanda took a phased approach, gradually increasing

the scope of reporting by financial institutions with the goal of full ISSB standard implementation by 2030. Finally, the adoption strategy provides flexibility to

eventually incorporate the more advanced double materiality principles.

When we talk about the implementation gap,

let me first highlight that we are

on the right path.

This year the Financing for Sustainable Development

report states developing countries are taking the

lead in sustainable business and finance regulation.

In 2024, 60% of new measures were introduced by developing countries. Although the adoption of sustainable finance regulation

has greatly accelerated in recent years, a

policy gap remains comprehensive.

Suitable finance frameworks are still relatively new. Many countries lack the capacity to connect

the dots between taxonomies, disclosure standards and

other frameworks to mobilize the full potential of these initiatives.

Once regulatory frameworks are in place, professional in finance institutions frequently lack the knowledge on how to integrate sustainability into their operations. Moving gradually from voluntary to mandatory requirements

can help to incentivize the or to set incentives for the private sector.

At grz, the German Development corporation agency that is commissioned by the German government

and European Union and other development partners,

we take a holistic approach to capacity building. Let me put this in more concrete terms.

We support partner countries in developing sustainable

finance frameworks, including regulatory instruments such as taxonomies, disclosure frameworks and standards for sustainable finance products. And we build capacity in financial institutions

enabling them to to integrate sustainability consideration into their operations. For example, together with UNEPFI and the Chartered Banking Institute, GIZ has started the Principles for Responsible Banking Academy to support

financial institutions in integrating sustainability into their business practices.

Through the Academy, we have trained banking

professionals in Brazil, Egypt, India, Mexico and Peru as of last year.

We are also supporting finance ministries and

development finance institutions in Nigeria and Mexico to issuing green bonds.

Our technical assistance to partner countries is

based on a close cooperation with international standard setters like the issb. To ensure international interoperability of the national

regulations, it is important to engage users of sustainable finance frameworks early and continuously. A taxonomy that is technically rigorous but

unusual by the domestic financial sector will not mobilize capital. We have learned that piloting with local financial institutions, consulting with market actors and

building capacity alongside developing the taxonomy not

only after it are essential to summarize.

Our approach is guided by internationally recognized

standards and principles while being tailored to

specific country needs through public and private stakeholder engagement to make sustainable finance work in practice. Thank you.

Thank you very much, Mr. Coopers. It's a very useful reminder that coherence at the global level only matters if it becomes workable on the ground at the country level. And this phased approach is case in point. Let me Turn now to Mr. Marcos Mancini, Senior Sustainable Finance Advisor at UNDP. Mr. Mancini, similar question for you. What does it take for sustainable finance to work in practice on the country level? And what is UNDP and more broadly the UN system doing to help Member States in this regard? In addition, where and how can the voluntary principles be most useful in shaping regulations, specifically in relation to paragraph 34 to help guide the adoption of interoperable regulation grounded in the existing ecosystem standards?

Thank you very much. There we go.

Thanks.

Thank you very much for the question. A lot to discuss there. I'll try to keep it brief. Pretty much like the previous panel, I

would argue this is a systemic perspective.

One needs to think about aligning the entire financial system at a country level.

And as a reference for that, we

have national development plans. Right now we have a disconnect between national financial systems and national development priorities. Sustainable finance only works at a country level when it is anchored in national plans. Good projects, isolated, let's say, projects in systems do not work, do not promote the resilience and the growth that that we are talking about. Countries need integrated financing approaches that connect planning, budgeting, investment policy and risk management into a single coherent strategy. Our work through integrated national financing frameworks provide that architecture now in place in 90 countries with UNDP support. Public finance, which we haven't talked that much, is still foundational. Credible tax systems, sdg, aligned budgets, particularly when we're talking about blended finance Sound

debt management create those policy signals that

we were referencing to enable private investment to flow risk still remains the central constraint. What is not insurable is not bankable. What is not bankable is not investable. We need those strong pipelines, yes, but we need those strong pipelines in line with the development priorities. As I was saying, we're working in 90 countries developing integrated national financing frameworks. In Colombia, for example, INFF linked reforms having formed more than 89 billion in

SDG aligned public budgets through our Tax

Inspectors Without Borders, a partnership with OECD,

2.7 billion in additional tax revenue have

been generated since 2015. That's $125 return for $1 invested. We continue to help countries in developing their debt capital markets. In Indonesia, for example,

who has now

aligned more than $10 billion in debt alongside alignment of 6 billion in public budgets and climate goals. To your question about frameworks and the Alphabet soup, the credibility frameworks come before regulation, frameworks, principles come before regulation. And the regulation needs to be anchored with national development priorities. We have the frameworks that we need. We have the principles that we need. We now need to avoid the cost of financial fragmentation which according to an OECD report stands at $780 billion.

That is capital that could be allocated to development.

So voluntary principles have a very important role in pre structuring markets before hard mandates come in place. They help curate the ecosystem. Member states do not need more proliferation of tools. And I think that the, the initiative on Article 34 comes in very timely at a, at a time where we need. I want to, I want to say harmonization, but I know harmonization is not the type of word that, that we use in this forum, but I'm using it on purpose because the first part of the harmonization is the harmony.

And that's precisely where I think the

initiative on paragraph 34 can come into play. And it's creating that harmony between isolated standards principles and how they interact and how they come together. But most specifically how they come together at a national level to support country owned, country led development plans. Thanks.

Thank you very much, Mr. Mancini. Very insightful comments there. A few things stick out. You talked about harmony, credibility, this incongruence between national systems and national priorities and the need for coherent strategies. All very important elements to keep in mind. And brings us to a related issue that even with strong implementation support frameworks don't deliver if the underlying information is not credible. Again, the word credible or decision useful. So let me now turn to Dr. Ede Idas Vasquez, a member of the Global Reporting Initiative Supervisory Board and a former World Bank Regional Director with deep experience across sustainable development, finance, infrastructure and climate. Dr. Idas Vasquez, what would make sustainability? The score is generally more credible, more comparable and useful for decision making, especially if the aim is to improve development outcomes as well as transparency. And we heard this phrase, double materiality. I'd like to dig into that a bit more. Double materiality means basically capturing both how the companies impact people, planet and the economy and how sustainability issues affect the company's financial prospect. What does that actually look like in practice for companies and investors operating across different jurisdictions?

Thank you so much, Mr. Moderator. Your Excellencies, distinguished delegates and colleagues, it is an honor for me to be here to discuss how sustainable management and reporting system and standards can lead to sustainable business and finance for development impact. But let me start by emphasizing that reporting is a means, it's not an end. The end goal for us is sustainable development, a just transition for economies that protect the environment, take care of their populations, especially the most noble, and follow more resilient and lower carbon and nature positive pathways. So how can sustainability reporting and standards support this goal? Well, simply said, you can only manage what you measure. At the same place, sustainability reporting helps companies measure, act and disclose how they impact the world, the environment and communities. And as the moderator was saying, reciprocally, how companies are affected by sustainability, sustainability issues, it works through two lenses. It is two sides of the same coin. So what are the two sides of this coin? Okay, first, financial materiality asks how do sustainability issues affect the company's financial prospects? This information is relevant for investors on capital markets. So our colleagues from the IFRS foundation and their ISSB standards focus on those financial risks and opportunities. And second, impact materiality ask how do the company activities impact people, the economy and the environment? And this information serves multiple stakeholder users, communities, governments, agencies and of course, investors and markets. So the organization that I represent today, gri, focuses on external impacts of organizations. Both perspectives complement and reinforce each other. Together they provide what is known as double materiality. And together, sustainability and financial data enable better policies, better risk assessment and management and better outcomes for people and planet. In Sevilla, Member States agreed by consensus that both perspectives are needed in paragraph 34. So double materiality is a shared norm. But now let me turn to the question of how to make sustainability disclosures more useful for decision maker and for better development outcomes. And the main message that I want to leave with you today is that sustainability and disclosure only works if it is transparent and credible if it is easy to understand and if it is actionable by shareholders. Investors, of course, want to know how sustainability issues affect a business or offer new opportunities. Again, this is one side of the coin, an important one. But at the same time, investors have also learned that sustainability, risk and impacts are also critical. Water scarcity affects operations, labor conditions become litigation, Biodiversity laws disrupt supply chain, Air pollution affects the health of workers and communities. The impacts on the ground are critical not only for the next financial quarter, but also for a longer term horizon. Other stakeholders you name is civil society, labor, indigenous peoples, communities living next to business. They're also very interested in the impacts and the risks that are linked to the operations of those businesses. And companies have learned that without an enabling environment, a license to operate, operations and profitability suffer. Finally, governments are interested on both sides of sustainability reporting. Financial regulators want to make sure that companies report to their investors on risk and opportunities. And the environmental, social and other regulatory agencies want companies to report transparently on impacts. Again, both sides of the coin and all of these stakeholders need transparent, credible, comparable and trusted reporting. My third message is that we already have many tools for double materiality reporting for both sides of the coin and several countries and thousands of companies are leading the way. In China, their 2026 corporate sustainability disclosure standards introduce impact disclosure alongside financial materiality. They use corporate sustainability Reporting Director Codifies Double Materiality Law In South Africa, the King five Code on Corporate Governance endorses the double materiality. Pension funds in Mexico require that India has mandated ESG requirements for largest companies. The movement is there. Gri, the organization that I represent today, has been working for over 30 years in developing sustainability reporting standards and today over 10,000 companies, including the vast majority of the largest corporations, already report their impacts using GRI, more than 61% of global market capitalization. So we don't need to reinvent the wheel. The tools are there to be adapted to national circumstances and the training tools exist to foster vibrant reporting ecosystem in which all stakeholders push for better, more transparent reporting that leads to sustainable income. This is the foundation of a global streamlined reporting that brings both impacts and financial risk and opportunities. I want to conclude that for sustainability reporting to be meaningful and useful for decisions, it should remain fit for purpose, easy to use and interoperable. GRI and our partners at the IFRS foundation are working together to continue strengthening this architecture and I want to recognize the many other partners we are working with, undp, un, ffi, PRI and UNDESA on this architecture and the needed capacity building sustainable reporting is everybody's business. Distinguished delegates, Excellencies, as we move towards the implementation of the Sevilla commitment, GRI stands ready to support you with the implementation of these commitments. To make progress, we believe that we need to focus on three areas. First, that we use disclosure frameworks that are anchors of impacts, risk and opportunities on an equal footing. Second, to leverage the existing global architecture that many of us have, gri, issp, et cetera, to prevent further fragmentation and ensure compatibility. And third, to leverage the disclosure of that information for policy decision making. You and your governments around this room can use the impact data to better measure and steer private sector contribution to your national sustainable development priorities.

Thank you.

Thank you very much, Dr. Vazquez. And if I might just reiterate a line that you opened with. It's important to remember that disclosure and reporting is a means and not an end to itself. Very, very important. Finally, let me turn to Mr. Neal Stewart, Director of Corporate Outreach at the IFRS foundation, which houses the issb, bringing many years of experience in investor relations, corporate governance and sustainability standards. Mr. Stewart, could you give an overview of the adoption of ISSB standards around the world and what this means in practice for financial materiality reporting? Additionally, how is interoperability achieved in practice, particularly within frameworks such as GRI when operating in jurisdictions where these standards are already in use? And finally, what kind of support do countries need to adopt ISSB standards in a way that is credible, workable and not overly burdensome?

Thank you, Dr. Ibakwe.

The ISSB has been mentioned several times by my distinguished panelists alongside me here, and I'd like to tell you a little bit more about it and where we've, what we've achieved in the last nearly five years. We're going to celebrate five years since the ISSB was created in November 2021. So the International Sustainability Standards Board, created under the IFRS foundation, answering the call from the G7, from the G20, from the financial Stability Board, from Iosco, the International Organization of Securities Commissions and many others in the market. Companies, investors, regulators. What was the call? The call was the need for decision, useful information for investors. A tremendous amount of work had been put into sustainability disclosure by companies using a system of voluntary standards and frameworks. And yet investors still were not getting the consistent, comparable, verifiable information they needed to guide the flow of capital. Companies were facing a costly and complex, as we call it, Alphabet soup. So the ISSB was created to solve for that and to do it with the due diligence. The process of the IFRS foundation and to do the same as the IFRS foundation had done for financial accounting standards over the previous 20 years. That is create a global language for business to create a global baseline of high quality sustainability related disclosures for the capital markets. A baseline that countries and companies and businesses and others could build on to meet other needs, to meet policy needs, to meet the needs of other stakeholders. But we wanted to establish this baseline for the capital markets. We took over responsibility for climate risk reporting from the tcfd, the Task Force on Climate Related Financial Decisions Disclosures. It had been created under the fsb, it had made tremendous progress. And as we created our first standards, the TCFD sunset it recognizing that these two standards we launched in 2023 S1 for general requirements and S2 specifically for climate related disclosures. The TCFD recognizing the FSB recognizing that they were carrying the legacy for forward or carrying this legacy of climate risk reporting and other sustainability related risk and opportunity reporting for the capital markets. We issued those standards in 2023 after a huge amount of input from companies, from investors, from regulators. With that due process, with that governance under the IFRS foundation and the world's regulators were heavily involved. One of the reasons why the ISSB standards were needed was so many jurisdictions were moving towards mandatory climate and other sustainability reporting. There was a real risk of a global patchwork of different systems. We needed one language. And so that's why very shortly after our standards were released in 2023, IOSCO again that's the securities commissions endorsed the standards for use of around the world. So where does that bring us now? Over 40 jurisdictions, over 40 of those regulators around the world and governments have cemented the ISSB standards and gotten on the journey for putting them into their regulatory frameworks, into their rules for companies to use. Those over 40 jurisdictions account for over 60% of global GDP, over 40% of global market cap, significantly around 60% of global greenhouse gas emissions. What's remarkable about those 40 jurisdictions is that that list includes some of the world's biggest, most important developed markets. Australia, the uk, Japan, Canada and so on. It also includes the world's biggest developing markets, China, Brazil and Mexico. But then it also goes all the way down the list to some of to many of the world's emerging markets, across Asia, across Africa, across Latin America. So you can see that these are standards that are genuinely fit for purpose by developed economies, but also very much by developed and emerging economies as well. Now with this momentum around the world, the ISSB standards are becoming a global passport, really reducing friction in the reporting system worldwide. We know there is a funding gap, we know that there is funding ready to be directed. What is needed to get this machine moving is the oil of information. And, and that's where the ISSB standards come in. Better information for better decisions. This has been the motto, the slogan of the IFRS foundation for the accounting standards and now for the sustainability standards. When you have this common language for sustainability for your businesses around the world, for your operations, for your trading partners, it reduces internal costs, it reduces compliance risk, it opens the doors to customers, it smooths contracts with suppliers, it streamlines mergers and acquisitions. Most importantly, it streamlines access to capital. And so then to your question, Dr. Bakwe, how we need a couple of things. One, we need interoperability and we need capacity building. By interoperability what do we mean? We mean that we, we don't want to increase the burden on companies, we want to reduce it. We want companies to be able to gather the data once, verify it once, apply it to their systems and processes and strategy and risk and then report it as needed to different stakeholders as needed. ISSB laser focused on investors, other standard setters like gri, looking at a broader range of stakeholders in addition to investors. So we want to streamline this for companies and that means agreeing on metrics, agreeing on definitions, working with gri, working with the European Standard center, working with others around the world to make sure we streamline it for companies. And then what is needed, what is needed now we need first of all consistency. So as additional countries beyond these 40 begin to adopt the ISSP standards, we, we hope to see a true global baseline, not different flavors of ISSB standards, but the same flavor around the world. And then what do we need in terms of capacity building? We need training for accounting professionals, for finance professionals, for sustainability leaders. It needs to be accessible, it needs to be low cost. And this is one of the ways that the ISSB standards, the ISSB and IFRS foundation are really working with partners, including many up here, undp, unepfi, giz to provide access to high quality training around the world. So I really appreciate the chance to speak alongside these really important partners in this shared mission of better information for better decisions. Thank you.

Thank you very much Mr. Stewart. It's a very, very key message that you're sharing there. And if I might try and combine your intervention with that of Dr. Vasquez, you can only manage what you measure and you can only measure what you fully define, agree upon and make standard. So I think combined we have a better picture of what is ahead of us in that regard. So thank you very much to all of our panelists for those opening interventions. We will hopefully have time for final takeaways and reactions before we conclude, but for right now, we will hear from our first respondent intervention from Civil Society. I would like to invite Ms. Rose Omamo to take the floor and I kindly ask that you stay within the allotted time. The floor is yours.

I speak on behalf of the International Trade Union Confederation which represents roughly 200 million workers worldwide. The FFD Forum should be an opportunity to build on the surveillance commitment and better regulate private financing development to align with the SDGs, including SDG 8 on decent work. Unfortunately, we have missed that opportunity as the current deliberations fall short when balancing incentives and regulation of private finance, an enabling environment for business is interpreted as deregulation. The reason why we call for regulation is simple. In absence of adequate safeguards, private finance often subordinates development commitments to commercial interests, aligning business and finance with sustainable development impact. Ensuring that private finance boosts the SDGs requires bold regulatory frameworks to ensure that private investments comply with ILO standards on decent work, responsible business conduct and due diligence, ensuring the respect of human and labor rights along the entire supply chain through independent monitoring and redress mechanisms. If private businesses activity, investment and innovation are to be major drivers of sustainable development and economic growth, this must necessarily be through the creation of decent jobs in line with the ILO decent work agenda. In Kenya, for example, we have seen a lot of investment in the digital economy which is growing more and more driven by advances in information and communication technologies and an increased access to Internet connectivity. This brings opportunities but also challenges. Platform work in Kenya provides essential income and opportunities to many, but some type of platform work have also become synonymous with extremely low pay, precarity and poor and dangerous working conditions. But it is not just about regulation. We also need to facilitate skills development and access to finance for micro, small and medium enterprises that will enhance their job creating potential and could contribute to the formalization of the informal economy. When complemented with the right incentives and enforcement measures, business accountability in development is key. This must be through compliance with ILO standards, due diligence and responsible business conduct. As far as innovative financing vehicles such as blended finance are concerned, increased accountability and transparency mechanisms are needed through binding criteria for eligibility and compliance with international labor, fiscal and environmental standards. Moreover, blending and development cooperation strategies should not come to the detriment of public based oda. We have just witnessed the largest annual contraction of ODA on record down 23.1% in real terms. In conclusion, we call on Member States to be much more ambitious in in aligning private finance with the public development objective. With Member States development objectives. We all want private finance to make a difference for development, but in order to do that, we must stop looking at private finance as the ultimate silver bullet and frame its contribution into public development plans and priorities based on democratic ownership, public interest and alignment with the SDGs. Thank you.

Thank you very much for that intervention and providing that perspective, especially on blended finance. With that, I'm pleased to return the floor to you, Mr. President for the interactive dialogue.

I thank Mr. Eboke for moderating the panel discussions. I now open the floor for the interactive discussion. I would like to remind the speaker speakers of the time limit again. 2 minutes for the individual interventions and 3 minutes for the statements on behalf of the groups. Please note that depending on the number of requests, the microphone may be automatically cut off when the alerted time has elapsed. This is an interest of the hearing all inscribed speakers with that. Now I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Canada, to be followed by Mexico.

Thank you, Mr. President. Canada welcomes the focus on strengthening sustainable business and finance for development impact, including for climate and gender equality outcomes. We underscore the importance of standardization and aligning impact standards, preventing fragmented approaches to development finance and ensuring data transparency and availability. This will support strong development outcomes alongside the mobilization of private capital. Under the Sevilla Platform for Action. Canada was proud to launch the Common Principles for Private Capital Mobilization endorsed by France, Germany, Italy and the UK with support from Japan. These principles provide a roadmap for how we can work together to mobilize capital at scale by addressing systemic barriers like fragmentation, limited data, availability of pipelines and lack of standardization. Canada is already putting these principles into practice through our engagement in initiatives such as Scaling Capital for Sustainable Development or scaled, which focuses on standardization and co collaboration with the private sector and the Hamburg Data alliance which is working to make data transparent and accessible. Looking ahead, Canada welcomes continued endorsement of the Common Principles for Private Capital Mobilization from other members to drive ongoing development impact alongside the mobilization of capital. Thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Canada. Now I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Mexico, to be followed by Belgium and Indonesia.

For Mexico, strengthening the contribution of the private sector to sustainable development involves not only mobilizing resources, it also involves ensuring that investments create real impacts that are aligned with national priorities. The challenge is not solely how much finance to mobilise, but rather how can it be channeled and what results does it produce? As such, we must move towards frameworks which integrate impact measurement, transparency and consistency across public policy, financial regulations and business decisions. Mexico has taken steps in this direction. In 2025, we implemented implemented new sustainability information standards that was overseen by our financial information bodies. And these rules mean it's vital to disseminate governance and environmental information if you are a major financial business and we're going to measure the impact from 2026 onwards. We also have Mexico's sustainable taxonomy and that raises the quality of financing, avoids greenwashing, strictly strengthens information comparability and ties investments to results. We link sustainable development to regional development, the creation of decent employment and the creation of local productive chains. SMEs here play a key role. They contribute to a fairer transition with benefits for women and historically marginalised groups. To make further progress, we propose championing international standards which are common in terms of impact measurement. These need to be interoperable and comparable. We need to have common sustainability criteria to evaluate regulations and investments and bolster institutional capacity, particularly for developing economies. We need to ensure FFD impact and that demands data accountability and consistency. It's only in that way that we'll ensure that each investment successfully contributes to more inclusive, resilient and sustainable development. Thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Mexico. Now I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Belgium.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. The compromiso di Sevilla reminds us that sustainable development is not only about mobilizing capital, it's about aligning that capital with national priorities and needs. Belgium advocates for for strong coordination between development partners, public authorities and the private sector, with a specific attention for the local private actors. Financial tools like blended finance, local currency lending and thematic bonds must be used wisely. They should support national priorities, meet high standards and focus on long term development goals. This is especially urgent in fragile context and LDCs where the road to prosperity is steepest. In vulnerable economies, injecting capital without a clear understanding of market gaps and risk can do more harm than good. This is the approach that Belgium is promoting with the EU Global Gateway which mobilizes private investment for transformative high impact projects. We are putting particular emphasis on the 360 approach, meaning that every investment is assessed and accompanied along all relevant dimensions in line with high standards, democratic values, good governance, transparency and security considerations. This integrated approach helps create an enabling environment and identifying risk and opportunities. Ultimately, prosperity is about people, sustainable infrastructure, strong institutions and human capital. Investment must therefore advance together to enable sustainable growth, resilient and secure societies and lasting impact. I thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Belgium. Now I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Indonesia. Thank you, Mr. President.

Indonesia aligned with the Sevilla commitment and fuels the urgency of aligning global capital with sustainable development priorities. While sustainable finance frameworks have expanded, their

impact remains uneven due to tighter financial

condition and geopolitical fragmentation which increase borrowing costs and reduced risk appetite for developing nation. And to further strengthen development impacts, we view three key points. First, regulatory measures must be country led and context specific. Greater interoperability should respect national developmental pathways such as Indonesia's strategic focus on downstreaming and building equitable critical mineral value chains to ensure that global rules reflect local share realities and support long term stability. Second, capacity building must prioritize project preparation and the integration of MSMEs into global value chains. We must move beyond disclosure to develop

bankable pipelines that can attract long term

investment supported by robust data, interoperability and performance monitoring. Third, support the Sevilla Platform for Action as an important platform for harmonizing voluntary standards and clarifying business responsibilities. This initiative can help scale impact investing and thematic bonds while reducing the market fragmentation and high cost barriers that often penalize developing economies. Indonesia remains committed to promoting a financing architecture that is inclusive, pipeline driven and impactful for all. Thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Indonesia. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Children and Youth International.

Yes, madam.

Thank you, Mr. President. My name is Charlene May Bornea and I speak on behalf of the major group for children and youth under the FFD constituency. The challenge is not the lack of capital. It is how capital is structured, allocated and incentivized. We recognize the critical role of private business and and finance as drivers of sustainable development, innovation and job creation. Yet current financial systems systematically exclude youth and perpetrate intergenerational inequity through short term profit orientation and persistent north south disparities. We face a $4 trillion annual financing gap while young people are nearly three times more likely to be unemployed than adults globally, with many in informal work lacking protection or pathways for upward mobility. This is not only a financing gap, it reflects structural exclusion from financial systems. Current models rely on risk assessments, collateral and credit histories that exclude young people from accessing capital. If sustainable finance is to deliver meaningful development impact, these structural barriers must be addressed not only in capital allocation, but also in how performance and impact are measured and disclosed. We therefore call for three priorities. First, embed young youth responsive criteria into risk and capital allocation frameworks. Second, pair financial access with capacity building, particularly in youth led MSMEs to support resilient enterprise development. Third, strengthen accountability and disclosures so that impact measurement captures intergenerational equity, decent work and expanded access to finance not only financial returns. We also encourage standard setting bodies and impact investors to treat youth inclusion as a measure.

I thank the distinguished representative of Children and Youth International. I give the floor to the distinguished representative of United Kingdom,

the uk. Thank you Chair. Sorry. The UK strongly agrees with where this discussion has converged. The issue today is not whether standards, disclosures and frameworks exist. Real progress has really been made, but whether they are credible, coherent and usable, particularly in countries with limited institutional capacity. For The from the UK's perspective, credibility now comes less from adding new frameworks and more from how well existing ones work together and whether they support real decision making by banks, investors and regulators. We've heard clearly from private capital that appetite remains strong, but complexity and uncertainty are real barriers. Investors are asking for consistency, interoperability and confidence in direction, not constant evolution and long term capital needs. Stable signals that sustainability frameworks will endure across political cycles. We've also heard that for banks and domestic financial systems which still provide the majority of financing in developing countries, sustainability is now core risk management. But frameworks only help if they can be implemented operationally and not just designed technically. This is why the UK sees the Platform for Action as an opportunity to shift the focus away from proliferation towards practical alignment, usability and country level delivery. For us that means working together on three things improving that interoperability across standards and disclosures investing in country level capacity and grounding frameworks in how capital actually flows to real actors delivering outcomes.

I thank the distinguished representative of United Kingdom. Now I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Eurodatio.

Thank you Mr. Chair, my name is Maria Jose Romero and I speak on behalf of Eurodad and the Civil Society FFD mechanism. An evidence and right based approach to the role of the private sector in development is critical. Policies aimed at attracting private investors can result in negative impacts on sustainable development needs and human rights obligations of the state. The Compromiso of Sevilla recognized the difficulties in implementing an agenda focused on leveraging private finance and the need for a greater focus on quality. Paragraph 31 calls for policy frameworks and incentives for private investment at the national and global levels that promote sustainable development, building on lessons learned since the adoption of the isabea. Jonah yet what we are seeing here and elsewhere is a consolidation of the pact between private finance and development actors. Private finance is treated as life best of a sinking development agenda despite evidence of corporate abuse and right relations in the Global South. The development agenda is thinking because of a development model based on extraction of environmental, social and financial resources in a system that caters to the power of profit. Civil society organizations and trade unions have repeatedly warned against the increasing role of corporate sector in what should be an intergovernmental process meant to address the structural barriers that undermine financing for sustainable development. Business models won't change without upholding the regulatory and developmental role of the state. Voluntary approaches are not working. This highlights the urgent need for a binding UN treaty on multinational corporations and human rights. We call on UN member states to promote a cautious approach when it comes to the use of blended finance guarantees and risk sharing mechanism.

Thank you.

Thank you. And now I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Manholf Campaign.

Hello, my name is Fred Sullivan. I represent the man up campaign, an NGO with consultative status with ECOSOC and the NGO Committee on Finance for Development and the Blue Ocean SDG Accelerator commitment Healthy oceans and healthy economies listed on the UNDP SDG accelerator platform. With a 2 billion dollar accelerator commitment focused on Kenya and Sierra Leone, but open to other LDCs and SIDS, there's no shortage of capital in the world. Over $100 trillion sits in private institutional investment pools and actively seeking stable long term returns. $4 trillion annual in SDG financing Gap is not a capital problem. It's a government's problem. The capital can fill the gap. What is missing is the interface that makes it safe and credible for all capital to flow into regenerative, circular and equitable economies. The five governance actions. Spatial financial platforms that make natural capital bankable. The UNC accounting that puts natural capital on sovereign balance sheets. A vibrant productive sector generating real returns and finding global MRV verification, governance and integrity that refuses front end fees before investments mature. The returns are grown in the capital pool, not the front end. The indigenous knowledge recognized as co equal as science. Human capital. The human capital side ultimately repays the investment. The Human Development Index can give us a measure even without disaggregated data. You cannot grow an economy by leaving half the team on the bench. First, employment incentives. Subsidizing growing companies to expand headcount. Putting women and youth inside living.

I thank you. I thanks. Now I give the floor to the district representative of una. It will be the last speaker in this session.

Excellencies and distinguished delegates. My name is Alexa Dominique and I'm speaking on behalf of the United nations association of the United States as a Sustainable Development Goals Ambassador. Mobilizing capital at scale requires strengthening the conditions that enable efficient and sustained investment, including reducing the cost of capital. Addressing risk allocation constraints from a policy standpoint first, expanding access to finance, particularly for SMEs, remains essential. Strengthening credit infrastructure, secure transactions frameworks and digital financial systems can reduce information asymmetries, improve credit allocation and broaden participation in formal markets. Second, predictable and transparent regulatory environments are critical to supporting long term investment. This includes clear tax regimes, consistent regulatory enforcement and streamlined administrative processes that reduce uncertainty and transaction costs. Risk sharing instruments such as guarantees, first loss capital and political risk insurance alongside deeper local currency capital markets can help align risk adjustment returns and mitigate currency mismatch risk. Strengthening market liquidity, yield curves and institutional investor participation can further support long term financing while maintaining financial stability across all areas. Coordination between governments, financial institutions and private

investors will will be essential.

Strengthening institutional capacity and data availability and project preparation facilities can help enhance investment readiness and support more consistent capital deployment and strengthen public private partnerships we thank you.

I thank the District Representative of civil society una. I now invite Mr. Iboke to invite kiites from each of the panelists of no more than one minute each and to make a brief closing remarks on his behalf.

Thank you very much Mr. President and thank you to all the delegations and participants for the discussion on the floor. We will have our experts on the panel give one final reaction based on what you've heard. Any remarks should be concise. One minute or less and we will start in the same order in which we began. So I'm speaking. Melvin, we'll start with you.

Thank you and thank you to all for the insightful discussion today. I heard two things throughout the discussion that I wanted to bring back together on the role of private capital. One we talk about private capital as if it is one thing. It is not and therefore the focus on the flow of that capital through sustainable development outcomes is critical. There is a term that I haven't heard used much today called market transformation. When we look at the role of ODA and leveraging private capital for sustainable development, the goal should be to look at how it's enabling local private capital ecosystems and the role of local actors in sustaining that activity for the long term. And I think one of the outcomes of this discussion should be the adoption the capacity building on the ground in order to sustain locally and therefore create create value where value is created right and making sure that all of the private finance that is going is both seeking the benefits that it can achieve both for that private capital return and the stakeholders and constituents both today and intergenerationally. Thank You.

Thank you very much. Mr. Usher, over to you.

Yeah, I would like to follow on from Amanda. I think we need to move from a traffic transactional focus to a transformational focus, understand what it means to transform markets and design interventions in terms of building up enabling capacity, building up the pipelines and putting in place the conditions that the private sector then can come and work on. The final point is that if you are a project developer or a project sponsor, the incentives to actually be the first of a kind in a market are quite low when you're talking about largely regulated markets like electricity production. And so we need to get the incentives right. And if we're going to bring in public capital, we need to bring it in early in developing the project pipelines to help balance those incentives. And we shouldn't be bringing in public capital late once the private sector has done all the de risking themselves. So let's get the incentives right, let's get the alignment and then we can help take things to scale.

Thank you very much. Mr. Cooper, over to you.

Thanks a lot. I think we heard from several countries

that capacity building is key.

And I think although many of the

instruments are focusing on a few countries, more countries should come in.

And again, capacity building on sustainable finance shows that this is possible.

So the advice would be engage with international stakeholders, standard setters early on, involve

private and public stakeholders in the development

of the policy and adoption approach and learn from the experience of regulators in other countries.

So back to you.

Thank you very much, Mr. Mancini, thank you very much.

I'm encouraged by the spirit of everybody's interventions. I think I have three takeaways.

One is market transformation. Building on Amanda and Eric needs to be grounded in national development priorities.

Second one is interoperability

doesn't need to be an afterthought. It needs to be embedded in the design of policies. And the third one is, as we've heard from many member states, implementation, implementation, implementations, skills and capacity building. It's not just about the developing of the policy and the regulation, it's about its implementation by market actors. Thanks.

Thank you. Dr. Jes Vazquez.

Thank you so much. I want to emphasize the point that the distinguished representative of Indonesia made on how critical it is for the country led regulations. And to highlight the example from Mexico where the emphasis to say, look, the inclusion of vulnerable communities is critical for sustainability disclosure. This is not just for investors. Impact at the core and what is happening to communities around is fundamental. If we're going to really move into sustainable financing. I want to highlight the point of the UK on really what to do with countries unlimited capacity, capacity and the need for modularity and a step at a time to be able to move in that journey of sustainability. Because at the end, as the representative of Indonesia said, on integration of MSME into global supply chains is critical and that sustainability reporting is part of that integration. Finally, let me conclude with the representative of civil society on labor. Labor for us in GRI is a key stakeholder. They are in engaged into every one of our governance bodies because decent work is integral to the GRI standards. The negative impacts cannot be part of sustainable business and finance and labor is critical in that process. That's why our materiality reporting is so important and how youth in the end is part of the transformation in that process. Without clear, transparent and credible reporting, youth will not have the information to put in that process. Thank you.

Thank you. And finally, Mr. Stewart, thank you.

As we've heard, there's a groundswell of reporting happening around the world. The data around climate risk, around other sustainability related risks and opportunities and it's becoming mandatory. But what I want to emphasize is that this is not just about compliance. Yes, there are costs to this mandatory reporting. There's change management. There is a big challenge ahead for many, many businesses and other organizations in the world. Why is it worth it? Is it because it's not just about reporting or compliance. It's about integrating this data into strategy, into risk management, into the governance of organizations, ultimately leading to better value creation and better impact. This is really about resilient economies, resilient businesses, resilient private sector and better management of a transition to a different world in the future.

Thank you very much, Mr. Stewart. And thank you to all our panelists. So many very rich and insightful perspectives shared here today. I'd like to just end and close with four clear priorities that I've seen that stood out throughout our discussion. Number one, stronger credibility. Number two, greater interoperability. Number three, more practical country level implementation and capacity building. And finally, decision useful standards for measurement, disclosure and reporting. This is why the SEVILLA platform for action on paragraph 34 is important to help steer this agenda and these priorities to better integration, better implementation and better transformation. Many thanks to all of our panelists and participants. Mr. President, I return the floor to you.

Thank you. Thank you moderator Dr. Eboke for guiding these very important discussions. And I also thank our distinguished panelists for your substantive contributions and all the delegations for participating in a very productive activity. Excellencies, district delegates, that concludes this morning's meeting. The forum will reconvene this afternoon at 3pm in these rooms to conclude its general debate. The meeting is adjourned.