UN Transcripts — https://transcripts.un.org/en/ecosoc/2026/21
Economic and Social Council: 21st plenary meeting - 2026 Operational Activities for Development Segment — Economic and Social Council — 3 June 2026
Language: en
Automatically generated transcript — may contain errors. Not an official United Nations record.

---
Dominican Republic · Vice President · Wellington Ben Cosme [0:02]:

Good morning, Excellencies, dear colleagues. May I kindly ask you to your seats. Declaro abierta la vigésima— The 21st meeting of the Economic and Social Council is called to order. I now invite the Council to continue its consideration of Agenda Item 7, Operational Activities of the United Nations for International Development Cooperation, to hold a dialogue divided in two parts with host governments, regional commissions, and United Nations country teams on Tailoring support for countries across the system and supporting delivery in the context of UN 80 recommendations. The effectiveness of the United Nations development system depends on its ability to organize itself around national priorities, deliver coherent support across entities, and adapt its presence and capacities to evolving country needs. This session provides an opportunity to come to reflect on how United Nations country teams and regional assets can be configured more flexibly and effectively, how cooperation frameworks can more fully become strategic anchor for country-level action, and how ongoing discussions under the UN80 process can help strengthen coordination, reduce duplication, and improve the system's ability to deliver tailored and integrated support across diverse country contexts. For our first interactive dialogue, I am pleased to welcome our distinguished panelists. Mr. José Manuel Salazar Girinac, Executive Secretary of the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean, who will join us virtually. Mr. Jorge Moera da Silva, Executive Director of the United Nations Office for Project Services. Ms. Yassim Oruc, United Nations Resident Coordinator in Moldova. And Mr. Stephen Jackson, United Nations Resident Coordinator in China, as well as our lead discussant, His Excellency, my colleague, Omar Hilali, Permanent Representative of Morocco. I first give the floor to José Manuel Salazar Girinax, Executive Secretary of the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean, ECLAC.


ECLAC · Executive Secretary · José Manuel Salazar Girinac [3:09]:

Good morning, dear Chair, Mr. Wellington Ben Cosme, Permanent Representative of the Dominican Republic to the United Nations and Vice President of the ECOSOC. Dear Member States, fellow panelists, Excellencies, it is an honor to address you. The regional level occupies a unique and strategic place within the United Nations system. I would like to address three areas in which the regional architecture strengthens country policies and country delivery. The first is that the regional level serves as a bridge to translate global priorities into coordinated support for resident coordinators and UN country teams. It is especially well placed to generate regional public goods and to address transboundary development challenges, from internal migration and climate change to sub-regional issues such as the sargassum crisis affecting the Caribbean Seas, or infrastructure integration in South America. Secondly, the regional architecture and platforms provide a very valuable space for intergovernmental dialogue, enabling countries to forge common agendas, exchange experiences, and mobilize technical cooperation around shared priorities. For example, the third ministerial council meeting of the Regional Platform for Tax Cooperation, for which the Economic Commission of Latin America and the Caribbean ECCLAC serves as technical secretariat, was held last month during the Regional Fiscal Seminar. The platform has become a key mechanism for addressing tax policy challenges, strengthening capacities, and articulating regional perspectives in international tax discussions. The regional platforms convened by ECCLAC and guided by its intellectual leadership and inputs are primary spaces for establishing regional positions and cooperation on key issues, such as developing cooperation among middle-income countries at the Regional Conference on South-South Cooperation, addressing the unique development needs of Caribbean SIDS at the Caribbean Development and Cooperation Committee, conveying regional perspectives on Beyond GDP initiative at the Statistical Conference of the Americas, promoting the Care Society Paradigm at the Regional Conference on Women just to name a few. The regional level is equally critical for strengthening coherence across the UN Development System. Regional Commissions are well positioned to support the Secretary-General's UNHCR reforms, including the regional reset, building on our role as vice chairs and co-secretaries of the regional collaborative platforms. In Latin America and the Caribbean, the regional collaborative platform has enabled coordinated support to Resident Coordinators and UNCTs For example, system-wide responses to Caribbean countries affected by Hurricane Melissa. ECLAT is also well placed to contribute to integrated regional knowledge and data ecosystems and to the UN Data Commons proposed under UN Haiti. The third area in which the regional architecture strengthens country policies and country delivery is the opportunity to directly request technical assistance from regional commissions. In 2025 alone, ECLAC attended 167 direct requests for technical assistance in areas as diverse as productive development, trade and integration, statistics, public finances, disaster prevention, and public governance, among others. Over the case, this has resulted in strong institutional relationships with technical authorities across the region, building trust and generating capacities in Member States. And this is highly valued by Member States. Excellencies, let me conclude by reaffirming that the regional level should not be seen as ancillary to delivery at the country level, but rather another dimension of support to Member States. The system was wisely designed to provide multilevel support, and this has been crucial in generating generating regional agendas that translate into national policies, as we are seeing, for instance, with the Tlatelolco commitment on care systems, contributing to regional public goods and addressing transboundary development challenges. We stand ready to continue to provide this crucial value, value added, as we move forward in a reformed development system. Thank you.


Dominican Republic · Vice President · Wellington Ben Cosme [7:37]:

Thank you very much. Thank you very much, Executive Secretary. I now give the floor to Mr. Jorge Moreira da Silva, Executive Director of the United Nations Office for Project Services, UNOPS.


UNOPS · Executive Director · Jorge Moreira da Silva [7:54]:

Mr. President, distinguished members, I'm very pleased to join you today with my colleagues in this panel on what I believe is one of most critical sessions of ECOSOC operational activities for development segment, the dialogue with host government resident coordinators and UN country teams. As you may be aware, I have had the great privilege during the last year of co-facilitating the Work Package 5 on the UN AT process, UN country team reconfiguration, under the leadership of the Deputy Secretary-General. Our objective was clear from the outset: to adapt UN Country Team configurations to be more coherent, impactful and efficient in support of national needs and priorities. This effort was firmly anchored in the System-Wide Evaluation on progress towards a new generation of UN Country Teams, providing us with a solid, evidence-based —understanding of what is working and what requires correction. As you know, we worked based on 5 principles, 4 building blocks, and 10 recommendations. We entered this process with high ambition. Extensive consultations were held across the UN system and Resident Coordinators, and Member States were engaged in plenary, regional group, and bilateral settings. We tested various options, and the Secretary-General's UN Haiti Initiative Progress Report issued last week shows where we have collectively landed. In exploring how the system could practically reorganize itself to deliver more effectively and efficiently around national priorities, we were guided by a core principle: form follows function, which follows strategy. To ensure an integrated response to national priorities and needs, primacy must be given to to one shared country strategy from which decisions on functions, expertise and organizational arrangements are informed. The cooperation framework must serve as the strategic anchor for UN Development System-wide support, informed by one common country analysis under the leadership of the Resident Coordinator. To move from fragmented institutional footprints —towards more strategically configured capacities aligned with the Cooperation Framework priorities, we must fix the sequencing. Entity-specific country programme instruments should be derived from and submitted for Governing Board approval after the Cooperation Framework is finalized. Furthermore, introducing a set of transparency standards can help ensure this alignment is continuous reality rather than a one-off compliance exercise. All entities should share draft country programme instruments with UN country team before they are finalized and maintain live work plans and resource pipelines that are visible to the Resident Coordinator throughout implementation. Through the Expertise on Demand mechanism,— consisting on a common catalogue of available expertise and services, and surge capacity from the regional level— we are breaking the correlation between residence, visibility, financial viability and impact. What matters is readiness to deliver at scale. So a permanent physical in-country presence can be adjusted and delivered flexibly, facilitated by the Resident Coordinator, specialized regional and global expertise can be deployed rapidly and easily accessible to UN country teams and Member States on demand. All of these adjustments must be accompanied by aligned shifts in incentive structures. This includes critical revisions of the management and accountability framework, updated cooperation framework guidance, and effective performance management systems that reward collaboration over institutional silos. For more flexible UN Country Team configurations to work effectively in practice, we must abandon one-size-fits-all models. Setups should be carefully tailored to each country's unique circumstances. On the basis of national priorities and needs, as reflected in the Cooperation Framework, UN Country Teams should define their setup as modular, hub-like configurations, drawing on in-country presence, non-resident entity contributions, and multi-country office arrangements. Modular components can then be scaled and adapted over time as country contexts evolve. I would like to conclude with one concrete example about UNOPS. We are non-resident in Jamaica, but we were the agent that was called when the Melissa hurricane affected the country, due to our expertise. So in the few hours and few days, we managed to bring our engineers to do the assessment. So it shows that the matter is not about presence, the matter is about readiness to deliver when needed. So this example, I think, proves a vital point for the future of the UN Development System, A permanent physical in-country presence is no longer the determining factor of how, or how well, the United Nations can support countries and communities. Thank you.


Dominican Republic · Vice President · Wellington Ben Cosme [13:33]:

I thank the Executive Director of UNOPS. I now invite Ms. Yassine Orouk, United Nations Resident Coordinator in Moldova, to take the floor.


UN Secretariat · Resident Coordinator · Yassine Orouk [13:43]:

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Mr. Vice President, Excellencies, colleagues. Partners, good morning to all. Excellencies, our UN Country Team in Moldova modeled the resilience of the Republic of Moldova itself in adapting and responding to the external shocks of the past few years: an all-out war in Ukraine, influx of refugees, a consequent cost of living, and then an energy crisis, all potentially throwing Moldova off track its SDG progress, especially the overarching goal to reduce poverty. I'm proud to say that the UN Country Team adapted and responded effectively and flexibly. There are three main factors why this adaptation and response was possible. One, without doubt, is remarkable national drive and leadership. Despite all these challenges, the Government of Moldova continued its its progress on its National Development Strategy, and with the SDGs anchored in it, driving our cooperation framework. For that, I thank the Government of Moldova. The second big factor was funding. Moldova has had generous partners. Our country— our cooperation framework is actually fully funded. An all-hands-on-deck approach with funding at regional and country levels, bolstered by a refugee response resulted in a tad bit of coordination fatigue, I admit, but also a lot more opportunities for collaboration and collaborative behavior within the UN Country Team. Finally, and the third factor, is the so-called people incentives factor. I've been absolutely blessed to work with a UN Country Team composed of some of the top leadership, top professionals of the agency funds and programs, and for that I thank all the agencies, funds, and programs Moldova. Going forward, ladies and gentlemen, Excellencies, there are 3 issues I invite you to please keep in mind so that our UN Country Team in Moldova can continue to adapt and respond with the agility it has been able to. First, on the cooperation framework and the configuration that follows from it. The UN Country Team in Moldova has asked me— they've asked that I lead a meaningful of our joint analysis and our prioritization so that their specific planning instruments are genuinely derived and guided by our collective and mutually accountable decisions. There are reasons why the UNCT wants this of me, of the UN Resident Coordinator. It's because Moldova is on a path to EU accession, there is crowding in of European member states, of institutions, all happening in an extremely geopolitically volatile region. And that's why we've applied as the UN Country Team a very innovative future insights exercise to our positioning within Moldova. And for that, I thank the brilliant team at UNDP on foresight who have availed to us all their capacities to the entire UNCT. But based on that experience, I wish to posit to you Excellencies, that configuration is not something that we do only within the UN development system, but it's rather vis-à-vis the broader partnership context. It's not a one-time exercise. It's a constant, reiterative process between the government who requests UN assistance and support, UN entity partners on one hand, and myself on the other, to ascertain whether we are indeed the correct actor to respond to the request and we have the adequate capacities to do so vis-à-vis other actors in the country. This, I believe, is the part of UN configuration which was in the spirit of the GA resolution but perhaps could even be further reinforced. The second is funding. I urge all of Moldova's partners to pool their resources towards national programs, many of which are supported by the UNICEF. One example is the refugee inclusion window in our MPTF, in our local trust fund, in support of the National Programme for Integration of Foreigners. We need more of these to be able to ensure scale, adaptability, and responsiveness of our cooperation framework. Finally, on interoperability. Without prejudice, Member States, on how you will decide to take the scope of the cooperation framework further, its authority further. Please allow us, allow us the team sitting on the ground to capture the depth and rigor of agency-specific platforms in one interoperable digital platform. Mr. President, humor me one anecdote. I worked as a national program officer in my home country for more than 10 years. Nothing beats the capacity of a UN agency colleague, managing his or her own programs, in reporting, capturing the results of those activities, allow the UN system collectively at the country level to capture that depth and rigor. Excellencies, you've given us great resources for, um, for the Resident Coordinator System, and coordination is working. We hope to develop on those gains and for our cooperation framework going forward, which will reflect our government's ultimate UN decision— partnership decisions. It's their decisions, but anchor us further in the national strategies and programs for achieving the Global Goals, with the overarching goal to reduce poverty at its core. I thank you, and I thank the Government of Moldova for the remarkable partnership. Thank you.


Dominican Republic · Vice President · Wellington Ben Cosme [19:23]:

I thank the Resident Coordinator in Moldova. I now invite Mr. Stephen Jackson, United Nations Resident Coordinator in China.


UN Secretariat · Resident Coordinator · Stephen Jackson [19:32]:

Chair, Excellencies, good morning. The 2018 UNDS repositioning, as you know, mandated a new generation of UN country teams with needs-based country presence— and I'm leaning into that phrase, needs-based— in order to facilitate joined-up, scaled-up support for the 2030 Agenda. From my experience as Resident Coordinator in Gabon at the start of the reforms, and then for the last 5 years in Kenya, and now for the last 2 months in China, I've seen real progress. In Kenya, for example, over the first 4 years of our cooperation framework, we launched some 20 joint programmes across the UNCT, uniting diverse UN entities to deliver as one, and catalyzed and supported by a growing country-level pooled fund. And already in those 4 years, half of our total programme value year on year was being delivered jointly, through joint programming, joint programmes, under one cooperation framework. So lots of good progress to report. How can UN country teams continue to go further? I could save us all a lot of time by just saying what they said, because there is profound agreement, particularly with what Georges and Yacine have just said, but let me just underline some of the same points with a spin from my own perspective. First, yes, cooperation frameworks must provide the overarching structure for all UN engagement at country level, and I mean all, converging us in joint work around a small set of tight shared strategic objectives. George, I think you were very eloquent on this point. The cooperation frameworks must sincerely reflect the top national priorities, and again the word 'top' is really important there. We all know how many priorities that there are in any country, but what are the top priorities and how can we gear our support towards those? The cooperation frameworks must capture the full range of UN country-level activities, not in a way that is restrictive or restricting, but that is comprehensive. So that synergies become obvious, opportunities for joint programming obvious, and duplication and waste can be eliminated. And these cooperation frameworks must be collectively developed and owned across the UN family, so that the inevitable trade-offs and hard choices, including on what the country-level configuration should look like, that those trade-offs are collectively identified and collectively owned. Second, yes, there must be mutual visibility and transparency across the activities of the as many as 25, 26 agencies that we had in UN-Kenya. Each entity needs to understand everybody else's portfolio, and Resident Coordinators need to be enabled to coordinate across a unified results framework and a single joint work plan.. And yes, that does mean, as you've heard this morning, CPDs, country programme documents, or their equivalents— not everybody calls them CPDs— they must be genuinely derived from the cooperation framework, not just loosely aligning with it. And that does have implications for aligning planning cycles. Cooperation frameworks need to go first, and then the CPDs. So again, Georges, really agree with you on that. We heard earlier in the week that there are some nervousnesses from some agencies, funds and programmes that changing planning cycles could risk interruption of service. I think that there are very easy fixes for that. We may need a transitional moment where we bring the planning cycles progressively into line, but we need to do it. And that's going to require firm messaging from you, the member states, who are members of those boards of the UN entities or the governing assemblies. We need your leadership there, and we need consistency in the language that you give us in this very valued ECOSOC segment with what you're saying or your colleagues are saying in the boards. And then country-level configuration decisions should flow rigorously from that collective strategic decision-making that is anchored in the cooperation framework. Third, and again we've heard this earlier, equal application of the cooperation framework to in-country and non-resident UN entities alike. And in fact, that distinction between resident and non-resident has been pretty irrelevant or disappearing over the last decade, especially in the increasing portfolio of upper-middle-income and high-income contexts where country teams are now working. Those contexts in particular demand really punctual, highly specialized policy expertise that isn't readily found in the agencies' funds and programs that are embedded, fixed on the ground, with all of the impedimenta of accreditation, permanent representation, relatively fixed staffing and program and costs. Increasingly, that type of specialist expertise needs to be met instead through much more lightweight, low-cost, and yes, flexible models, embedding experts who borrow a desk and support within a resident coordinator's office or hosted within one of the larger agencies, funds, or programs on the ground. Here I'm talking about deployment from the regional or indeed the global level, and so it follows logically from there that, but what we need is a quick, simple, reliable expertise— mechanism for tapping into regional or global pools of expertise, the expertise-on-demand model. Fourth and finally, interoperable digital platforms, and yes, you put your finger on it. UNINFO that we have at the moment is potentially very powerful, but it's limited by its inability to plug and play with agency systems. Simply put, we have double entry, so agencies, funds and programmes do their own reporting in their own systems, and then this has to be manually re-entered, either by RCO staff or those same agencies, funds and programme staff, in UNINFO. We need to invest in the interoperability. The UN80 work stream on technology and data promises a platform to streamline common results reporting for clarity and efficiency, and you heard about this from Jens Vandelle just yesterday. Host governments, most important partners and UN entities, all of us will benefit hugely from having this real-time shared visibility of how programmes are advancing or where they're faltering, and understanding the financial data and the progress. This common information point couldn't be more important, so please hold our feet to the fire about it collectively. To conclude, empowered Resident Coordinators are central to all of these further reforms, but not as gatekeepers. We don't intend to be gatekeepers, we want to be gateways. We unite efforts, we reduce frictions and inefficiencies, and we help UN Country Teams tap into far greater quanta of development financing through new partnerships. Excellencies, I know of no UN Country Team anywhere nor of any Resident Coordinator who are not resolutely striving daily to accelerate their country's journey towards the SDGs. And with your support on these points, I believe we can go much further. Thank you.


Dominican Republic · Vice President · Wellington Ben Cosme [27:18]:

I thank the Resident Coordinator in China for his intervention. Before moving on, I wish to invite delegation wishing to participate in interactive discussion to go ahead and press the microphone button to indicate their request to intervene. In the same note, I'd like to remind speakers that in order to allow sufficient participation, there will be a 3-minute limit for statements on behalf of groups and 2 minutes for national statements. I now have the distinct privilege to invite to the floor our lead discussant, and invite His Excellency, my colleague Omar Hilali, Permanent Representative of Morocco, to make a statement.


Morocco · Permanent Representative · Omar Hilali [28:11]:

Thank you very much, Mr. Vice President. I would like to also to thank you for inviting me and also to express our appreciation to our distinguished panelists for their thoughtful and substantive presentations. Your interventions have highlighted the key points. Questions of configuration and regional architecture are not merely institutional discussions. They go to the heart of whether the United Nations development system can respond effectively to the diverse with the reality and priorities of program countries. We also welcome the presence and participation of different regional coordinators from different regions. From Morocco's perspective, as we undertake this effort for enhancing coherence across the system, it is essential that we remain attentive to national contexts and avoid approaches that in practice could become overly standardized— standardized or one-size-fits-all. On cooperation framework, Morocco fully supports that these frameworks are the central organizing instrument for United Nations support at the country level, and they are essential to strengthen alignment with the country programmes of individual entities. At the same time, such alignment must preserve national ownership, respect national planning cycles, and avoid unnecessary disruption to programmes that are already delivering concrete results on the ground. The cooperation framework should then serve as flexible enabling platform for more integrated action. Allow me now to highlight two considerations in this regard. First, host country priorities and national frameworks must remain at the center of any configuration or alignment exercise. As we work toward greater synchronization between cooperation frameworks, and entity-country programmes, maintaining continuity in a long programme or preserving trusted operational presence in the field may be more important than achieving immediate and complete alignment of documents or timelines. Second, the pursuit of coherence should focus above all on how we work and and deliver together. I believe we can agree that the central challenge is not the existence of different programming documents, but rather the need for more integrated implementation, stronger joint monitoring, and clearer collective accountability for results. Future alignment can and should be strengthened through better designated joint programs, pooled resources, and shared resource frameworks without repeatedly interrupting operations that are already performing effectively. Sir Vice President, allow me now to turn briefly to the regional dimension. This segment and today's panel has given the opportunity to share important ideas regarding regional architectures and platforms in light of the proposals of SG's report. Here too, we see significant potential provided that this regional arrangement remains clearly oriented towards supporting development priorities at the national level. In this context, It is important to recall that the Regional Economic Commissions possess a longstanding legacy of work that has produced tangible results in support of regional integration, data and analysis, and peer learning. The question, therefore, is not to reinvent or duplicate what has already demonstrated its value, but rather to build upon this experience and connect it more systematically to the priorities identified in cooperation frameworks at the country level. Allow me to raise 3 questions for the panelists' consideration. First, from your perspective, what will be the specific value added of the proposed regional platforms for integration in the context of regional country engagement. Second, while we fully support the aspiration to work more seamlessly across development, humanitarian, peace, and human rights pillars, we must remain attentive to the risks of generalization, particularly where needs and political realities differ significantly from one country to another, even within the same region? How do we ensure that integrated approaches remain significant— sufficiently sensitive to these differences? Third, how will this regional arrangement remains firmly demand-driven and responsive to program countries. From program countries' perspective, the central question is whether engagement with regional mechanisms will facilitate more timely, relevant, and coherent support for national implementation, or whether it might unintentionally creates additional layers of process that may be difficult to navigate. We would welcome the panel's reflection on how best to strike this balance. Mr. Vice President, in conclusion, Morocco supports the broader objective of making cooperation frameworks the anchor of United Nations support and using configuration and regional architecture to strengthen collective impact. As we move forward, however, we believe it's essential to preserve three safeguards. First, avoiding one-size-fits-all approaches. Second, ensuring continuity and predictability of support on the ground. And third, and finally, ensuring that regional solutions built on existing arrangements and expertise built at the level of each region. I thank you very much.


Dominican Republic · Vice President · Wellington Ben Cosme [35:36]:

Our appreciation to the Permanent Representative of Morocco. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Palau on behalf of the Alliance of Small Island States, followed— to be followed by Guyana on behalf of the Caribbean Community, And Mozambique.


Palau · AOSIS [35:57]:

Mr. Vice President, I have the honor to deliver this statement on behalf of the Alliance of Small Island States, and in the interest of time, I will deliver a shortened version. AOSIS welcomes this dialogue, and we thank the panelists for their insightful presentations. As discussions advance under the UNAT process, we must ensure that reform efforts strengthen rather than dilute the ability of the UNDS to respond respond to the realities of Small Island Developing States. For SIDS, tailoring support across the UN system is an operational necessity. Our countries face a convergence of structural vulnerabilities where conventional development approaches simply cannot work. In this regard, EOSYS underscores that any discussion on tailored UN country team configurations and the regional architecture must begin first and foremost with country needs and national priorities and not on institutional convenience. As such, effectiveness cannot be measured solely by efficiency metrics or consolidation objectives. Effectiveness must instead be assessed by whether the system is delivering responsive and context-specific support to program countries. SIDS often require highly specialized expertise that is critically important for implementation of national development plans and strategies. Therefore, the proposed expertise on demand can be a viable approach as long as it is genuinely responsive to national priorities and is agile and accessible in practice. The challenge, however, is ensuring that the right expertise reaches the right countries at the right time. At the same time, expertise on demand cannot become a substitute for sustained institutional presence. Short-term deployments alone cannot replace long-term trusted partnerships institutional memory, or sustained engagement. In this regard, the configurations of UN country teams, especially those covering multi-country office settings, are of paramount importance. Country teams operating in, in these settings require not only technical expertise, but also a deeper understanding of the structural constraints facing the program countries, as well as the trust of host governments. Mr. Vice President, for SIDS, proximity matters, presence matters, trusted partnerships matter. Therefore, the central question is not whether reform should occur, but whether the proposed reforms will result in a stronger and more responsive development system on the ground. Before conclusions are reached, Member States must have a clear understanding of what specific changes are being proposed, how they would operate in practice, what gaps they are intended to address, and how they would strengthen delivery for SIDS, especially those covered by multi-country office settings. EOSYS will continue to engage constructively throughout this process with the objective of ensuring that reforms strengthen implementation of the QCPR and ultimately deliver a more effective and responsive development system for SIDS. I thank you.


Dominican Republic · Vice President · Wellington Ben Cosme [38:52]:

I thank the distinguished representative of Palau. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Guyana on behalf of the Caribbean community.


Guyana · CARICOM [39:01]:

Mr. Vice President, it is my honor to deliver this statement on behalf of the 14 member states of the Caribbean community, CARICOM. We extend appreciation to the panelists for their presentation. CARICOM recognizes the importance of efforts to strengthen the effectiveness, coherence, and delivery of the UN development system, including through a reinvigorated Resident Coordinator System. The 2026 UN SDG Chair's Report affirms how central this system is to UN development support, while identifying that rising demands are being met with declining resources. The Caribbean hosts 4 of the 9 UN multi-country offices globally, in addition to dedicated offices in Haiti and Guyana. Our highly vulnerable Small Island Developing States depends heavily on responsive and coordinated UN country teams, particularly as climate-related disasters intensify in frequency and severity. Dedicated coordination capacities are crucial to facilitating coherent and integrated UN support at country level. As such, a tailored approach to national development plans should include sustained access access to strategic and specialized support on which program countries rely. CARICOM, therefore, is keenly interested in the implications of the UNAT Initiative, including proposals related to the regional reset under Workstream 3. While we support efforts to improve efficiency, reforms cannot be one-size-fits-all. Adjustments being made must not dilute in-country expertise. Reduce responsiveness or undermine priorities such as climate resilience and disaster preparedness. We look forward to receiving timely information about proposed initiatives such as the Joint Knowledge Hubs. Mr. Vice President, at a time when SDG progress is alarmingly off track and official development assistance is declining, the RC system is more critical than ever. Reductions should be balanced with sustainable corresponding arrangements that account for multidimensional vulnerability and resilience needs. Caricom foreign ministers have emphasized that any recalibration of the UN development system must safeguard local presence, ensure predictable and sustainable financing, and prioritize delivery tailored to the unique vulnerabilities and capacity constraints. Of SIDS. CARICOM will engage constructively in these discussions with the goal of a strong and adequately resourced system to accelerate SDG implementation. I thank you.


Dominican Republic · Vice President · Wellington Ben Cosme [41:48]:

I thank the distinguished representative, the Ambassador of Guyana. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Mozambique.


Mozambique [41:57]:

Thank you, Vice Chair. Thank you. And thank you, the panellists, for their insights. We were among the original Delivering as One pilot countries, having volunteered at the end of 2006 and adopted the approach in 2007. Today, with 25 agencies, funds, programmes working with us under the cooperation framework, the question for us is how to equip to equip, finance, and empower a coordinated UN country team to deliver transformation at scale. To be frank, the results are mixed. If the ultimate logic of development cooperation is to strengthen national systems to the point where external support becomes less necessary, then the continued scale of needs reminds us that we still have a long way to go. Musa Miq, multi-layered and evolving challenges are well known. As far as we are concerned, those challenges cannot be solved project by project. As my former boss used to say, sometimes one feels like a minister of projects, managing the administrative demands of projects rather than driving national transformation. Our challenges require a UN country team configuration that is not driven by agency footprint, historical presence, or fundraising incentives, but by national priorities, cooperation framework outcomes, and the capacities needed to deliver them. We are therefore in favor of a differentiated and modular approach to UNCT configuration, one that leverages surge capacity and expertise on demand while preserving sustained country-level presence, institutional memory, in trust with national counterparts. This can be done. We're looking forward to work with the UN system and form follows function, indeed. Thank you.


Dominican Republic · Vice President · Wellington Ben Cosme [43:57]:

I thank the distinguished representative of Mozambique. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Norway on behalf of the Group of Friends on Disaster Risk Reduction.


Norway [44:09]:

Vice President, Excellencies, As I just said, I have the really great honour to deliver this statement on behalf of Australia, Indonesia, Peru, and Norway as co-chairs of the Group of Friends for Disaster Risk Reduction, representing member states committed to strengthening resilience worldwide. We really would like to thank you, Vice President, for convening this session, but not the least to the panellists and the speakers for really excellent contributions. As we look toward a more impactful An Equitable UN Development System, we underscore that disaster risk reduction must remain an integral part of how support is tailored to different country contexts. Today's development gains are increasingly threatened by compounding risks from climate shocks to systemic vulnerabilities. This underscores the importance of prevention-oriented approaches across the work of UN country teams. The UNAID reforms, including ongoing efforts to strengthen the UN Development System, offer us a critical opportunity to ensure that countries access relevant capacities. For DRR, this is particularly relevant. A large share of technical expertise sits at regional and global levels and can be more effectively leveraged through coordinated, demand-driven approaches that respond to national priorities. Priorities. Several UNAT Work Packages include, as we know, a strong focus on risk reduction, early warning, and prevention. This provides a strong foundation for enhancing support that brings together expertise and help address shared and transboundary risks. We encourage building practices that support risk-informed development, early warning systems,— and resilience planning, leveraging the UN Plan of Action on the RR for resilience adopted back in 2016. At the same time, UN country team configurations should remain responsive to country-specific contexts and risk profiles. Countries facing climate vulnerability, structural vulnerability, or disaster risks will benefit from more tailored support that integrates DRR across planning, financing, and implementation. This includes strengthening capacities for risk understanding and more coherent policy approaches across the sectors. In closing, investing in disaster risk reduction is an investment in sustainable development. A UN Development System that puts prevention, resilience, and risk-informed approaches at its core, will be better equipped to deliver lasting results for all of us. Thank you.


Dominican Republic · Vice President · Wellington Ben Cosme [46:57]:

I thank the distinguished representative of Norway. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Netherlands, followed by Switzerland and United Kingdom.


Netherlands (Kingdom of the) [47:09]:

Thank you, Mr. Vice President. The Kingdom of the Netherlands welcomes this discussion. Effective UNCT configuration is foundational to coherent, impactful delivery at country level. And in the presence of the resident coordinators, let me again— let me reiterate our strong support for your work. Currently, UNCT composition continues to be driven by institutional presence and funding interest rather than national priorities and genuine value added. The CF must be the real driver of who is present in what capacity and with what resources, and the resident coordinators must have a formal role in those decision decisions. We welcome this update on UNCT reconfigurations. Reports ahead of this session and this year OAS so far have provided limited visibility on concrete progress, and given that reconfiguration touches on institutional presence, funding interests, and mandates, transparent stocktaking is essential. We express our strong support for the proposals presented, but we cannot ignore emerging friction. Mr. Jackson already referred to UNDP's remarks yesterday on the sequencing, and a letter of several agencies have flagged further reservations. This illustrates how politically complex— politically and institutionally complex this process is. So I have the following questions. What concrete steps are you taking to implement what is proposed? And what concrete steps we, including in the lead-up to the Executive Board, as members, need to take to unblock this process and provide political backing? Thank you.


Dominican Republic · Vice President · Wellington Ben Cosme [48:41]:

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


Switzerland [48:49]:

Thank you, Chair. Thank you, panelists. And I would like to take the opportunity to thank the resident coordinators here, but also in general for their important work, often in very difficult situations. A lot of what has been presented makes so much sense to us. Sequencing of the strategic documents with the primacy of the UN cooperation frameworks is what is needed, and we will strongly support that also in the executive boards that are coming, that are following the OAS. Country teams configuration, as you mentioned, should already be tailored according to the needs and the needs also of the cooperation frameworks. So let me just ask, you know, what is needed so that resident coordinators can better push for that? Is the authority that you have and the instruments that you have, is it enough, or what do you need from us to support you to deliver on this? Then could you elaborate a bit more on the expertise on demand? How concretely will that work, and what will be the role of the resident coordinators with often limited resources also? How will you be able to respond and to ensure that expertise on demand is delivered in the right way. Finally, let me just also mention our support for the digital delivering and showing of results and impact. It is what we need, and we strongly support that strive. Thank you very much.


Dominican Republic · Vice President · Wellington Ben Cosme [50:46]:

I thank the distinguished representative of Switzerland. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of the United Kingdom.


United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland [50:53]:

Thank you, Vice President, and thank you to the panelists at this session for their valuable insights. The UK welcomes this opportunity this session provides to engage with those with firsthand experience of where the UN development system is currently excelling and where there is clear need to improve. With the SDGs off track and the uncertain global economic picture, a more coherent, agile, and tailored UN development system is essential. I'll keep my input brief, but I wanted to pose 3 quick questions to the panel based on what we've discussed so far this morning. First, as we've heard, ensuring the centrality and precedence of the cooperation frameworks in defining in-country activities and presence of the UN country team will be vital in creating a one UN approach in country. What discussions do you have with agency reps in country if you feel an agency's work is not aligned closely enough with the cooperation framework, and what response do you usually receive? Second, and relatedly, do you feel the prevailing trend among agencies is to align more closely with cooperation frameworks, or is fragmentation remaining stubbornly high in the view of RCs? And finally, we've had concrete ideas from many RCs at different stages of the UN80 process regarding potential changes that can be made at country level to make the UN development system work more effectively. If you were to select one primary reform that member states should get behind, within or beyond current UNHCR work packages? What would this be and what impact would it have on the ground? Can you please make clear what is needed from member states and what is in the hands of the UN itself? Thank you.


Dominican Republic · Vice President · Wellington Ben Cosme [52:27]:

I thank the distinguished representative of the United Kingdom. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Algeria, to be followed by Sweden and Ireland.


Algeria [52:38]:

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. President, Madam Chair and distinguished panelists, Algeria welcomes the discussion on improving how the United Nations supports countries in meeting their development goals. Today's global challenges, such as climate change and rising debt, require more flexible and country-focused solutions. From Algeria's perspective, we believe that cooperation frameworks These priorities should not only guide overall strategy, but also direct— shape— directly shape how UN country teams are organized and operate. These teams should be designed around each country's specific priorities, with strong leadership from resident coordinators to ensure better coordination and avoid duplication. It's important to balance strong presence at the country level with access to regional and global expertise, ensuring that the UN Development System remains both responsive to national priorities and capable of drawing on specialized knowledge when needed. To make this flexibility effective, it must be supported by reliable funding and robust accountability mechanisms that ensure impactful, tangible, and measurable results. To conclude, Algeria calls for a more adaptive and coordinated UN development system that puts national priorities first and is better equipped to respond to changing needs in order to achieve the goals of the 2030 Agenda. I thank you.


Dominican Republic · Vice President · Wellington Ben Cosme [54:24]:

I thank the distinguished representative of Algeria, also vice president of ECOSOC. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Sweden.


Sweden [54:34]:

Thank you, Mr. Vice President. Excellencies, Sweden welcomes the participation of the resident coordinators here today, whose insights help ground our discussions in operational realities. Over the past days, member states have called for a more tailored UN presence— demand-driven, context-based, and agile. At the same time, we must be realistic. We do not foresee a significant increase in ODA or a broader donor base. How do we strike the right balance between ambition and realism, between growing needs and constrained resources? In Sweden's view, the situation calls for a slimmer, more focused UN presence at country level, supported by strong regional architecture and access to expertise on demand. Resources must prioritize delivery and technical expertise over administrative overhead. Needs continue to far exceed available resources. This makes it critical for the UN to build on its comparative advantages and to focus where it can have the greatest impact. If resources remain constrained, how can we organize the UN's presence to maximize impact, coherence, and results? The UNAD process provides an opportunity to accelerate a reforms, including a stronger RC system and a fit-for-purpose UN country presence. Sweden, together with Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, the Netherlands, the UK, and Ireland, a group of countries referred to as the Nordic Plus, have taken the initiative to support country-level leadership to strengthen UN delivery by engaging coherently and proactively in countries where new cooperation frameworks are being developed, We are seeking to help advance the elements of the reform agenda from 2018 that have experienced lower level of implementation. This initiative is practical and reform-oriented. While the UN is responsible for its effectiveness, Member States and partners also shape the conditions under which it operates. Our objective is clear: to help create the incentives, partnerships, and ways of working needed for a more impactful UN. I thank the distinguished representative of Sweden.


Dominican Republic · Vice President · Wellington Ben Cosme [56:39]:

I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Ireland.


Ireland [56:44]:

Thank you, Vice President, and to each of the panellists for sharing their insights this morning. It's been really helpful. The ORC system and a fit-for-purpose UN country team are fundamental to the UN development system delivering the important results that it does day in and day out for millions of people globally. Advancements have been made since 2018, but in our view, the full potential of the ORCE Centre's approach is yet to be unlocked. The recalibration of the system mandated by the QCPR, together with the UN80 process, presents a real opportunity to evolve. To enable that vision, Ireland believes in properly and consistently funded ORCE system and an ORCE that is empowered to mobilize those resources to ensure delivery of outcomes guided by coherent planning documents defined by national priorities. To allow the ORC to play this envisioned central role, accountability incentive structures at all levels of the UN development system must be better aligned towards country priorities and needs. It's vital also that the ORC be equipped with the requisite skills, access to expertise, and top-down management support to uphold system-wide coherence across deeply interconnected spheres of peace and security, human rights, and development. While applicable across the system, this is particularly acute in fragile and conflict-affected settings, as well as transition contexts. Finally, a kind of question to the, the panelists: we talk a lot about coherence of effort in the UN development system, and as member states, we have a responsibility to be consistent in our guidance to that system, whether that be here in ECOSOC or at the boards. Um, we're interested also in your views on how our embassies representatives in country can support your work. So the thoughts that you have on that would be interesting. Thank you.


Dominican Republic · Vice President · Wellington Ben Cosme [58:25]:

I thank the distinguished representative of Ireland. I give the floor to Mexico.


Mexico [58:38]:

Thank you very much, Mr. Vice President. We're grateful for the organization of this exchange of views, and we acknowledge the efforts the regional coordinators and UN country teams in countries. We would like to highlight the value of appropriate regionalization to improve response times, access to specialists, and the relevance of solutions for regions with common challenges such as Latin America and the Caribbean. In this context, we believe that it is fundamental to continue strengthening coordination of the development system and promote more integrated responses that make it possible to address simultaneously economic, social, and environmental challenges. As has been highlighted during the panel, we reiterate the values— the value of cooperation frameworks to have work really focus on national priorities, and this implies that we have to acknowledge that development challenges are not homogenous. And that solutions must be adapted to the specific realities of each context. We consider particularly valuable to work with an approach based on responding to specific national circumstances and structural challenges that various countries confront, including those related to fiscal restrictions, high levels of indebtedness, climate challenges, and other factors that limit their capacities to achieve implementation of SDGs. I'd also like to highlight the value of South-South and triangular cooperation as a complement to traditional modalities of cooperation. And for countries with a dual status such as Mexico, these represent an opportunity to strengthen our institutional capacities and promote—


Dominican Republic · Vice President · Wellington Ben Cosme [1:00:34]:

unfortunately, the microphone is switched off. Gracias, el distinguidor presidente. I thank Mexico Floor to the distinguished representative of Pakistan, to be followed by Nepal and Ukraine.


Pakistan [1:00:46]:

Mr. Vice President, we thank the panelists for their interventions. We will focus on the following 4 areas. First, on the idea of entities sequencing CPDs after cooperation frameworks, we would like to understand from those on the ground how would this be implemented in practice. One concern raised yesterday by the UNDP administrator and also mentioned by one of the panelists was interruption of delivery services on the ground. So does sequencing mean that planning for CPDs should not start until after cooperation frameworks are finalized and signed? Or does it mean we will stagger the cooperation frameworks and CPDs in terms of the cooperation frameworks ending, for example, in a year, 2027,, and the CPDs ending a year after, so that there's no interruption in delivery of services on the ground. So it was mentioned that there are quick technical fixes to, to this issue, so we would like to understand how the issue of interruption of delivery services on the ground will be handled. Then secondly, on UNCT configuration, we see merit in having a more focused configuration of UN presence on the ground, but we would like more deliberations on the criteria and procedure for configuration. The process should be led or co-led by host governments, and recommendations emanating from that need to be endorsed by host governments. This seems to be lacking in the QCPR report, where it is proposed that the RC recommendations get directly elevated to the regional and global level. And then on the regional reset, we are unconvinced on the proposal to replace RCPs with RPIs. I will not repeat the concerns we have raised multiple times due to a lack of time here today,, and on the expertise on demand mechanism as well, we need more clarity on who would trigger the request, who would pay for this mechanism, and would this expertise be an adequate substitute for sustained country-level presence. Thank you.


Dominican Republic · Vice President · Wellington Ben Cosme [1:02:42]:

I thank the distinguished representative of Pakistan. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Nepal.


Nepal [1:02:50]:

Mr. Chair, Nepal's experience demonstrates that the cooperation frameworks work best when it serves as central strategic instrument guiding the entire UN country team and aligning support with national development priorities. Now, let me highlight a few points on these areas. First, we see particular value in a strong and empowered resident coordinator system. They are the development experts, and we are— so we are interested to know more about this expertise on demand. We want to know if this is an investment in effective coordination and development solutions for countries they are assigned to. The RC system in Nepal has been instrumental in steering UN engagement around 7 key transitions for SDG acceleration, from jobs and social protection to climate action, digital transformation, financing, food systems, education, and health. Second, country needs should determine UNCT configuration. As countries' needs evolve,, the UN system should align with them. Nepal's priorities, as I stated above, so the UNCT should remain flexible and responsive to these national circumstances. Third, regional expertise should complement country presence. We want to know— we want to have more clarity on this area as well. And developing countries, especially the countries in special situations, must have predictable and timely access to these high-quality quality UN expertise and technical support. In closing, the measure of effectiveness is not a number of UN entities present in the country, but the extent to which the UN development system delivers tangible results. We need results on ground, and Nepal stands ready to work closely with Member States and partners for strengthening a more agile, well-resourced, and impactful United Nations development system, including under the UNEAT initiative. Thank you.


Dominican Republic · Vice President · Wellington Ben Cosme [1:04:41]:

I thank the distinguished representative of Nepal. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Ukraine.


Ukraine [1:04:50]:

Thank you, Mr. President. Ukraine strongly supports efforts to ensure that UN country teams are configured and mobilized in line with national development priorities and country-specific needs. In our view, cooperation frameworks should be be practical instruments that guide not only planning, but also the composition, capacities, and delivery of the UN system at the country level. Ukraine's experience demonstrates the importance of a coordinated and flexible UN presence. More than 20 UN entities are currently operating in Ukraine across humanitarian, recovery, development, human rights, and resilience-related areas. In such a complex environment, effective coordination in the search is essential to ensure coherence, avoid duplication, and maximize impact. The Resident Coordinator plays a central role in this process. We have seen how strong coordination helps bring together the comparative advantages of different UN entities and align their efforts with national priorities. We therefore support support continued strengthening of the Resident Coordinator System and ensuring that Resident Coordinators have the authority and resources necessary to perform their coordination functions effectively. We would also like to highlight the value of flexible access to regional and global expertise, particularly in countries facing complex and evolving challenges. Such support can strengthen UN delivery provided in complements a strong country-level presence, and remains guided by national priorities. Ukraine remains grateful for the support of the UN system and values its contribution to strengthening the resilience of our institutions and communities in face of Russia's ongoing full-scale war of aggression against Ukraine. I thank you very much.


Dominican Republic · Vice President · Wellington Ben Cosme [1:06:43]:

I thank the distinguished representative of Ukraine. Cedo ahora la palabra al distinguido representante. I give the floor to Colombia.


Colombia [1:06:53]:

Thank you very much, Mr. Vice President. I would like to applaud your work today. I also would like to welcome the resident coordinators here and applaud the work of all your colleagues around the world and the importance of the way you interpret the realities on the ground which we're discussing here today. Mr. Chairman, I'd like to convey to you that Colombia strongly believes that the effectiveness of the work of resident coordinators has to be more relevant in terms of appropriate financing, internal coherence, and the use of South-South and triangular cooperation, and take advantage of the opportunities represented by the UNAID reform. As far as financing. This should be based on genuine solidarity. It must be inspired by universal values and must promote the action of the receiving state by strengthening its national capacities. As far as internal coherence, I think it's important to take into account the long history of Colombia in its relationship with the UN and its agencies on the ground, and we'd like to reiterate our appeal, historic appeal for a greater internal coordination and better quality of support on sensitive topics, as well as focus on national priorities. As far as South-South cooperation, we reiterate the importance of this instrument due to its horizontality and the respect that it grants to the work of countries. Colombia is ready to share its experiences to work with all of you and to promote the reform of UNAID in favor of the work of UN Resident Coordinators. Thank you.


Dominican Republic · Vice President · Wellington Ben Cosme [1:08:38]:

Thank you very much, Ambassador Representative of Colombia. To the distinguished representative of Indonesia, to be followed by China and Guatemala.


Indonesia [1:08:50]:

Thank you, Mr. Vice President. We thank the panelists for their presentations. Indonesia's Experience shows that cooperation frameworks are most effective when firmly anchored in national development priorities. For Indonesia, efficiency must mean stronger coordination, less bureaucracy, and better use of existing capacities. The RC's role is essential in this regard, including through regular, structured, and transparent dialogue with program countries. Strengthening the RC system also requires due attention to balanced regional representation so that its leadership reflects diverse development contexts and experiences. On expertise on demand, this should not create additional costs or new layers of complexity. It should make expertise more accessible, including through national and local experts, local governments, and implementing partners. Local expertise brings context contextual knowledge, institutional memory, trust, and proximity to implementation realities. It can also reduce costs, strengthen national capacity, and ensure long-term development impact. In Southeast Asia, mechanisms already exist, including between ESCAP and ASEAN. The task is therefore not to create parallel structures, but to better connect and operationalize what has already been built. Including through South-South and triangular cooperation. Our question is, how can Expertise on Demand better use existing regional mechanisms while preserving national ownership, affordability, and meaningful capacity building for program countries? Thank you.


Dominican Republic · Vice President · Wellington Ben Cosme [1:10:31]:

I thank the distinguished representative of Indonesia. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of China.


China [1:10:38]:

Thank you, Mr. Thank you, President. China appreciates this very frank and pragmatic discussions with the panelists, shedding light further on the regional reconfiguration and the country team reset proposals of the SG. The GA Resolution 72/279 sets out the mandates and also the contents for the repositioning of the UN Development System that has been achieving results according to the SG's latest report. But at the same time, the international situation is rapidly changing and new challenges are coming, but the funding for development is declining over the past couple of years and the various conflicts and the crises are making the situation even more complex. Therefore, flexibility and also coherence of the UN Development System as a whole is more critical today than ever before. China supports the UNHCR initiative's direction and ambition and also believes that a stronger UN country team and the regional cooperation aligned very, very closely with the host country's priorities and needs and respecting country leadership and ownership is critical in order to ensure valuable capital variable funding can be used for programs in order to support the abilities and also development efforts of the host countries. Along the line, we welcome the discussions like today, but with the hope that in the future, the panelists can be from more diversified areas and more representative of the different countries in different situations. In order to truly, through case studies, to reflect how ASEAN working together with members of the UN Country Team can enable a stronger UN response and a delivery of humanitarian aid. I thank the distinguished representative of China.


Dominican Republic · Vice President · Wellington Ben Cosme [1:12:43]:

Ahora cedo la palabra— I now give the floor to the representative of Guatemala.


Guatemala [1:12:51]:

Thank you. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Vice President, forgive me, the floor for Guatemala. The— an effective development system must also be relevant. The system should respond to the needs and specific realities of each country and not to uniform schemes. We believe it's essential to have timely access to specialized expertise, including non-resident capacities when they provide added value to national capacities, and national capacities that are strengthened on the ground. For countries that confront fiscal restrictions, climate vulnerabilities, and other structural challenges, this requires flexible multidisciplinary supports geared towards results without enhancing fragmentation or administrative burden. Thank you very much, Mr. Vice President.


Dominican Republic · Vice President · Wellington Ben Cosme [1:13:49]:

Thank you, Guatemala. I give the floor to the distinguished representative of the European Union.


EU · EU [1:13:55]:

Thank you, Vice President, and thank you for all the interventions to the panelists. Excellencies, colleagues, I have the honor to deliver this statement on behalf of the EU and its member states. We are very glad to see several Resident Coordinators in the room. They are the backbone of the UN Development System on the ground, and OAS is fully meaningful only with their participation. The question before us is simple: how do we ensure the UN's presence on the ground is as agile, coherent, and impactful as the challenges we face? The answer lies in 3 shifts: from fragmentation to unity, from rigidity to adaptability, and from global processes to country-owned results. First, for this to happen, cooperation frameworks must become the strategic anchor of the UN country teams. We have seen how cooperation frameworks can align UN teams behind national priorities,, but only when they are treated as mandatory, not optional. Critically, entity-country-program documents must be derived from and aligned with the frameworks, not the other way round. RCs need to be empowered to reconfigure teams on the basis of it and national priorities, ensuring the UN delivers as one coherent system in support of country-owned development goals. Second, delivering better results requires better access to expertise as well as leaner operations. The EU has backed models like the Expertise on Demand mechanism and regional rosters because they work. For example, the Climate Advisers in the Caribbean. But this only succeeds if our seas can access expertise without bureaucratic delays, and if entities are rewarded for sharing capacity, not hoarding it. Beyond expertise, operational efficiency must improve. The EU strongly supports reducing duplication and streamlining operations through strengthened shared service delivery. Third, and finally, the EU strongly supports a fundamental shift in how country teams configuration decisions are made. They must be purpose-built, to respond to national priorities and tailored to national contexts. This means that configuration decisions should be taken jointly by the UN entity, the host government, and the resident coordinator. Executive boards will have an important role to play in the reconfiguration of the UN country teams, especially when moving from fragmentation to unity. They will need to enforce country cooperation frameworks. Alignment. In conclusion, the EU supports the objective of a stronger, more focused UN with country teams reconfigured around national SDG priorities, —drawing on the full system expertise available on demand. In this regard, the EU strongly supports a clear roadmap that turns UN Country Team reconfiguration into concrete, context-specific action. And this brings me to our question this morning: What would a realistic implementation plan look like? One that translates cooperation frameworks into tailored UN Country Team configurations, not just on paper, but in practice. Thank you.


Dominican Republic · Vice President · Wellington Ben Cosme [1:16:26]:

I thank the distinguished representative of the European Union. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Australia, to be followed by Armenia and Canada.


Australia [1:16:39]:

Thank you very much, Vice President, and thank you to the presenters today. I'll keep my comment just to one question only. The UN SDG report flags that the management and accountability framework is in the process of being revised and would really welcome advice on this process in timelines, what elements of the MAF are being prioritized for implementation and review? Thank you very much.


Dominican Republic · Vice President · Wellington Ben Cosme [1:17:06]:

Thank you very much to the distinguished representative of Australia. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Armenia.


Armenia [1:17:15]:

Thank you, Chair, and we thank the panelists for sharing their perspectives. Armenia believes that the ultimate measure of success of any reform of the UN development system is whether it enhances the quality, effectiveness, and responsiveness of the support provided to program countries on the ground and results in strengthening national capacities. And in this regard, we would like to share our perspectives on supporting delivery in the context of the ongoing reforms. First, we recognize the important role of the UN Resident Coordinators in ensuring coherence across the UN country team in supporting national needs and priorities, bringing together normative and operative pillars of the UNDS, drawing on the comparative advantage of any UN entity. Second, we emphasize that reconfiguration of the UN country teams has to be tailored to host country needs, with the Cooperation Framework positioned to serve as the national compact for system-wide support. However, such configuration needs to result in strengthening the UN country teams, their mandates, and resources rather than concentrating expertise at the regional level. Challenges in country team configurations and regional arrangements should be guided by the needs and priorities identified identified by program countries themselves. Third, Armenia supports localized UN engagement rooted in proximity to project beneficiaries, with the aim to reach the most vulnerable and operationalize the pledge of leaving no one behind. This is particularly important for countries facing structural constraints, which require sustained daily engagement, high-quality policy advice, and integrated support tailored to national circumstances. And in conclusion, reforms should enhance rather than diminish the UN impact at the country at the country level, and access to specialized expertise in areas critical for sustainable development. Recalibration of the UN presence coordinator system needs to result in strengthening the UN presence on the ground, as well as coherent system-wide response to the development needs. I thank you.


Dominican Republic · Vice President · Wellington Ben Cosme [1:18:59]:

I thank the distinguished representative of Armenia, Vice President of ECOSOC. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Canada.


Canada [1:19:08]:

Thank you, Mr. Vice President, and thank you to the panelists. Especially the resident coordinators. We really appreciate, as ever, your remarks on not just the benefits of the resident coordinator role, but also the complexities in advancing the reforms that we, member states, ask you to carry forward. With regards to the sequencing on sustainable development cooperation frameworks and the country programs, I think we all agree that this is an important process in terms of having a holistic planning and strategic framework for the UN in country. And Stephen, we particularly appreciated your remarks on how they focus on top priorities and the need for trade-offs. Appreciating that there is a role for member states and executive boards and governing bodies in this, we would welcome your thoughts on ideas on how we can further strengthen these efforts and what we can do to support you in, in these processes. And somewhat related, on the reconfiguration of country teams, even if they all are in alignment with the sustainable development cooperation frameworks, I think we can imagine that there might be challenges in reaching consensus or agreement on who remains resident and not, and in what scope or capacity, the country presence is maintained. So we'd be interested in your views on how to design these processes for success and the role you foresee Resident Coordinators having, but also what support you need from Member States for that. And finally, linked to both of these areas on the expertise for demand, Canada— and we've shared this already this week— but we're really pleased to support the Peace and Development Advisers and deployment capacity of these two Resident Coordinators. In complex settings. In our experience, this has been a highly effective and functioning expertise-on-demand model. However, it's one that we find to be significantly underfunded. The demand far outpaces the availability of this expertise, and we imagine it would be similar in other areas of deployable advisors. What role do you, as resident coordinators, foresee in these mechanisms being deployed and designed and implemented in your countries, and specifically, what challenges do you


Dominican Republic · Vice President · Wellington Ben Cosme [1:21:11]:

I thank the distinguished representative of Canada. In the interest of time, I will now invite the panelists to briefly respond to the comments and questions from delegations. And if Mr. José Manuel Salazar is still online— Yes, please go ahead.


ECLAC · Executive Secretary · José Manuel Salazar Girinac [1:21:33]:

Thank you. Thank you very much, Chair. I'd like to answer the 3 questions, if possible, posed by the distinguished representative of Morocco, because I think these are very precise questions, but also because they relate with several of the comments that were made in this excellent round of comments and insights. The first question was, what is the value added of the proposed regional platforms for integration? Okay, I would say that the regional cooperation platforms that we have been operating, you know, in the last few years have contributed significant value added through the IBCs, the Issue Based Coalitions, the working groups. There have been significant forward steps to better coordination and delivery from the regional level to the country level. So in that sense, the idea, the concept of building the RPIs, the new ones, as an upgrade of the RCPs and the lessons learned is a very useful and powerful idea. One aspect of the upgrade is more integrated work across pillars. This is a challenge. In Latin America, ECLAC and UNDP as co-chair, we have done recently an exercise of identifying how the three pillars may relate to each other, what synergies might exist in 13, around 13 areas of work. And we have discussed this with all the members of the RCP, so all the UN agencies, funds, and programs. This was a very valuable exercise. We have done, we have to do more work on it.. But this is the kind of exercise that needs to be done in each region to identify opportunities for a more integrated approach between pillars. And I think this is partly also your second question, what advantage from closer work among pillars, how to advance towards integrated approaches. I think this is one way to advance towards more integrated approaches, identifying area by area the possible synergies. It is heterogeneous in some areas. The potential is very large. In some areas, it's less intense. And finally, the third question will be, will the new modus operandi proposed and the new engagement rules facilitate more effective implementation on a national level, or is this an additional layer of difficulty? I think this is a very important question. It can even be seen as the acid test for the success of any reform. Neither countries nor the UN system leaders want more layers of difficulty and bureaucracy. And this has been very much part of the conversation— how to have better coordination with new procedures that are light and facilitators rather than heavy and that increase frictions or transaction costs. I'd like to refer briefly to two risks of adding additional layers of difficulty that we have been discussing and that indeed were mentioned in this round of comments. One is the single entry point idea through the RCs, or what is now called the gateway function. As I said in my statement, ECLAC, for instance, received 167 requests directly for technical assistance last year from Latin American countries and Caribbean countries. The direct access to regional economic commissions is something natural, given that each regional economic commission supports a secretariat, more than 10 intergovernmental bodies. In the case of ECLAC, it's around 14 intergovernmental bodies, to be precise. Those are communities of practice that include ministers, vice ministers, heads of department, policymakers, experts. So there's an enormous amount of trust and excellent relations that have been built through over the years between those authorities and experts and the respective personnel of regional economic commissions and of course other regional UN agencies. At the regional level. This makes it very natural and explains why countries value tremendously the possibility of requesting different types of support directly from regional economic commissions. And that is why we, the regional economic commissions, have been arguing about the importance of maintaining this opportunity of direct access from governments to REDS by not having a strict interpretation of single entry point. Of course, we can improve coordination with the Brazilian coordinators in making sure that the as gateways of activities at the national level are well informed about the request and are not surprised and can take this into account into their planning. But we have been arguing against this strict interpretation. And the second example, I will finish with this, is the idea of country cooperation frameworks as anchors for the work of the whole UN. This is a very important, very powerful idea. We have been insisting in the need to have flexibility and agility with this instrument. The world is changing fast. Megatrends are accelerating. Also, even within the same national government, national priorities might change or be adjusted for good reasons along the way. The fluidity of the world and national circumstances mean that it is impossible, or even better say, unadvisable, to have frameworks that are fixed for 4 years. Modern management ideas advise a flexible and adaptive approach. This is also one of the reasons why foresight and anticipatory governance that the UN itself is promoting is so important. So this diagnosis should be translated into an approach that is flexible, adaptive, and dynamic in the use of the implementation and implementation of the cooperation frameworks as anchors. So idea is powerful,. But there has to be this kind of flexibility and adaptability approach in the cooperation framework so that they don't become inflexible, which can have a series of issues. These are two examples of how to avoid additional layers of difficulty in the new modes of branding, and I hope these ideas are helpful. Thank you.


Dominican Republic · Vice President · Wellington Ben Cosme [1:27:21]:

Thank you very much. Many thanks, Mr. Salazar Sirinec. I now give the floor to Mr. Moreira da Silva.


UNOPS · Executive Director · Jorge Moreira da Silva [1:27:27]:

Thank you, Mr. Vice President, distinguished members. In the interest of time, I will focus on one topic because, by the way, it was the topic more often mentioned, which was the role of the cooperation frameworks. And why the cooperation framework is gaining all this traction in this conversation is precisely because what is at at stake is not making the UN presence smaller; it's, by contrary, the idea of getting fit to deliver at scale, but not only delivering at scale, delivering in a more coherent manner with more collaboration across the system. That's why the Cooperation Framework is really the document that enhances the capacity to deliver at scale, but also in a non-fragmented and in a coherent manner. For the sake of transparency, because I've been, as you know, facilitating this process, I want to say something about the process and about what was on the table and what is now on the table. When we started this process, I heard from Resident Coordinators, from Member States, that the fragmentation is an issue, the proliferation of country programme documents,, and its consistency or inconsistency with the cooperation framework was an issue. So I proposed that let's go for one document, just one document, just the cooperation framework. And then I heard from some agencies that, 'No, that can't work because we need the CPDs.' And I think that they are right. They need the CPDs because the CPDs is a document that is important for accountability, is a document that is important for implementation. So we ended with an alternative, that is, well, if we need to maintain cooperation frameworks with country-program documents, at least can we go further in making the cooperation frameworks more strategic and avoiding the fragmentation? And that's why the idea is the sequencing. Let's first approve the cooperation framework and only then only after the CPDs. Also, the derivation that the CPDs must be consistent, derived from the cooperation framework, so the CPDs must be a way to implement the cooperation framework, not to bring any other strategy that would create some confusion. And second— and third, it's important to have a consultation. Nobody works in isolation.. So if an agency needs a CPD, well, the CPD should be consulted at the country team. So you can see why, in my opinion— and apologies if I'm being so blunt— in my opinion, we can't go below this. I think that for someone that has worked for 12 months in this reform and consulting resident coordinators and member states, if we go below this, I think that we will end with a reform that is not consistent with your requests. So we need to find a way on implementation to fix the planning element. It's true that it's important to avoid that there is no interruption on delivery, but it's a matter of the how, not a matter of the whether. We'll find a way, and the DSG establishing a working group to ensure precisely that this element of derivation sequencing is implemented in a way that has no impact on the implementation. So I'm quite optimistic about the way forward. Thank you.


Dominican Republic · Vice President · Wellington Ben Cosme [1:31:09]:

Many thanks, Mr. da Silva. Ms. Uru.


UN Secretariat · Resident Coordinator · Yassine Orouk [1:31:14]:

Thank you, Mr. Vice President. Thank you, Excellencies. Amazing questions. I would be doing huge disservice service if I try to answer even one of them fully. They require a lot more thought. Let me engage with— starting with the intervention by the MPR from Morocco with respect to national alignment and supremacy of national ownership. And I don't mean ownership as in, oh, yeah, the government does— you know, is happy that we're doing this. The cooperation Framework is a reflection of those national programs, identified national initiatives that allow us to expedite on SDG delivery. Yesterday, my colleague from Egypt gave a— gave multiple very good examples of how, when the UN system is able to galvanize behind a nationally driven national program, then neither funding nor configuration actually become an issue. Things fall in place. This is the trick of the cooperation framework, that instead of being a compilation and a, and a listing of multiple global objectives and strategic plan summaries of UN entities, it needs to be a reflection of the national programs we have collectively identified as being expedited of Sustainable Development Goals. So going forward, as I said, I've started this process. One member state inquired what kind of conversations we're having with our UN country team. So we talk about this all the time. They have asked me to move ahead with a cooperation framework that takes into account the national— that puts the national programs at the forefront, but also takes into account the dynamic situation that Moldova finds itself in, the multiple vulnerabilities it finds itself in, and with respect to its EU accession and, and the crowding in of European partners coming in. So I promise to do that. I think I'm just going to leave it at this. There's a lot more going on, on sequencing. I believe that that's something I'm very passionate about,, but I think my colleague Stephen can speak to that more.


Dominican Republic · Vice President · Wellington Ben Cosme [1:33:32]:

Thank you, Mr. Stewart.


UN Secretariat · Resident Coordinator · Stephen Jackson [1:33:36]:

Thank you, Chair, and agree, Yassine. I mean, what an incredible discussion, incredible rich range of views, but large consensus, I think, and time doesn't permit to come to all of the points raised, but I will also start with the intervention from His Excellency the Permanent Representative of Morocco, and I couldn't agree more on the need for integrated, flexible implementation under national ownership. I also really agree with His Excellency from Mozambique that we can't allow the existing footprint to drive the choice, the programming choice—that is, the cart driving the horse. It has to be the other way around. But then I want to join those observations to the question raised by Switzerland, about whether we as Resident Coordinators have enough authority. I mean, the first thing I want to say is we have very little authority in the formal sense, and we don't necessarily seek that. If I can put it this way, there are four sets of stimuli, if you like, operating on any country team member, agency head on the ground in country. The first and the most important is the national the national ownership. But there is a caveat to that, which is that they, of course, are mostly dealing with the line ministry that is pertinent to their mandate. And that's what I meant when I said in my presentation that we need to be geared to the top national priorities. I mean no disrespect if I say that in any given country, if an agency comes to me and says, for example, it's one of the three Rome-based agencies, and says, 'Well, the 'Well, the Ministry of Agriculture wants me to do X,' but if that isn't part of the top prioritization made by the country, then I need to be in a position to say, 'Well, yes, but we all agreed that actually we were going to work on these 5 things at the beginning.' So national ownership needs to be really understood as very strategic through the cooperation framework. Then, of course, the other sets of stimuli— well, they're listening to me, but the line to me is dotted, and remains dotted, and their primary stimuli beyond the national are, number one, what is their headquarters telling them, and number two, what are the development partners on the ground, what are the signals they're sending through their funding decisions. And that brings me to the question of funding, getting the funding mix right, because frankly it drives a lot of the fragmentation that you are complaining about, and you're right to complain about it. So we really are— again, Mozambique, the Minister of Projects, I understand exactly what you're saying, and I sometimes feel like the resident coordinator of projects. So a big part of the configuration challenge and of solving it is rebalancing the funding mix so that there is more pooled funding and more core funding and less project prioritized and strongly earmarked funding. I'm not saying do away with it altogether, but you need to get that mix right if you want to get the configuration right, so a healthier funding mix. In terms, finally, of what should we do and what should you do, which was, I think, how the UK asked the question, well, first of all, I think we need to work on criteria for country-level configuration, and I think that that is— part of what is underway through the UNAT process. Sequencing, yes, George, you've spoken to that, and I think that there is a proposal on the table within the UNAT work stream that UN entities should— individual entities should submit their CPDs in the first year of implementation of the cooperation framework. And so, yes, indeed, as Pakistan said, stagger, stagger, start with the country cooperation framework and then stagger to the CPDs. So we can do both of those things. From you, we need a healthier funding mix. Ireland, you asked, you know, what are colleagues saying on the ground? Famously, when I asked in a dialogue on the funding compact, I said, 'You're all committed globally to providing more pooled funding and more core funding, and yet I'm not seeing that on the on the ground in Kenya, why not? One member state representative in Nairobi said to me, 'Well, it's these political folks that negotiate the funding compact, but they don't control the money; we do.' And unless that kind of inconsistency can be changed, it's going to be very difficult to get this right. Thank you.


Dominican Republic · Vice President · Wellington Ben Cosme [1:38:15]:

And on that note, let me thank the panellists for their insightful contributions today. And to all of you for all your inputs. Before proceeding to the next dialogue, I will briefly pause the meeting for a change of podium. Please remain seated.


Speaker 64 [1:38:34]:

Every day, millions of people are forced to make harder choices just to get by. A farmer deciding when to plant as droughts and floods intensify. A mother having to choose what to give up as prices rise. A young person wondering if opportunity will ever reach them. This is where development matters most. Today, pressures are rising: climate shocks, conflict, the cost of living. And artificial intelligence is reshaping how we work and how we trust information and institutions. But faced with decreasing resources, the real risk is not a lack of solutions. It's fragmentation. When development efforts and funding scatter, progress slows and trust erodes. Collective action and impact become harder. That's why coordination matters. Across more than 160 countries and territories, Resident Coordinators ensure the UN works as one, turning national priorities into coordinated action, financing, and results. UN agencies result at The results are clear: 1.8 billion people are living healthier lives. 284 million more people gain access to electricity. 1.9 billion women and girls are benefiting from expanded rights and opportunities. When the UN works as one, the return on coordination is clear. Through the Joint SDG Fund, every $1 in catalytic funding unlocks up to $20 in investment, and nearly $600 million has been saved by working better together. 5 years to 2030. No time for fragmentation. The question is simple: Can we act together, fast enough? We can. When countries lead, and the UN works together, we deliver results at scale.


Dominican Republic · Vice President · Wellington Ben Cosme [1:42:27]:

Good morning, everyone. Let's start the next session. La consecución de la Agenda 2030 Delivering on the 2030 Agenda requires a United Nations Development System that can adapt its support to distinct realities, vulnerabilities, and priorities of different country contexts. Countries in special situations, as well as countries facing fragility, crisis, and internal displacement, continue to confront mounting structural pressures. Even as development funding becomes more constrained and humanitarian needs continue to grow, this session provides an opportunity to reflect on how the UN Development System can sustain integrated and context-specific support in these increasingly complex environments and reinforce national capacities resilience while ensuring that support remains aligned with country priorities and long-term development objectives. For our second interactive dialogue on delivering tailored support in countries in special situations and reinforcing development support, In complex settings, I'm pleased to welcome our distinguished panelists: Mr. Bruno Le Marquis, United Nations Resident Coordinator in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, who will join us virtually; Madame Ulrika Richardson, United Nations Resident Coordinator in Libya; Mr. David McLachlan Carr, Regional Director for Asia-Pacific; of the United Nations Development Coordination Office, and Mr. Simon Springett, United Nations Resident Coordinator in Barbados and Eastern Caribbean, as well as— well, I first give the floor to Mr. Bruno Le Marquis, United Nations Resident Coordinator in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Can you hear me? Loud and clear. Very good.


UN Secretariat · Resident Coordinator · Bruno Le Marquis [1:45:09]:

Mr. Chair, Excellencies, thank you very much. It's a pleasure to join you as I've just finished my term in the Democratic Republic of Congo and I'm on my way to Afghanistan, but I'll be speaking about the DRC. So the DRC continues to face complex political and security challenges as well as one of the most severe and protracted humanitarian crises globally. There are currently close to 6 million internally displaced people in the DRC as well as over 4 million returnees. The humanitarian response is taking place against the backdrop of the unprecedented global humanitarian funding crisis starting in 2025, which has very severely affected the DRC. This drastic reduction in assistance, in particular humanitarian assistance, while they represent a real challenge in providing life-saving assistance to the most affected communities, also is also a real opportunity to move forward with urgency towards a paradigm shift to reduce humanitarian needs, to reduce dependency on humanitarian assistance, and to increase the impact of development assistance by working on several fronts. How to reduce humanitarian needs? Working on several fronts. The first one is the primacy of political and diplomatic solutions to end conflict. The second one is tackling the underlying crisis, the underlying drivers of conflict and vulnerabilities, which I call the Gordian knots, such as access to resources. In the DRC, most conflicts are related to land, access to land, the issue of the exploitation of natural resources, the issue of illicit financial flows, and so on. So by tackling underlying drivers of conflict, you can reduce humanitarian needs. The third, by enhancing efforts made in terms of prevention, in terms of anticipation, in terms of risk reduction, both for conflict and disasters. But this focus on prevention cannot take it for granted in conflict-affected countries because usually the approach is really to run after the crisis of the day. And finally, through the implementation at scale of the humanitarian-development-peace nexus. Against this background, as triple-hatted Deputy SRSG Resident Coordinator, Humanitarian Coordinator in the DRC, I have promoted the following approach with the UN Country Team government and national partners, and development partners. First, a focus on impact and a more deliberate approach to providing policy advisory support with a focus on key transformational public policies and focus on the underlying drivers of conflict, but also on strengthening national systems. The UN footprint in the DRC, as shown in a comprehensive capacity mapping we conducted when we developed our new cooperation framework 2 years ago, showed that it was essentially a humanitarian footprint and a project implementation footprint. So through our new cooperation framework, we have the ambition to up our game in line with the UN comparative advantages by bringing specialized expertise, bringing specialized competencies, as well as global knowledge and comparative experiences in priority sectors. Upon request from government to help unlock the incredible potential of the DRC, to help unlock some of the blockages, and to help unlock development funding. Secondly, and as co-chair of the Development Partners Coordination Forum, I have supported a better alignment between the UN and development partners and national priorities for greater impact. In fragile and conflict-affected countries, there can be a tendency by partners to bypass the state, which only reinforces its weaknesses. So we have worked closely with the DRC government to rework and revitalize the aid management and coordination architecture, and both government coordination mechanism and partners development mechanism are now largely aligned. The government is also now setting up the political forum that was missing that will bring government and development partners. The third topic we've been working on a lot is on the HDP nexus and durable solutions. We've supported two priorities, we've pushed for two priorities. First, to put government at the center, and second, to move at scale. And this has not been the case so far. So under the leadership of provincial governors, we've supported the formulation of two provincial strategy in Ituri and Tanganyika for durable solutions. So this is provincial ownership. And also, uh, we assisted government to establish a national nexus forum that has recently been launched, that is being chaired by the Minister of Planning and the Resident Coordinator. And this is bringing all relevant government ministries, provincial authorities, local actors and all development, peace, and humanitarian actors. So government at the center to move at scale. In this context, I want to say a word about the current Ebola outbreak in the DRC. As RCHC, I have advocated for a nexus approach to the response to epidemics and outbreaks and to leave something behind, like stronger national system and sustainable investment. During the last Ebola outbreak of 2019, $1.2 billion were invested in the response and there is almost nothing to show for. So it's very important to leave something behind through a development lens. And finally, we have worked a lot on bringing closer together the UN and the international financial institutions. We went from good to great with a focus on policy alignment so that we can push reform, we can push policy change, and by combining our respective comparative advantages, we've, for example, been able as UN to help the IFI unlock financing for prevention and resilience. These are some of the things we've been doing in the DRC over the past few years. Thank you for your attention.


Dominican Republic · Vice President · Wellington Ben Cosme [1:51:41]:

I thank the UN Resident Coordinator in the Democratic Republic of Congo. I now invite Miss Ulrika Richardson, UN Resident Coordinator in Libya, to take the floor.


UN Secretariat · Resident Coordinator · Ulrika Richardson [1:51:54]:

Mr. Chair, Excellencies, dear colleagues. It's a pleasure to be here today and I look forward to the exchange following our interventions. So allow me to provide a few reflections and three concrete examples from my role as double-headed Deputy SRSG and Resident Coordinator in Libya. First, tailoring support means starting from country realities, not institutional categories. Libya, a remarkable country, is a country in protracted political transition, considerable fragmentation, and with divided institutions, an economy almost entirely dependent on oil, yet affected by persistent illicit flows. Like many other countries, it does not fit any single category. It is a development, humanitarian, peacebuilding, economic governance, and migration challenge at once, often in the same place and at the same time, and often addressed by the same national partners. With the understanding of the interconnection between the challenges and with stronger anchoring in national and subnational realities, the UNCT in Libya under my leadership is committed to developing integrated approaches that respond to immediate emergencies, while in parallel building medium to long-term resilience and policy coherence, meaning being able to respond in the, in the immediacy while not losing focus on the longer term. At the heart of our efforts is our determination to ensure that UN support is configured around the specific combination of vulnerabilities, opportunities, and priorities the country faces, aligned with its priorities. Together with me, and enabled by me as an RC, the UNCT is tailoring its support driven by national priorities rather than by institutional mandates or sectoral silos. In complex settings, coordination is not an administrative function, but a development function, an enabling connecting function that drives delivery behind national priorities. In a setting where challenges are interconnected, governments must engage humanitarian actors, development agencies, IFIs, and bilateral partners at once, often through the same overstretched institutions. Our mission is to connect them. How did we do this in Libya? I will give 3 concrete examples. First, stronger cross-pillar coherence and coordination, as well as coordination with international and national partners, obviously. Integration between the UN Country Team and the UN Mission, the political mission, and addressing drivers of instability, but at the same time, the driver of stability. First, we saw the humanitarian reset as an opportunity to repurpose the humanitarian country team into an operational humanitarian development partner— no, humanitarian development peace advisory group for donor coordination, but also as a substantive platform for policy dialogue driving coherence, integration, and national Partnerships, and in April this year, I launched an ambassadorial-level development partners dialogue, which I co-chair with a rotating member— member state. The first meeting drew very strong engagement from embassies, IFIs, and UN entities and government. Our priority now will be to ensure that these platforms evolve beyond strategic exchanges and information sharing mechanisms and become more implementation-oriented and and strategically useful coordination forums capable of supporting practical follow-up, policy coherence, and linkages between the technical, development, and political discussions. The lesson is clear. As resources tighten, coordination is what still guarantees a country's access to the full UN offer. It is not an overhead. It is what makes delivery possible. And no actor can do it alone. Number 2, UN country team and UN mission integration. One of the most important lessons from Libya is that complex challenges increasingly require integrated responses that bring together development, humanitarian, human rights, peacebuilding, and political perspectives. I am pleased to report that the integration between the UN political mission in in Libya and the UN Country Team in Libya works, driven by strong, strong joint-up leadership and facilitated by the Resident Coordinator Office, and with a Joint Cooperation Framework as our common anchor for strategic planning and implementation. The intention is not only to strengthen analytical and policy capacities, but also to position the UN more effectively in accompanying and aligning the Libyan-led processes and to concretely deliver what development can offer to stability and resilience. The evidence is there. Where the UN is structured and supported to act as one, it delivers as one. Number two, economic governance is increasingly becoming a driver of stability., but has been often a driver of instability. So Libya's experience demonstrates that economic governance challenges are often— challenges are often at the heart of broader development governance and stability concerns. I was given the task through Security Council Resolution 2796 last year to set up an integrated economic unit to address the question on strengthening economic governance. And this brings together capacities from the UN Mission, from the Resident Coordinator Office, from relevant UN entities such as UNDP and such as UNODC, as well as strengthening partnerships with IFIs, in particular IMF, the World Bank, and the African Development Bank. As a driver for overall stability and vice versa, economic governance requires joint analysis, shared engagement strategies, and coordinated with support across multiple UN entities and partners. We now work with national institutions such as the Central— National Central Bank of Libya, such as the National Audit Bureau, the Attorney General, and other relevant actors to support dialogue on economic reform and accountability. What is clear is that a modular presence of the United Nations teams on the ground is absolutely essential to be able to deepen partnerships and to remain relevant over time. It means that, one, you have a temporary need for specific capacities, but that capacity doesn't necessarily need to be based in the country for a longer period of time, so it really needs to be a very modular, on-demand, expertise-driven presence. In closing, countries do not experience their challenges in silos, and neither should we. Our host governments and you, Member States, in this chamber are not asking for separate humanitarian, development, political, or economic responses. You are asking, and we are asking, for integrated solutions. Achieving this will be the measure of our collective success. Thank you very much.


Dominican Republic · Vice President · Wellington Ben Cosme [1:59:45]:

Thank you very much. I thank the Resident Coordinator in Libya. I now invite Mr. David McLachlan Card, Regional Director for Asia-Pacific of the United Nations Development Coordination Office.


DCO · Regional Director · David McLachlan Carr [1:59:58]:

Thank you, Mr. Chair, Excellencies, colleagues. Within the rubric of the UN80 reset, the question we ask is, you know, how can the UN development system mobilize the right mix of expertise, enhancing operational support and partnerships around national priorities quickly, coherently, and accountably. And across the Asia-Pacific region, countries face increasingly overlapping risks, and these don't have boundaries or borders: climate vulnerability, disaster exposure, debt and fiscal stress, demographic change, inequality, displacement, food and energy insecurity, the digital transition, and complex political, or crisis dynamics. These risks do not always align neatly with formal country classification. Middle-income countries may face vulnerability and implementation gaps. Large and highly diverse countries may require highly specialized policy-level support, and small island and multi-country contexts may require a different mix of proximity, regional capacity, and operational flexibility. The test of the regional architecture, therefore, is whether it makes Resident Coordinators and UN Country Teams more effective in delivering Cooperation Framework results in line with national priorities, particularly where countries face complex risks, constrained resources, and rising expectations for SDG acceleration. So this framing keeps the focus on delivery rather than institutional structure, and the regional architecture should be a mechanism for precision support, helping RCs and UNCTs access the right expertise at the right time, align capacities behind national priorities, reduce duplication, and strengthen the accountability for collective results. A strong message is that regional architecture should not be another layer, but it should simplify access to the system, the knowledge hub, and the and the resources available to country teams. Let me quickly address 5 key propositions. First, tailoring regional support must be driven by country demand, the risk, and the implementation contexts. Asia-Pacific shows why this matters. The region includes small island developing states, least developed countries, landlocked countries, middle-income countries, higher-income countries, and large and diverse complex countries., and all of these are facing challenges that transcend boundaries and formal categories. While they remain important, they don't fully capture the vulnerability, capacity scale, or development demand that we need to address. Secondly, regional architecture should simplify access to the UN system. The test is whether it helps RCs and UNCTs access the right expertise quickly and aligned with their regional assets, with the cooperation Framework priorities and reduce that duplication, delivering more coherent support to host governments. The regional architecture should make the system faster, lighter, and more responsive, not create another bureaucratic layer. Thirdly, the RC system is the hinge between national priorities, UNCT capacities, and regional assets, and tailoring works where RCs can convene, prioritize, and align system-wide support behind Cooperation Framework results. The expertise on demand must therefore be operationally clear, predictably accessible, clear gateways, and allow rapid deployment mechanisms. Fourthly, financing constraints are key to delivery. Fiscal pressure is turning cooperation framework implementation into a prioritization challenge, and without predictable and flexible financing, integrated planning will not translate into integrated delivery. The region must support the resource mobilization, including with the regional development banks. Fifthly, regional capacity must complement, not replace, country presence. The aim is not to make the UN more distant, but to make the full breadth of UN expertise more accessible to countries while preserving proximity, trust, and political understanding— and this is the important part— connecting to South-South cooperation and triangular cooperation, and global best practices is where the region needs to be. Let me quickly, Mr. Chair, give a couple of examples of the work of the Regional Collaborative Platform at the Asia-Pacific region. Firstly, it is aimed to be a knowledge hub to deliver expertise on demand. We have an IBC, Issues Based Coalition on Climate and Energy Transition, that is meant to bring global best practices of green climate and renewable energy independence to the countries that need it. It's especially relevant to the most vulnerable countries affected by climate change, and in particular, the nations of the Pacific. This is closely allied to the IBC on Resilience, which helps government formulate disaster mitigation strategies, co-chaired by ESCAP, and looking at such issues as sea level rise, and mitigating and protecting agriculture across the region. Last year, we stood up a new IBC on digital transformation, which is how to leverage artificial intelligence and knowledge and the knowledge transfer from the technical giants of our region to the developing world, leaving no one behind on the new technologies. An advisory group on blue ocean economies has been stood up to provide and translate the the promise of the Antigua and Barbuda Action Strategy and to promote development of operations across the Small Island Developing States. A networking group on youth and aging from the Pact for the Future, which best practices for youth engagement, job creation, linking AI technologies to the new economies, but also assisting governments to provide social safety nets and tailored to support to aging populations. Across the region. And finally, this year we are standing up a new networking group on transnational crime to— in reaction to requests from multiple Resident Coordinators in different countries for more coherent policy support on such issues and transnational problems as illicit funds transfers, human trafficking, scam centers, etc., which are a huge drain on resources and an impact on STG achievement across the region. So across these examples, if I may, tailored support at the regional level is not a static classification exercise, but it requires the UN Development System to configure the right mix of country presence, regional expertise, policy advice, financing support, operational capacity, and partnerships around supporting national priorities and cooperation framework results. And the value of the regional architecture Architecture should therefore not be judged by whether it makes support country— it should be judged by whether it makes support to countries faster, more coherent, more relevant, and ultimately more accountable. Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.


Dominican Republic · Vice President · Wellington Ben Cosme [2:06:59]:

I thank the Regional Director for Asia-Pacific of the UN Development Coordination Office. I now invite Mr. Simon Springett, UN Resident Coordinator in Barbados and the Eastern Caribbean, to take the floor.


UN Secretariat · Resident Coordinator · Simon Springett [2:07:12]:

Thank you, Chair, and a very good morning. It's a real honor to be here in the Council today as we advance our discussions on the QCPR and as we reflect how to further strengthen the UN Development System in support of program countries. And I'd also like to say, you know, it's really been heartening over the last 3 days to hear the full membership support to the Resident Coordinator. Major system, and we hope that we can continue to build on that. At its core, the QCPR and the UN80 are about delivery, including completing the unfinished business of the 2018 repositioning of the United Nations Development System and translating its commitments into tangible results for people. This is not a theoretical ambition. The Eastern Caribbean, where I live and work in support of 7 member states and 3 overseas territories, really illustrates exactly what is at stake. Small Island Developing States in our region face a specific and compounding set of realities: high exposure to climate change and external shocks, heavy debt burdens, limited institutional capacity, sensitivity to volatile global markets, and a geographic dispersion that increases both the cost and the complexity of coordination. These are not marginal challenges. They are structural, and they demand a United Nations that is precisely designed for these contexts. Experience from the Eastern Caribbean demonstrates that strong coordination capacity, supported by a distributed national presence, is indispensable. For effective delivery, for policy dialogue, and for building partnerships that sustain results over time. The Multi-Country Sustainable Development Cooperation Framework for the English and Dutch-speaking Caribbean is an example of what this looks like in practice. Across 22 countries and territories, the Multi-Country Sustainable Development Cooperation Framework provides a single integrated framework that aligns the full United Nations system behind shared national and regional priorities, including those expressed in the Antigua and Barbuda Agenda for SIDS. In a context defined by small island states and high vulnerability, this coherence is not a luxury. It is essential. And it reflects precisely the direction of this reform. Moving from fragmentation to integration, and ensuring that cooperation frameworks function as the central strategic instrument guiding all UN development support. In practice, this means countries can access shared policy support on common regional challenges—climate resilience, disaster risk financing, shock resistance, social protection—while still tailoring interventions to their specific national circumstances. So scale and specificity together. However, this does not come without challenges. The Cooperation Framework's design architecture is sound, but its full potential hasn't yet been realized and does require a change in developing finance incentives from agencies and from member states to make this collective commitment work more effectively. Arguably, central to making this work is the United Nations Resident Coordinator. In the Eastern Caribbean, as across all of our programme countries, Resident Coordinators serve as conveners across the full development ecosystem, working alongside governments, United Nations entities, international financial institutions, regional organizations, and development partners chairing internal and external coordination structures that support government-led responses to development and humanitarian challenges. This convening role is what makes coherence real, as it reduces collective fragmentation and duplication. It mobilizes financing, in our case, and particularly for climate resilience, and it enables collective responses to shared challenges that no single country or agency can address alone. As an example, as we have just started on Monday the 2026 Atlantic hurricane season, I co-chair the Caribbean Development Partners Disaster Management Group with the Caribbean Disaster Emergency Management Agency, which helps drive the Caribbean Regional Response Mechanism in the event of a disaster. UN80 offers a genuine opportunity to strengthen this role further, ensuring that the UN delivers not as a collection of separate entities, but as part of one broader coherent system of development support. But reform only succeeds when it's grounded in country realities. For small island developing states and multi-country contexts, that means 3 things: tailored configurations that reflect the actual context, strong and sustained coordination capacity at the country level, and resident coordinators' offices that are fully resourced to meet the needs and expectations placed on them. And these expectations are only growing. To meet these, we need predictable, sustained funding. Recognition that coordination is a system function, not a peripheral one, and continued active support from member states, both in New York and in capitals. Without strengthened capacity of the resident coordinator, the ambition will suffer and remain a statement of intent. Empowerment does not equate to gatekeeping, but drives coherence in coordination with the United Nations Country Team, including those non-resident agencies, which we are increasingly viewing as networked and readily accessible rather than non-resident. And I think how we define presence does matter. The cooperation framework gives us a glimpse of what can be possible when the system is aligned, integrated, and genuinely driven by national priorities. That is the standard that the QCPR and the UNADCC is set for us. Reform only succeeds when it delivers more coherent, responsive, and timely support at country level, grounded in national priorities, focused on people, and capable of deploying the right expertise at the right time. We have the right framework, we have the right experience, and now we need the resolve and the resources to follow through. Thank you.


Dominican Republic · Vice President · Wellington Ben Cosme [2:14:08]:

I thank the UN Resident Coordinator for Barbados and Eastern Caribbean. I will now open the floor to delegations wishing to participate in the interactive discussion. Participants are invited to press the microphone button to indicate their request to intervene. As previously stated, the limitations will be 3 minutes for statements on behalf of groups and 2 minutes for national statements. And for our interpreters, I kindly ask you to please deliver your statements at a normal speaking speed. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Mozambique.


Mozambique [2:14:59]:

Thank you. Thank you, Vice Chair, and thanks to the panelists for their insights. The operational realities in Mozambique are multilayered and multidimensional. Some are man-made, others nature-made. Some are the result of structural constraints in domestic and others external shocks. Whatever their origins, we don't have the luxury of addressing them in isolation. Therefore, national ownership in addressing these challenges must be understood strategically, not as a collection of isolated sectoral requests, but as priorities agreed through the cooperation framework and national development strategies. That's— take, for instance, debt distress. The UN country team must be able to support resource mobilization, debt management, climate finance, etc. Here, the convening power of the RC is an asset. On climate vulnerability, it's the same. The tools exist, and there are proof of concept examples, including from the humanitarian field, as we saw recently in action in Mozambique. So we must be able, upon request from the government, to access the right expertise quickly, with clear protocols, predictable financing, and a common catalogue of expertise, including digital matching tools. I thank you.


Dominican Republic · Vice President · Wellington Ben Cosme [2:16:41]:

I thank the distinguished representative of Mozambique. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Jamaica, to be followed by Norway and Switzerland.


Jamaica [2:16:52]:

Thank you, Mr. Vice President. Jamaica welcomes this important dialogue and I thank the distinguished panellists for their very insightful presentations. The Secretary General's report on the implementation of the QCPR underscores that no two development trajectories are alike. This recognition is at the core of effectively delivering tailored support in countries in special situations, and Jamaica commends the UN development system on efforts to deliver context-specific assistance across a range of country-specific— across a range of country settings. From the perspective of Jamaica, effective tailored support should reduce fragmentation in the development system and foster integrated policy support for countries. It should improve access to predictable and flexible financing. This is not only necessary for disaster recovery, but for investment in resilience, early warning systems, and adaptive social systems. It should provide support for capacity development, including through the deployment of technical expertise from within the UN system to support SIDS, where there is a need. Simplifying processes is also very important. Effective tailored support should utilize strong data and evidence to inform decisions about the support offered to SIDS, and there should be strong support for countries' national development priorities and aspirations. SIDS in the Caribbean are situated in the second most disaster-prone region in the world. We often find ourselves trapped in a cycle of borrowing to finance disaster recovery recovery efforts, which increase debt and limits fiscal space to invest in development. Many of us are in the region are classified as middle or high-income countries due to the international system's reliance on GDP and GNI as measures of progress. This significantly reduces our access to concessional finance and increased borrowing rates. For us, better support starts with


Dominican Republic · Vice President · Wellington Ben Cosme [2:18:52]:

Please. She's reading the ambassador's statement. Can you press the mic again, please? Oh. All right. Go ahead.


Jamaica [2:19:03]:

Thank you very much, Mr. Vice President. For us, better support starts with recognizing the interconnected nature of climate vulnerability, debt constraints, and limited fiscal space. Expanded access to concessional and affordable finance is critical. The use of the Multidimensional Vulnerability Index would allow the international system to have better appreciation of the challenges that SIDS and other climate-vulnerable countries face, regardless of income classification. The use of innovative financing mechanisms such as debt-for-climate swaps, debt-for-nature swaps, and debt pause clauses in loans also serve to support climate-vulnerable countries. Given the increased frequency and intensity of extreme climate-related, climate change-related weather events, support for investment in disaster risk reduction is of paramount importance. And Jamaica stands as a prime example of the benefits of this. Our use of prearranged financing instruments such as catastrophe bonds and catastrophe insurance facilitated the quick disbursement of recovery funds following the passage of Hurricane Melissa last last year. Such funds would not have been readily available otherwise. Finally, the international system can also support countries through reducing transaction costs, simplifying processes, and providing technical support where there is a need. Thank you, Mr. Vice President.


Dominican Republic · Vice President · Wellington Ben Cosme [2:20:27]:

I thank the distinguished representative of Jamaica. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Norway.


Norway [2:20:34]:

Thank you. Thank you, Chair, and thanks to the panel for very interesting presentations. As we have said in earlier statements, we strongly support more coherent UN country teams that deliver, especially in complex settings. We noted the criteria for the composition of the country teams in the QCPR report, but they are quite general. I guess the challenge will be how to weight them up against each other and who shall decide. We believe that the Resident Coordinator is essential for such process, and of course the needs and situations of the host countries as reflected in the cooperation framework. I note some resistance from agencies on the role of the RCs. This is a tension that needs to be solved and brought into a good path going forward. This is not the time to start weakening the RC system. So my question My question to the panel is this: Who should, in your view, be involved in the process of composing the country teams? Where shall that discussion take place, and what kind of time frames should one work with? Thank you.


Dominican Republic · Vice President · Wellington Ben Cosme [2:21:43]:

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


Switzerland [2:21:50]:

Thank you, Chair. Thank you to the panelists. We would like to express our appreciation to the resident coordinators for their work, performing key functions in very challenging circumstances. I would like to ask a question in regard to coordination resources in connection to UNAT Work Package 13 on shared platform initiative. We welcome the measures proposed by Work Package 13 as steps into the right direction, such as the standardized colocation of OCHA and RC offices, for example. However, we are not sure that this is enough. We think more should be undertaken to provide RCHCs with integrated analysis, guidance, and support, especially in fragile settings and crisis situations, in order to perform the coordination role to its best, while of course not jeopardizing humanitarian principles. In this regard, what institutional measures at regional and central level would be helpful to be taken to strengthen integrated coordinated coordination support provided especially by DCO and OCHA. Thank you.


Dominican Republic · Vice President · Wellington Ben Cosme [2:23:20]:

I thank the distinguished representative of Switzerland. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of the United Kingdom.


United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland [2:23:30]:

Thank you, Vice President, and thank you to the panelists for their valuable insights. As with other panels, we, we really thank the for their attendance. It's really added crucial insight from the ground, so thank you for taking the time. I have 3 questions. First, several panel members mentioned positive engagement with the IFIs at country level. It's good to hear the success stories of where this has worked on the ground. How can the UN and member states ensure that these and other success stories and lessons learned can be replicated in more locations, including through the UN80 process? Second, the RC to the DRC's example of the high figures spent on the Ebola response, yet no support to the structures, was very telling. We very much kind of support that development and sustainability— thank you— must be ensured in humanitarian response. How can we use UN80 and the humanitarian reset to ensure this? I'd also welcome the RC to Libya sharing a bit more detail on the lessons learned from the humanitarian reset, as well as the UN country team and UN mission integration that you mentioned. And finally, if RCs were to select one primary reform that member states should get behind, what would this be and what impact would it have on the ground? Thank you.


Dominican Republic · Vice President · Wellington Ben Cosme [2:24:48]:

I thank the distinguished representative of the United Kingdom. We now give the floor to the distinguished representative of the International Organization of Employers of Civil Society.


IOE [2:25:02]:

Thank you, Excellencies, colleagues. I'm speaking here on behalf of the private sector. I'd like to focus on the issue of tailored architecture and support at the country level, which was discussed on the first panel. The Pact for the Future mentions partnering with the private sector more than 20 times. Yet how are we translating this commitment into meaningful collaboration at the country level? The International Organization of Employers represents 50 million companies in 150 different countries. We have partnered with UNDCO and the Quadradner Stiftung to conduct dialogues and workshops and to develop a playbook or guide for resident coordinators and Employers' Federations and Chambers to support engagement in cooperative frameworks and VNRs. The objective is to strengthen collaboration on priorities such as jobs, skills, infrastructure, digitalization, business and human rights, amongst other things. There is some progress in this collaboration, mainly in middle-income countries, but much more remains to be done. We must be more systematic in our approach in including the private sector, and business, we remind you, is not a single sector. SMEs drive employment and growth while multinational companies contribute investment, innovation, and expertise. We strongly encourage that everyone work together closely with business associations federations, and chambers so that they can bring together large and small companies across the different sectors. Employers remain the most trusted institutions by the Edelman Trust Barometer. If we want to go forward on the 2030 Agenda, let us work together in a structured collaboration with business representatives. Thank you.


Dominican Republic · Vice President · Wellington Ben Cosme [2:27:06]:

We thank the distinguished representative of International Organization of Employers. We now give the floor to distinguished representative of Women's Environment and Development.


WEDO · Major Groups and other Stakeholders · Coordinator · Veronica Brown [2:27:19]:

Thank you, panelists. This is also in response to Panel 1. My name is Veronica Brown. I'm the coordinator of the Women's Major Group and here on behalf of the major groups and other stakeholder mechanism and a co-convener for the Feminist Cross-Coalition Working Group on UN80. From the perspective of feminist movements working alongside communities In diverse country contexts, we welcome the focus on ensuring that the UN system is tailored to the realities, priorities, and needs of countries rather than applying one-size-fits-all solutions. As discussions on UN80 move forward, we highlight three principles. First, national ownership must remain at the center. Country configurations should be driven by country needs and priorities developed through inclusive dialogue with host governments, UN country teams, and relevant stakeholders, and strive to deliver evidence-based, context-specific policy recommendation. Second, we should be honest about where coordination challenges already exist. If the objective of UN80 is to improve coherence and reduce fragmentation, then we must also examine whether the current resident coordinator system is delivering on those objectives in practice. In many contexts, UN entities continue to face overlapping processes, multiple coordination requirements, and unclear lines of accountability. Before pursuing significant reductions in agency presence on the ground in the name of coordination, we should first assess how existing coordination mechanisms are functioning and where improvements can be made. Third, expertise on demand must remain accessible, responsive, and grounded in country realities, with considerations to the risk of precarization by overreliance on consultants over staff positions and the disproportionate impact of this precarization on women, including the risk of losing consistent specialized expertise on gender equality through this initiative. UNAID presents an opportunity not to make the system smaller, but to make it more effective, more responsive, more capable of supporting countries in achieving their development priorities in the SDGs. Thank you.


Dominican Republic · Vice President · Wellington Ben Cosme [2:29:17]:

I thank the distinguished representative of Women, Environment and Development Organization. I now give the floor to to the distinguished representative of Palau.


Palau [2:29:29]:

Thank you, Mr. President. I'm happy to be taking the floor in our national capacity and just to take this opportunity to express our appreciation to the panelists for their insightful comments. I do want to take the opportunity of having a resident coordinator who is currently serving in a multi-country office setting to provide maybe some questions and also some feedback as well in terms of the work that the MCOs are doing. Over the last 3 days, we have been making a series of comments of the importance of how the UNAID proposals are important in how the multi-country office settings work, and we do believe that they are distinct and unique from other setups where most of the UN system is present in other larger countries and larger contexts where there are— RCs are largely covering just one country. So we do want to seize the opportunity to perhaps ask a few questions specifically on the multi-country office setting. And the first question would be is, in terms of the number of the UNAT proposals, whether or not there has been an assessment by those resident coordinators that are covering multi-country offices. Palau is also one that's covered by a multi-country office in Micronesia. Whether or not there's a clear idea of how these proposed changes can enhance the RC's ability to coordinate across multiple UN country teams and deliver integrated support to program countries, and then Our second question would be specific to the country team configurations where, for an MCO, the country team configurations are more regional in nature rather than a specific country context. If you can share whether or not these reforms are designed in a way to take into account the multi-country office configurations. Thank you.


Dominican Republic · Vice President · Wellington Ben Cosme [2:31:28]:

I thank the distinguished representative of Palau. I now give the I pass the floor to the distinguished representative of the Association Ma'una for Human Rights and Immigration.


Association Ma'una for Human Rights and Immigration [2:31:44]:

Mr. Chair, I take the floor on behalf of my organization, and I would like to emphasize that achieving the SDGs requires the presence of effective, strong public institutions capable of transparently managing the resources. The example of Yemen is a true test to the ability of the UN development system to adapt with the exceptional circumstances facing countries affected by prolonged conflicts. Yemen has been suffering for more than a decade from war, institutional collapse, and economic meltdown. Millions of Yemenis live in dire humanitarian and developmental circumstances, in addition to the regional challenges, including poverty and the lack of food security. We believe that the success of any UN developmental intervention in Yemen should be based on the principles of transparency, accountability, with the respect of institutions and national circumstances to serve equitably all citizens and to enhance trust between the people and the state. Mr. Chair, our discussions have highlighted the importance to have UN responses adapted to national priorities. Yemen needs a special approach in this regard, and we would like to mention that the recent constitutional developments in Yemen, including the vacuum arising from the death of the president in May 2026, require the need to support a clear legal and constitutional constitutional process that preserves the institutions of the state and prevents a further institutional collapse. Constitutional stability is important in Yemen and it is a sine qua non for sustainable development and for a lasting peace. Thank you, Chair.


Dominican Republic · Vice President · Wellington Ben Cosme [2:33:34]:

I thank the representative of the Association of Mahona for Human Rights and Immigration. I now invite the panelists to briefly respond to comments and questions from the delegation. I give the floor, if you're still online, to Mr. Bruno Lemarchis, UN Resident Coordinator in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Are you still online, Mr. Lemarchis?


UN Secretariat · Resident Coordinator · Bruno Le Marquis [2:34:00]:

I am online. Thank you very much. Maybe on the question from Norway, I think on who should decide, who should be involved in the reconfiguration, I think First, form should follow function, so this process should be guided by the content and the priorities of the Cooperation Framework. This is the star that should guide this conversation to agree on the what, to agree on the how, and to agree then at the end on the who. I think it's largely happening that way, but there is no— not yet, as far as I know— set methodology to have this objective process undertaken in an inclusive way. So having a methodology would really help. I think also what we did in Congo, having this capacity mapping, comprehensive capacity mapping, is also very, very, to me, very good practice because it's an eye-opener to see who is really on the ground doing what and are those activities, those staff working supporting the implementation of the cooperation framework. I think the RC should be at the center of those discussions, but in a very inclusive, participatory manner with the entire UN family, resident, non-resident, and if needed calling on regional and global offices of those agencies with consultation. It's important to consult with national partners and development partners. On the question from the UK, I think there is partner countries who have a lot to gain from strong UN-IFI collaboration. It's really at their benefit, but one practical suggestion I have based on my experience in the DRC, what really made a difference is a dedicated person, dedicated capacity that was funded by PBPso, and there are not many in the world. At some point she was alone, now I think there are 3 in the world. You have someone who can, who speaks UN language, who speaks IFI language, regional and global development bank, and we can make linkages between the 2 systems from a policy alignment perspective. It's very key not to engage into those partnerships, the entry point is not money, It's not money. If the UN goes to the IFIs to talk about money, it won't be a constructive conversation. It's all about policy alignment. How do we move— how do we help countries move reforms forward? On the Ebola question, well, I think there is work to do within the UN with all development partners. What I said is obvious. We should leave something behind when there is a massive when there is an outbreak with massive investment. But the system as it is built, there will be a lot of funding poured into those crises very fast, and the development funding will come— either won't come or will come later. So I think there is work to be done on the donor side, on the IFI side, on the UN, and all of that should really be also led by the respective government leadership. And if there is one reform to be pushed, I think RCs, we often talk about that, the fact that the 2018-2019 UN Development System reform has not yet been pushed through the board of the agencies, especially the large operational agencies. So when it comes to the Mutual Accountability Framework, the role of the RC, the role of the Cooperation Framework, and so on, There is work to do with agencies so that they fully embrace, they fully abide, and also to strengthen the position and the leadership and the authority of the Resident Coordinator. Thank you.


Dominican Republic · Vice President · Wellington Ben Cosme [2:38:04]:

Thank you, Mr. Le Marquis. Ms. Richardson?


UN Secretariat · Resident Coordinator · Ulrika Richardson [2:38:10]:

Thank you very much, dear delegates. It's a really rich, rich discussion. Rich set of questions and I will not attempt to answer all of them. And I think Bruno just answered quite well the question from Norway. Just to say on— just to add to that, I think what absolutely should not be the guiding question or the guiding, let's say, principle is what already exists on the ground. And so we have a tendency often to, of course, sometimes seek the easiest way out, and that is definitely nothing that will help us to change in short or in medium term. So I think it's very needed to make sure that the principle is try and sort of move away from the simplest way of going forward of repeating what is already there. Now, just to say on Switzerland's question, and I think It actually speaks a lot to the need to have data interoperability, the importance of making sure that we don't sort of operate with different datasets and also with different systems. And I think it goes a long way to also what we heard from the delegates, the speakers from Mozambique, from Yemen, but also from Jamaica. —because if we do that, we actually just deepen the divisions that are between the different dimensions that actually are not only multilayered, but actually they are interconnected and they are interdependent. And I've seen—I've been RC—I think—I'm not sure if this is my 5th or my 6th RC assignment, and I was an RC before the reform, during reform, and now after the reform.— and I've seen that sometimes our systems— first of all, I think that there is a lot happening on the ground that we might not be— that you might not be sort of always listening here in New York, and I think that's why these exchanges are so valuable, and also the exchanges that we've had throughout the years during the RC global retreats that we have at the end of the year, so these are invaluable in fact, to move discussions forward. But often at country level, there are ways of finding solutions, right? And these integrated solutions, which might not be put to scale at many— in many countries. But I think, indeed, the cooperation at the country level between the country teams, the UN country teams and the humanitarian country teams, is absolutely essential. And here again, the importance here is to strive to have the two talk at best with each other and to be sort of integrated in many of its objectives, but also how the whole sort of HDP sort of cross-pillar cooperation comes together. So— and what was very helpful in Haiti— I was in Haiti before coming to Libya— was to have, of course, OCHA and the RC office co-located. Unfortunately, it's no longer the case when I left, but that was a very helpful thing. Now, just on the specific— and I think also I want to highlight that in Haiti, what was important was this particular— the Chamber of ECOSOC and the platform of ECOSOC. We have— for those of you who might be aware, there is an ad hoc advisory group on Haiti, which is an ad hoc group within the ECOSOC, and that was actually very helpful to me to be able, as an RC, as a triple hat in Haiti, to actually be able to bring— to keep development at the center also of the conversation., to not be sort of driven only by the humanitarian sort of prerogative, but actually putting development out there as the solution. Humanitarian response extremely needed at the time, but because it was life-saving, but, you know, it's not seen as a— it should not be a solution, right? So this was— the ECOSOC played a very important role, as did actually the regional collaborative platform, because— and this was particularly with the chair— previous speaker José Manuel Salazar was also very helpful in helping me convince many agencies, development agencies, to actually stay in Haiti, because we had a lot of development programmes happening around the capital, outside in the rural areas. And that was very important, because if we would have abandoned that then it means that we would have only increased the country's vulnerabilities and would have also weakened our possibility to actually to sort of help the country get back on its feet once sort of violence was receding. Unfortunately, that's— there are still a lot of challenges, obviously, in Haiti. And so coming to the question also of the UK, how we work with the IFIs. I think Bruno already responded. We have a dedicated office here at headquarters that actually captures a lot of the lessons learned, the PBSO, the UN IFI sort of team, and they help us to sort of capture some of those lessons learned, and we are asked to share it with them. But it is very essential, and of course the relationship becomes very different. Whether you're in a country like Haiti, who is a big borrower to these IFIs, or in Libya, which is not a borrower at all. But the fact is that there is a lot of expertise within the IFIs and it's— that we can benefit from, but also vice versa. Many of them, for example, in Libya are not on the ground, right? So they benefit from our on-the-ground knowledge and our on-the-ground sort of temperature taking on a daily basis. So that partnership is absolutely essential to actually, again, achieve that coherence that is so important, particularly when it comes to policy advice. And policy advice is important in any country context, whether you are in a deep humanitarian crisis or whether you are in a deep political transition, policy coherence will always be and is always essential. I think, yes, if there is one reform— so, and I think someone, I think that would— the delegate from Norway mentioned that there is some sort of resistance against the sort of— against the RCs from some agencies. I must say I've seen it from— because I was first an RC, as I mentioned, before the reform. I must say, yes, we don't have formal authority, and I think my previous and his colleagues have— and my colleagues have talked to that. But we haven't earned authority. If we are useful, if we act with integrity, then we earn that authority. And I think we have to be strong development practitioners, and we are. I mean, myself, I have 35 years' experience. We have a very sort of credible track record that also gives us that authority. So I must say I see much less resistance. In fact, I see a lot of understanding, and I see a lot of wish— let's say, a lot of desire from agencies to use us better. And I just came from— we had a small strategic reflection among the heads of agencies, myself, who are basically based in Tripoli.— and basically I told them, 'How can I be of help? How can I be more of help?' And they really want to use our function much more strategically for alignment, for coherence, and I think that that resistance is really, at least from my perspective, is certainly not as it was in the beginning before reform. But if there is one reform that I think has to happen, it's of course, it's— it's closing these loops. There are a lot of unfinished business here, but for me it is the incentives across the board, incentives and accountability for agencies, agency reps, for donors, I think there is— and also for RCs, right? So I think that is the number one reform I think that will actually make it or break it. Thank you.


Dominican Republic · Vice President · Wellington Ben Cosme [2:46:50]:

Thank you, Ms. Richardson. I now give the floor to Mr. McLachlan-Cart.


DCO · Regional Director · David McLachlan Carr [2:46:56]:

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Most of the questions were directed at Resident Coordinators, but myself, like Ulrika, have been 5 times Resident Coordinator. I have some regional comments, 5 quick points. This thing, the nexus between humanitarian development work needing to close and become more closely working together, particularly in disaster risk reduction, which was a point made by several. I'm very pleased that as the Regional Director for Development Coordination Office, I get a seat at the table at the Interagency Standing Committee with OCHA to talk about how we can work on these early recovery efforts after disasters, and then I think that greatly facilitates the humanitarian-development nexus. There was a question about how we can ensure the right sizing and configuration of country teams. I think the Regional Collaborative Platform, or the regional platform for integration to be, has a big role in ensuring that there's the regional positioning of assets is right-sized and correctly positioned to ensure that there's access to expertise. I'm not advocating for opening any new offices, but the deployment of advisory services strategically into resident coordinators offices or inter-country teams can make a great difference in getting that expertise to host governments where it's— where it's needed in terms of policy support. Thirdly, a very important point about private sector engagement. I'm very pleased that Global Compact has a representative working in my office to ensure that there is greater dialogue and communication with the private sector through chambers of commerce at regional and national level. Fourthly, on funding and resource mobilization, I think we would benefit from closer collaboration with the regional financial architecture. It's not perfect, but is also— a problem in our region is, of course, the lack of harmonization of regional presences, you know, Manila versus Bangkok, etc., and this point about co-location and coordination being inextricably intertwined, I think, is a very important one, which is my last point, I think you make a very good point in that not many questions have come about business operation strategies and the need for operational efficiencies to continue to be advocated by member states as part of the reform so that the savings from operational efficiencies can be ploughed back into development. I think we need more discussion also at regional but also country level on, you know, business operations, harmonization, common back offices and common premises., and this would greatly, I think, enhance the efficiency and coherence of the UN Development System. Thank you.


Dominican Republic · Vice President · Wellington Ben Cosme [2:49:32]:

Thank you, Mr. McLachlan-Gard. Now, Mr. Springett.


UN Secretariat · Resident Coordinator · Simon Springett [2:49:38]:

Thank you very much, and I guess it leaves me to address the question raised by Palau, which I'm very, very grateful for. Maybe by way of context, because we always talk about multi-country offices, but what does that actually mean in in practice. So I live in Barbados, but I support 7 UN member states, 3 overseas territories, and in a single country setup, normally I would interact with all cabinet ministers, but across the Caribbean, it's about in excess of 160 ministers. So trying to have that level of political engagement to be able to really work with governments to design how best the UN can support their requirements. You know, what we have done, we've now outposted Resident Coordinator Officer staff into each of the member state countries, which means we now have a full-time presence, which of course comes at a cost, but we have a full-time presence in those countries being able to, as many member states have said, really build those important relationships that are really required to have a meaningful relationship to divide— to drive UN engagements. And then within those countries, we have roughly between 5 and 7 agencies and 20 to 20 staff in each of those countries. So it is a complicated structure, and we've— it gets even a bit more complicated because our cooperation framework covers 22 countries and territories, but is coordinated by 5 resident coordinators and 6 UN country teams. So, but as I said, the architecture is sound. It is, it is complicated, but I think we are finding ways to be able to use a relatively complicated architecture to really drive the UN system's performance based on what governments are asking us for. We will— as we've developed the new cooperation framework, which will be signed sometime this month, we've really taken all aspects of UN AD to note, trying to— without presupposing member states' decision, but we've really tried to future-proof our cooperation framework for some of the eventualities of UN80. And I think, as we well know, that cooperation frameworks, while they are a cycle, they can be opened and adjusted as requirements dictate. I would like to mention just briefly on the private sector, I'm part of 3 private sector networks in the Caribbean. We have the ARISE Network, which focuses on disaster risk reduction. We have the OCHA-UNDP Network Connecting Business Initiative, which also focuses on disaster response. And we also have a growing UN Global Compact, the Network Caribbean, which I'm also a board member on. And another thing, we're— through the Caribbean response mechanism, which is our disaster response mechanism. We have a very similar setup to the cluster system, and I'm very pleased to say that we have the Caribbean Private Sector Organization who leads one of those coordination structures. And then finally, maybe to UK's comment on IFIs, On the 15th of June, we'll be convening— I'll be convening a meeting in Barbados on harnessing equity capital to drive food systems transformations, and we have 4 deal rooms, so we're bringing in banks, etc., and we have 4 deal rooms, and those are being led by EIB, CAF, IDB, and the Caribbean Development Fund. So I think it shows a strong level of cooperation that is built on partnerships rather than simply on financing. Thank you.


Dominican Republic · Vice President · Wellington Ben Cosme [2:53:53]:

Let me take this opportunity to thank the panelists for the valuable insights and for all the delegations for their constructive inputs. We have concluded our program of work this morning. I would like to draw your participants' attention to two side events taking place at 1:15 today. The first titled, 'Why are pooled funds and joint programs Still at such low levels at the country level despite the global commitment. That will take place in Conference Room 12 and is organized by Dan Hammerjord Foundation. And the second title, 'The Future of Multilateralism: Building the UN Development System for the Post-2030 Era,' will take place at A66 UN Plaza and is organized by the Major Group for Children and Youth. I welcome interested participants to attend this discussion. The Council will reconvene at 3:00 p.m. this afternoon at this chamber to continue and conclude this program of work. The meeting is adjourned. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you for that. It was very interactive.