Forever North–South? The political challenges of reforming the UN development system

Abstract

Member states of the United Nations (UN) agree that its development system needs substantial reform given its fragmentation and outdated structures, as well as new demands from the 2030 Agenda. Yet, a recent two-year reform process yielded no substantial reform decisions. Why did member states fail to endorse the necessary reforms despite almost unanimous recognition of the need for change? This paper describes member states' conflicting positions on reforming the UN and analyses their failure to delegate authority to the UN development system. North and South, donors and recipients, are locked in a struggle for power and control, maximising bilateral influence at the expense of the benefits of multilateral cooperation. The paper contributes to the pool of UN studies, adding a decidedly political perspective of the reform process. It is based on diplomatic statements, negotiation drafts and interviews with UN diplomats.Once again, member states of the United Nations (UN) have been engaged in a process to reform the organisation's development system. If the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, set in 2015, is the new 'software' for global development cooperation, then member states understood that it was also time to update their 'hardware' , the UN's development system. So, an intergovernmental dialogue was initiated under the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) to discuss options for 'the longer-term positioning of the United Nations development system, taking into account the post-2015 development agenda' . 1 An advisory team was created to offer intellectual support. The plan was that, following the dialogue phase in 2015 and 2016, the General Assembly would take strategic decisions in late 2016 on how to reposition the UN development system for the era of sustainable development.With its 34 entities and an annual revenue of USD 26.7 billion in 2015, 2 the UN development system is by far the biggest arm of the UN and by all accounts an important actor in the multilateral system. But experts agree that its fragmentation and inefficiency have grown beyond what is acceptable, seriously limiting the system's performance, that its functions

Global Governance

“…Yet, no decisions towards substantial reforms were made. Several studies attributed this lack of change to the traditional conflict between industrialized and developing countries that prevents governments from delegating further authority to the United Nations (Baumann 2017;Dongxiao, Ruipeng and Lei 2018).…”

From developing country to superpower? China, power shifts and the United Nations development pillar

“…In UN development work, the dominant role pair among member states centres on divisions between the 'developing' South and the 'developed' North, the latter often used synonymously with 'West' (Baumann, 2018;Haug, 2021).…”

The show must go on: The EU's quest to sustain multilateral institutions since 2016

“…As the linchpin of the multilateral system, the UN is regularly subject to demands for reform. Where many developed states criticise the UN's inefficiencies and overspending and prefer greater executive power of the Secretary‐General, developing states often press for greater development spending and further empowerment of the General Assembly (e.g., Baumann 2018). Moreover, non‐permanent members of the Security Council have long sought to reform and enlarge the highest decision‐making body to better reflect the power distribution of the 21st century (e.g., Binder and Heupel 2020).…”