Shamshad Akhtar a Pakistani replaces Jomo Kwame Sundaram at UN-DESA

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Dr Shamshad Akhtar (Urdu: ڈاکٹر شمشاد اختر) was appointed by the President Pervez Musharraf as the governor of the State Bank of Pakistan for three years in December 2005. She is the 14th governor of the State Bank and the first female to assume this position. Previously, she also held positions with the Asian Development Bank.

Born in the city of Hyderabad, Sindh, Dr Akhtar completed her Ph.D in Economics from Scotland's Paisley College of Technology. She has an M.S. in Economics from Quaid-e-Azam University in Islamabad and an M.A. in Development Economics from the University of Sussex, England. In 1987 she attended Harvard University under the Fulbright programme. Furthermore, she served in the World Bank prior to joining the State Bank of Pakistan.

Dr. Shamshad Akhtar took over as Governor, State Bank of Pakistan on January 2, 2006 for a three-year term. Dr. Akhtar, who is the first woman and the 14th Governor of the State Bank since its inception in July, 1948 brings rich experience, both national and international, to her new assignment.
Prior to her appointment as SBP Governor, Dr. Akhtar has been serving the Asian Development Bank (ADB) as its Director General, Southeast Asia Department since January, 2004. Earlier, she was Deputy Director General of the Department. She also held the position of Director, Governance, Finance and Trade Division for East and Central Asia Department of ADB.

Dr. Akhtar began her career in ADB in 1990 and rose to the position of Manager in 1998 after serving as Senior and Principal Financial Sector Specialist. She has been ADB’s Coordinator for APEC Finance Ministers Group from 1998–2001 and has served on a number of ADB committees including the Reorganization Committee, Appeals Committee and Oversight Committee etc. She has interfaced and represented the Asian Development Bank at the Bank for International Settlements and the International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO). She has developed a broad regional expertise in financial and economic matters of Central Asian Republics & Southeast Asia including the People’s Republic of China.

Before joining the ADB, Dr. Akhtar worked for 10 years as an Economist in the World Bank’s Resident Mission in Pakistan. In Pakistan, she also worked briefly with the Planning Offices of both the Federal and Sindh Governments. She dealt with wide ranging subjects which covered analysis of macroeconomic situation, finance and money and structural reforms of key sectors including industry and agriculture. Her work included papers on taxation system of Pakistan, state of inter-governmental fiscal relations, poverty incidence & its dimensions and foreign direct investment etc. Dr. Akhtar also contributed to the development of diversification of financial markets including the analysis of monetary policy and state of banking industry (at the World Bank) and restructuring of the Securities & Exchange Commission, Insurance Commission and worked closely with the private sector including the stock exchanges of Pakistan. She has been advising the central banks on reforms of financial markets. Dr. Akhtar has also been dealing with the banking sector’s legal, regulatory and institutional reforms while advising on diversification of the industry to exploit long term funding through development of bond market.

[edit]

Jomo Kwame looses his bid for ILO - Briton wins (Who will justify all UN-DESA's DSA paid to Jomo for months of PR campaign in Geneva?)

Click here to view this on ILO webpage

Guy Ryder elected as ILO Director-General

Guy Ryder was elected as the tenth Director-General of the ILO and will begin his five-year term in October 2012.

GENEVA (ILO news) – The International Labour Organization (ILO) has elected Guy Ryder as its tenth Director-General. Ryder, who is currently the ILO’s Executive Director for International Labour Standards and Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work, was elected by secret ballot by the ILO’s Governing Body. He will begin his five-year term in October 2012.

“I am really excited about this chance: this is a tremendous opportunity, in the middle of this global crisis, to make a difference to the lives of millions of people, including those who've never heard of the ILO, to change their lives for the better”, said the Director-General elect. “I thank the Governing Body for their confidence. The significance of what happened here today will be judged by what we do, and that is to put the people and the world of work at the heart of everything we do.”

SCANDAL at UNDESA ROME: Audit of DESA’s Global Centre for Information and Communications Technology in Parliament Project: INT05X73

Should John-Mary Kauzya resign over yet another scandal under his direct supervision

Should Gherardo Casini be held responsible for this audit

or as usual who cares - is Italian Taxpayers money anyway !

----

FINAL AUDIT REPORT

Audit of DESA’s Global Centre for Information and Communications Technology in Parliament Project: INT05X73

BACKGROUND

In November 2005, the United Nations (UN) Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA), in cooperation with the International Parliamentary Union (IPU) and a group of national and regional parliaments, jointly established project INT05X73, the Global Centre for Information and Communications Technology (ICT) in Parliament (the project). Established as a multi-lateral initiative on the occasion of the world summit on the information society (WSIS) in Tunis, Tunisia, the project is an effort to contribute to the empowerment of legislatures around the world to better fulfill their democratic functions by reinforcing parliamentary capacity to harness ICT tools and to place them at the service of the institutional process. The project pursues two main objectives: (a) strengthen the role of parliaments in the promotion of the information society, through fostering ICT-related legislation in light of the outcome of the WSIS; and (b) promote the use of ICT as a means to modernize parliamentary processes, increase transparency, accountability and participation, and improve inter-parliamentary cooperation. The project aims to achieve these objectives by providing a framework for sharing knowledge, coordinating actions, providing technical assistance, and pooling information and resources across legislatures around the world.

DESA’s Office in Rome (the DESA Project Office) serves as the project’s secretariat and is entrusted with achieving the project’s objectives and expected accomplishments, along with discharge of its day-to-day administrative and financial management functions. The DESA Project Office reports on the implementation of the project to an external high-level board (the Board), nominated by the UN, in cooperation with IPU, and to an advisory committee designated by the Board. Within DESA, the project reports substantively to the Division of Public Administration for Development Management (DPADM) and administratively to the Capacity Development Office (CDO). DPADM provides substantive backstopping of the project’s planning, implementation, and reporting responsibilities, while CDO provides administrative and financial management support. The project is headed by the Head of the DESA Project Office at the D-1 level, and assisted by three professional staff at the P-5, P-4, and P-3 levels and consulting experts. Table 1 presents the financial data for the project for the period from 1 November 2005 to 31 December 2009:

Table 1: Project’s Selected Budget Information (2005-2009) (in US dollars)

In its 2011 risk-based audit plan, the Office of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS) identified DESA-operated technical cooperation projects as a high risk area on the basis of the nature of their significant reliance on voluntary funding and related capacities to achieve project objectives.

OBJECTIVE AND SCOPE

The audit was conducted to assess the adequacy and effectiveness of the DESA project’s risk management, control and governance processes in providing reasonable assurance regarding the achievement of its objectives. The key controls tested included those related to: (a) fundraising; (b) financial forecasting; (c) governance; (d) risk management and strategic planning; and (e) project performance reporting. The audit covered the project’s activities related to the five key controls for the period from 1 November 2005 to 31 March 2011.

AUDIT RESULTS

In OIOS’ opinion, the project’s risk management, control and governance processes examined were partially satisfactory to provide reasonable assurance regarding the achievement of its objectives.

The project’s governance mechanisms, comprising an independent high-level board and advisory committee, and DPADM and CDO within DESA were adequate to oversee its activities. The project also had strong leadership to carry out its activities and to account for results. The project performance reporting framework had been instituted to report on project performance and utilization of resources. However, there were areas in need of improvement, as outlined below.

A formal fundraising strategy had not been formulated

The project did not have a fundraising strategy to secure the required funding in a timely manner to support the project’s activities. As of March 2011, only $5.3 million, or 31 per cent, of the total $16.6 million project budget had been secured. Reliance on the Government of Italy as the main donor and lack of a strategy to diversify funding sources exposed the project to undue financial risk and uncertainty.

(1) DESA should prepare a comprehensive fundraising strategy that commits the Board, the International Parliamentary Union, and other stakeholders to ensure the financial sustainability of the Global Centre for Information and Communications Technology in Parliament Project INT05X73.

DESA accepted recommendation 1 and agreed to prepare a formal fundraising strategy in the context of the second phase of the Centre, 2012 and beyond. Recommendation 1 remains open pending receipt of a copy of a comprehensive fundraising strategy from DESA.

Contributions from partners and collaborative arrangements were not adequately recorded

The project had received contributions in-kind from partners and collaborative arrangements, which were crucial value-adding support to the project’s sustainability and to subsidizing project costs in lieu of cash contributions. According to the DESA Project Office, approximately $3 million was received as in-kind contributions during the period. The tracking of such contributions, therefore, was essential to monitor the project’s inputs, as well as forecast its financial requirements on an ongoing basis. Monitoring such contributions was also essential in the discharge of DPADM’s oversight over the appropriateness of acceptance from partners of contributions and collaborative arrangements by the project. The DESA Project Office generally reported these contributions and collaborative arrangements to the Board, but there was no formal requirement to track, account for, and report them to provide accurate information on project costs. In the absence of adequate records for such contributions, there is no assurance that all project contributions and costs are properly accounted for.

(2) DESA Project Office should record all contributions in-kind from partners and collaborative arrangements and report periodically to the Board and the Division of Public Administration for Development Management to provide accurate information on project costs.

DESA partially accepted recommendation 2 and stated that there is an intrinsic value in informing the Board of all partnership arrangements, in accordance with ST/SGB/2006/5. The project will include a distinct section on such arrangements in its future reports to the Board, although no cost will be associated to these arrangements. OIOS maintains that it is important for project costs to be inclusive of all contributions, and reiterates recommendation 2, which will remain open pending action by DESA.

End-of-term evaluation and formal exit strategy of the project are pending

In strategically planning the project, evaluation was identified as a necessary component of monitoring results and activities during the mid-term and at the completion of project. The project document, therefore, called for two independent evaluations to be conducted on the achievements of its objectives; however, the mid-term evaluation was never conducted. Furthermore, no exit strategy was prepared for the project, which is scheduled to end on 31 December 2011. Without an exit strategy there is the risk that intellectual property assets could be lost after the project is ended.

(3) DESA should conduct the end-of-term evaluation and prepare an exit strategy for the Global Centre for Information and Communications Technology in Parliament Project INT05X73 prior to its extension or termination.

DESA accepted recommendation 3 and stated that it will prepare an end-of-term evaluation and exit strategy prior to the project’s extension or termination. Recommendation 3 will remain open pending receipt of evidence that end-of-term evaluation and exit strategy have been conducted.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

OIOS wishes to express its appreciation to the Management and staff of DESA for the assistance and cooperation extended to the auditors during this assignment.

I. INTRODUCTION

1. The Office of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS) conducted an audit of the operations of the Department of Economic and Social Affairs’ (DESA) Global Centre of Information and Communications Technology (ICT) in Parliament project INT05X73 (the project) located in Rome, Italy.

II. AUDIT OBJECTIVE

2. The audit was conducted to assess the adequacy and effectiveness of the project’s risk management, control and governance processes in providing reasonable assurance regarding the achievement of its objectives. The key controls tested for the audit included those related to: (a) fundraising strategy; (b) financial forecasting capability; (c) governance; (d) risk management and strategic planning; and (e) project performance reporting. These key controls are defined as follows:

(a) Fundraising strategy - controls designed to provide reasonable assurance that the project has the necessary funding to achieve its objectives and expected accomplishments.

(b) Financial forecasting capability - controls that provide reasonable assurance that the project has the ability to forecast contribution receipts and mitigate risks related to its sustainability.

(c) Governance - controls that provide reasonable assurance that the project has proper independent and internal governance and oversight mechanisms to oversee the project’s activities and ensure accountability.

(d) Risk management and strategic planning - controls designed to provide reasonable assurance that risks relating to achievement of the project’s objectives and expected accomplishments are identified and assessed, and that action is taken to anticipate, avoid, mitigate, or manage risks.

(e) Project performance reporting - controls that provide reasonable assurance that the substantive results of the project’s activities and the utilization of the allocated financial resources are accurately and completely reported in a timely manner.

III. AUDIT SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY

3. OIOS conducted the audit from January to March 2011. The audit covered project activities related to the period from 1 November 2005 to 31 March 2011.

4. To gain a general understanding of the project’s operations, OIOS reviewed the project document, organizational structure, terms of reference of the Board and Advisory Committee, agendas and minutes of board meetings, annual work plans and cost plans, financial authorizations, monthly financial imprest reports, progress reports, financial statements, publications and other outputs, staffing table, job descriptions, and other relevant information. OIOS also reviewed the project’s public website and obtained project statistical data and other documentation. In addition, OIOS reviewed reference documents contained in the report of the World Summit of the Information Society (WSIS) held in Tunis, Tunisia in 2005. OIOS also conducted interviews with DESA officials in New York and Rome.

5. To assess the adequacy of internal controls, OIOS considered whether the selected key controls provided reasonable assurance that DESA managed the project effectively to achieve its objectives and conducted relevant tests to assess whether policies and procedures were implemented consistently.

IV. OVERALL ASSESSMENT

6. In OIOS’ opinion, the project’s risk management, control and governance processes examined were partially satisfactory to provide reasonable assurance regarding the achievement of its objectives. The project’s governance mechanisms, comprising an independent high-level board and advisory committee, and DPADM and CDO within DESA were adequate to oversee its activities. The project also had strong leadership to carry out its activities and to account for results. The project performance reporting framework had been instituted to report on project performance and utilization of resources. However, there were areas in need of improvement as outlined below.

V. AUDIT RESULTS

A. Fundraising strategy A formal fundraising strategy had not been formulated

7. The project did not have a fundraising strategy to secure the required funding to support the project’s inputs, activities and outputs in a timely manner. As of March 2011, only $5.3 million, or 31 per cent, of the total $16.6 million project budget had been secured. The Government of Italy contributed $5.1 million or 93 per cent of the total contributions received, while the European parliament, together with the Government of Honduras, contributed $64,298, or one per cent of the total receipts. While the project had partially been successful in overcoming this funding gap through receipt of contributions from partners and collaborative arrangements, reliance on the Government of Italy as the main donor and the lack of a strategy to diversify funding sources exposed the project to undue financial risk and uncertainty.

8. Moreover, although the Board had responsibility to ensure proper fundraising and advocacy for the project’s activities, in practice, the Head of the DESA Project Office was mainly responsible for mobilizing funds and reported annually the project’s financial situation to the Board and DESA. However, there was no clear evidence of the involvement by the Board, IPU, or DESA in fundraising efforts to address the adverse situation. As a result, opportunities to leverage the individual and collective strengths of all stakeholders to mobilize resources, including their broad experience and networks, as well as to improve the project’s access to donors and exploit all fundraising options, could not be pursued effectively.

Recommendation 1

(1) DESA should prepare a comprehensive fundraising strategy that commits the Board, the International Parliamentary Union, and other stakeholders to ensure the financial sustainability of the Global Centre for Information and Communications Technology in Parliament Project INT05X73.

9. DESA accepted recommendation 1 and agreed to prepare a formal fundraising strategy in the context of the second phase of the Centre, 2012 and beyond. Recommendation 1 remains open pending receipt of a copy of a comprehensive fundraising strategy from DESA.

B. Financial forecasting Gaps in project budget and actual contributions

10. The Government of Italy approved its initial contribution of $1.6 million in 2005. However, the bulk of its contributions amounting to $3.5 million was not received until 2008. Although a vacancy announcement had been published on Galaxy in October 2006 for recruitment against the Executive Coordinator’s post, the Head of the DESA Project Office in Rome was requested in May 2007 to concurrently serve as the Head of the DESA Project Office ad interim due to insufficient funding. The project could not forecast when the position of the head of the DESA Project Office could be filled with a full-time person.

11. Timing of the actual receipt of contributions also affected the project’s capacity to undertake technical assistance missions, a main component of the project, to respond to the growing need of parliaments in developing and transitioning countries in the implementation of ICT initiatives. These activities, which had a planned budget of $775,000, were limited to only three missions prior to the late recruitment of the P-5 professional. Once the P-5 professional was hired in 2010, the project was able to schedule technical missions to developing countries in Africa, Europe, and the Caribbean, over four years into the project. Limited finances also affected the ability to forecast financial feasibility of translating publications into the UN official languages other than English. Due to limited funding, only 5 out of 16 publications were produced in French, while only two were produced in Spanish. Outreach across the UN official languages, therefore, was limited.

12. Earmarking of the contributions also affected the project’s financial forecasting capability. For example, the European Parliament paid $128,174, but the full contribution was earmarked to pay for the costs of travel for participants of a project-related conference and any savings from the contribution were required to be refunded to the donor. In this case, the project refunded to the European Parliament approximately $15,250, effectively reducing contribution income. The Head of the DESA Project Office was ultimately able to secure contributions from partners and collaborative arrangements to defray project costs and implement planned activities, but this was mainly done on an ad hoc basis and not without reduction to the project’s planned activities. As of March 2011, the project had forecasted a budget of $25 million to extend the project from 2011-2020 and this forecast is not supported by prospective donors.

13. DESA’s financial forecasting capability for the new project could be strengthened by the procurement of a predictable supply of contributions resulting from a comprehensive fundraising strategy committing all project stakeholders. DESA stated that financial forecasting is fully dependent upon commitments of donors which are formalized through contribution agreements.

Contributions from partners and collaborative arrangements were not adequately recorded

kind contributions during the period.

14. The project had received contributions from partners and collaborative arrangements of: (a) two associate experts from the Government of Italy and the Government of the Netherlands; (b) conference facilities at the world e-parliament conference in 2007, 2008 and 2009; (c) services and expertise of parliamentarian staff for assessment missions; and (d) resource persons for training and workshops, and daily subsistence allowance subsidies for parliamentarians traveling from developing countries to attend international meetings. These contributions from partners and collaborative arrangements, which were received between 2007 and 2011, were reported to the Board, in general, but were not accounted for in

15. Contributions from partners and collaborative arrangements were crucial value-adding support to the project’s sustainability and they subsidize project costs in lieu of cash contributions. The tracking of such contributions, therefore, was essential to monitor the project’s inputs, as well as forecast financial requirements on an ongoing basis. Monitoring such contributions was also essential to DPADM’s oversight over the appropriateness of acceptance from partners of contributions and collaborative arrangements by the project. However, there was no formal requirement to track, account for and report contributions to the Board and DPADM.

Recommendation 2

(2) DESA Project Office should record all contributions in-kind from partners and collaborative arrangements and report periodically to the Board and the Division of Public Administration for Development Management to provide accurate information on project income and costs.

16. DESA partially accepted recommendation 2 and stated there is an intrinsic value in informing the Board of all partnership arrangements, in accordance with ST/SGB/2006/5. The project will include a distinct section on such arrangements in its future reports to the Board, although no cost will be associated to these arrangements. OIOS maintains that it is important for project costs to be inclusive of all contributions, and reiterates recommendation 2, which will remain open pending action by DESA.

Ban Ki Moon revenge day: Sha Zukang will not get another term - his contract will expire 4 days after Rio+ Conf

Ban Ki Moon is known for his deals behind the scene, and this time he did it again. In what sources say is a coordinated "agreement" with Chinese Amb. at the UN, Ban's Office has managed to get rid of Sha Zukang.

As a part of the deal Sha "would be allowed to terminate his five year term", but in the meantime pressured (mostly by Europeans) members of WEOG, (who see DESA as a G77 deals shop) Ban is about to force on DESA major restructuring.

As one EU Diplomat said: "Italians, Indians and Russians and more recently Chinese clans have had fun for more than three decades with this place, now is time to bring it back to its initial mandates...or there will be no more money for them". The same diplomat said that is"unacceptable for a department where half of D1/D2s are either Indians, Pakistani or South-East Asian". "How can anyone trust a department where you have a USG (Sha), an ASG (Jomo) and at least 10 D1/D2s from either China, India and Pakistan do the right thing or even understand the development needs for rest of the world?...It just doesn't make sense. There is no geographical distribution nor equal representation".

Many at Ban's office describe Sha Zukang tenure so far as "out of touch" and a "disaster for DESA's role in development". One very close collaborator of Ban's says: "Sha would better perform when he's drunk".

Meanwhile sources say that Sha Zukang is angry and that he might decide to cut short his term even before Rio+. All seems will be decided in Beijing...very soon!

UN Economists Disagree With IMF & Geithner on China, Bollinger Blind on US Banks

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, May 5 -- While the International Monetary Fund and US officials like Timothy Geithner call for changes in the valuation of China's yuan, the UN on Thursday said that economic problems in the US and countries like it cannot be blamed on China, and defended valuation of currency and capital controls as sovereign rights.

Inner City Press asked UN Deparment of Economic and Social Affairs official Jomo Sundaram about Geithner's and the IMF's charges, and to explain the UN's and IMF's differences on issues ranging from India's economic prospects to the place of capital controls.

Jomo replied that the IMF has been ignoring Article Six of its Articles of Agreement, which he says gives states the right to manage their capital accounts. He said UN bodies like the Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific, are “closer to governments” that the IMF, which works from Washington.

Certainly, ESCAP chief Noeleen Heyzer has made comments viewed as favorable to the still military dominated government of Myanmar, and Jomo on Thursday tossed seemingly gratuitous praise to Sri Lanka, just after a UN Panel of Experts described 40,000 civilians killed there.

Geithner, Obama & Hillary Clinton & Chinese officials, UN & Bollinger not shown

But ESCAP was not able to report much data about the Democratic People's Republic of Korea -- so they are not able to get close to ALL governments.

Also at the UN this week, Columbia University president Lee Bollinger told the press that there needs to be more journalism in China because “we don't know the condition of Chinese banks.” One wanted to ask him, what about the US banks whose dalliance in predatory mortgages led the whole world into economic meltdown? But the question was not taken. So it goes at the UN.

UN G-20 Team Cuts Out UNDP & Jomo Kwame Sundaram of DESA, Ban 2nd Term in View, DC House Looming

By Matthew Russell Lee

UNITED NATIONS, November 9 -- As UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon arrived in South Korean for the G-20 meeting, UN sources in New York complained to Inner City Press about an “unprecedented level of micro-management” by Ban's office in the run up to the G-20.

South Korea having this G-20 is a laurel in the country's crown, as is Ban's position in the UN. But Ban wants to use this G-20 meeting, if possible, to get endorsements for a second term as Secretary General, publicly or privately. So nothing can go wrong.

For that reason, the sources tell Inner City Press, unlike before other G-20 meetings when a range of UN system officials have been involved, this time Ban's closest advisers seized control of preparations.

Excluded or elbowed out among others the sources tell Inner City Press were Norwegian Olav Kjorven, assistant secretary-general and director of policy at UNDP and Malaysia Jomo Kwame Sundaram, the assistant secretary general of DESA under Sha Zukang, the Under Secretary General who wined and dined with and gave an award to the Tiananmen Square general during Ban's recent trip to Shanghai.

This of course is bad form. But Ban is under pressure, especially after the controversy surrounding his craven suck-up to China during his four day visit, not once publicly mentioning the name of this year's Nobel Peace Prize winner Liu Xiaobo.

Ban & Sagong Il of G-20 Korea Summit Coordination Committee, Jomo & Olav not shown

Even the generally liberal and pro-UN New York Times ran an editorial questioning whether Ban should be supported for a second term.

Now, after the November 2 election, Ban and his advisers know they face a buzz saw in the Republican controlled House Foreign Relations committee, probably under UN knowledgeable Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, who may look into issues ranging from UN inaction in Darfur to Myanmar as well as UNRWA. Their tour guide to Washington Robert Orr, reportedly the crafter of the “US is a deadbeat” line, may lose his way in the new Committee. Will they hire a lobbyist? Watch this site.

Increasing Citizen Participation? - Let's copy UNESCO - will be easier for all !

CITIZEN PARTICIPATION AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT

LEARN HERE FROM UNESCO's PAST

PLEASE DON'T TRY TO REINVENT THE WHEEL

JUST COPY PASTE UNESCO'S ACTIVITIES

1) Informing Citizens:

Fighting Corruption Using the Internet in Kenya
The Information Technology Standards Association (ITSA) of Kenya has launched a pilot project whose aim is to increase public awareness and encourage public participation in fighting corrupt practices. The pilot project will offer a corruption online reporting facility in six towns, two remote locations. The media will form the source points of information which will be routed to the Electronic Graft Management (EGM) Centre. The EGM Centre will filter this information electronically and forward it to the relevant authorities for action.
The complete case study can be consulted at The Center for Digital Discourse and Culture (CDDC)

Government Procurement System in Mexico
Mexico’s federal government established "Compranet" for government procurement as part of its efforts to fight corruption by automating procurement procedures. By facilitating a process of bidding and reverse bidding on-line, it seeks to make government purchasing more efficient and transparent. The system allows the public to see what services and products the government is spending its resources on, and what companies are providing them with these services. There are more than 6000 public sector tenders logged daily, and more than 20,000 service-providing firms are regular users.
Go to Compranet



2) Improved Service Delivery:

E-seva center in Andhra Pradesh State of India
The goal of e-seva is to simplify the delivery of city services by providing a wide spectrum of citizen-friendly services that will save citizens the bother of running around to various departments. Services provided include payment of utility bills; reservations of train tickets; getting birth and death certificates, vehicle permits and driving licenses; transport department services, etc. Before the launch of the e-seva project, these services were only available at separate offices and were normally time-consuming because of slow processing speeds and large crowds.
The complete case study, as well as other ICT stories, can be consulted at The International Institute for Communication and Development – Knowledge sharing (IICD)

Member Organized Resource Exchange (M.O.R.E.) in St. Louis, Missouri
M.O.R.E. is a computer network project in an inner city neighborhood of St. Louis. The program was established in 1983, and its goal was to use computer networks to help people learn to pull themselves out of poverty. The service delivery programs included : Grace Hill Neighborhood College, which is a a neighborhood-based system of education to help prepare community members for employment, and Business and Career Center – an employment database to help low-income persons overcome the information barrier that prevents them from finding jobs. The Center is a successful example of the use of ICTs to increase the access to local institutions by members of marginalized communities.
More information


3) Increasing Citizen Participation:

Iperbole Internet civic network in Bologna, Italy
This represents an interconnected gathering point of collective knowledge focusing on "two-way" communication and citizen participation in the information exchange process. Local citizens benefit from a network of internet public places, free internet access points, e-mail and newsgroups. There is direct and remote internet training for beginners; online healthcare support; online services for senior, disabled people and young people; and a "time bank" through which local people can exchange services. There is an online discussion forum, publications of local documents (with abstracts and glossaries) and customer satisfaction surveys.
Go to Iperbole

Democracy Project in North Jutland, Denmark
The task of the Democracy Project was to create an electronic forum for e-democratic dialogue among citizens and politicians, with a particular aim towards the November 20, 2001 County Council Election Day (which later turned out to also be a General Election Day). In 1997, North Jutland had the lowest voter turnout in the Danish elections. The object of the Democracy Project was to publicize decisions made on a regional political level and to involve the citizens in the democratic process. Specifically, the County Council also wanted to reach newly-eligible voters, who were known to show a low turnout. Citizens, politicians and first-time voters were invited to take part in the project. The result was a very lively and well-visited web site with a good dialogue among citizens and politicians.
More information

Bali-Hoo: U.N Still Pushing for Global Environmental Control

Thursday , February 25, 2010

By George Russell

Despite the debacle of the failed Copenhagen climate change conference last December, the United Nations is pressing full speed ahead with a plan for a greatly expanded system of global environmental governance and for a multitrillion-dollar economic transfer scheme to ignite the creation of a "global green economy."

In other words: Copenhagen without the authority — yet — of Copenhagen.

The world body even has chosen a time and a place for the culmination of the process: a World Summit on Sustainable Development to be held in Rio de Janeiro in 2012, the 20th anniversary of the famed "Earth Summit" that gave focus and urgency to the world environmentalist movement.

The 2012 summit date is significant for another reason: It marks the end of the legal term of agreement for the Kyoto Protocol on greenhouse gas emissions, which includes carbon reduction targets, and provided the legal basis for an international cap-and-trade market for carbon, centered in Europe. The U.S. first signed then backed away from the Kyoto deal without ratifying it; until its apparent collapse, the comprehensive Copenhagen deal was intended to include the U.S. and supplant Kyoto with a new, legally binding regime.

The new Rio summit will end, according to U.N. documents obtained by Fox News, with a "focused political document" presumably laying out the framework and international commitments to a new Green World Order.

Just exactly what that environmental order will look like, and the extent of the immense financial commitments needed to produce it, are under discussion this week at a special session in Bali, Indonesia, of the United Nations Environment Program's 58-nation "Governing Council/Global Ministerial Environmental Forum," which oversees UNEP's operations.

The GC/GMEF, as it is known, is made up of environmental ministers and top-level bureaucrats from a roster of supervising nations — the U.S. is one of them — and its meeting is surrounded by a galaxy of environmentalist non-government organizations (NGOs) and environmental journalists from around the world.

Idyllic Bali is a favored venue for U.N. environmental meetings, in part because of its seclusion from too many outside eyes, and because its Pacific location and small size make it a highly congenial hothouse for environmental enthusiasm. In 2007, it served as a launching pad for the Bali Action Plan, which laid the negotiating basis for the Copenhagen treaty process.

The latest Bali session runs from Feb. 24 to 26, and is accompanied by a welter of other UNEP activity ranging from sessions on international waste management and chemical disposal, to the start of a process aimed at a new international treaty covering the storage and disposal of environmental mercury.

But the major topics are a global system of governance and what amounts to the next stage of a radical transformation of the world economic and social order, in the name of saving the planet.

Alongside that, as always, are discussions of vast sums of money that should flow to developing nations to help them make the transition to the new, greener world. As one of the papers written in advance of the meeting to "stimulate discussion" puts it, "the situation ... presents genuine opportunities for a dramatic shift from what can be termed 'business as usual.'"

For the anonymous bureaucrats who wrote the discussion papers, "business as usual" apparently means the current world economy, which the anonymous authors disparagingly term the "brown economy," or the "current dominant economic model." It is, according to the UNEP documents, a model in crisis, "which currently consumes more biomass than the Earth produces on a sustainable basis," and also "depletes natural capital" and "risks perpetuating and exacerbating persistent poverty and distributional disparities."

The new green economy under discussion at Bali will be something very different: For starters, it is much more vague, and as far as the discussion paper authors are concerned, it will stay that way.

The paper paints the coming green order in nebulous and utopian terms. It "implies the decoupling of resource use and environmental impacts from economic growth." It involves "substantially increased investment in green sectors, supported by enabling policy reforms." The investments will "provide the mechanism for the reconfiguration of businesses, infrastructure and institutions, and for adoption of sustainable consumption and production processes." It will lead to "more green and decent jobs, reduced energy and material intensities in production processes, less waste and pollution, and significantly reduced greenhouse-gas emissions."

But when it comes to measuring the achievement of those goals, the paper says, "it is counter-productive to develop generic green economy indicators applicable to all countries given differences in natural, human and economic resources." In the process of turning brown to green, "a green economy in one country may look quite dissimilar to a green economy in another country."

All of which may make judging the value of investment in the ecological transformation difficult to evaluate, except for insiders. But then, the paper suggests that the world may have an additional governing structure composed of exactly those insiders. As the paper puts it:

"Moving towards a green economy would also provide an opportunity to re-examine national and global governance structures and consider whether such structures allow the international community to respond to current and future environmental and development challenges and to capitalize on emerging opportunities."

The discussion paper, published — but not distributed — on Dec. 14, 2009, assumes that the goal of the green economic transformation is the same as that of the ill-fated Copenhagen conference: a 50 percent reduction in global carbon dioxide emissions by 2050. That, the paper says, will require a staggering $45 trillion dollar to accomplish — much of it in transfers from rich nations to poorer ones.

The paper, however, paints that as a bargain — "an average yearly investment of just over $1 trillion." About half of that would go for "replacing conventional technologies with low-carbon, environmentally sound alternatives."

Click here to read the Green Economy paper.

Another major investment target would be "ecosystem-based adaptation and mitigation"—paying people and governments to maintain and expand forests, wetlands, coral reefs and other productive sources of "natural capital," which the current "dominant economic model" — the paper provides no other specifics — abuses.

But that is only the beginning of the transformation. Consumption patterns must change, so that fewer wasteful products are consumed, and more ecologically proper ones are produced — organic food and beverages, for example. The UNEP authors, citing other analytical papers produced by UNEP, claim that "the global market for environmental products and services is projected to double from the present $1.37 trillion per year to $2.74 trillion by 2020."

Beyond the organic food market, however, "environmental products and services" are not defined in much detail. One area would be the management of chemicals and solid and hazardous waste — as the paper puts it, "solid waste management alone consumes on average 20-50 percent of most city budgets."

In social terms, one of the most important goals of the transformation would be jobs, jobs, jobs — all of them green, and many of them, as it happens, already in existence.

The report notes, for example, that the U.S. recycling industry as of 2002 already employed over 1 million people; more investment would thus provide "significant opportunities" for more job creation. The same goes for looking after trees: Citing the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization, the paper claims that "10 million new green jobs could be created by investing in sustainable forest management."

The report argues that significant amounts of the money developed countries have thrown at the problem of ending their current steep recessions could be counted as the type of green investment it envisages as part of the trillion-a-year future. In the U.S., for example, the document says that 11.6 percent of the economic stimulus as of August 2009 — about $112.8 billion — is the type it sees as vastly increasing in the future.

Where is all the money supposed to come from? The paper is emphatic that government alone doesn't have enough. The paper says that "regulated market mechanisms" are needed to "to promote new and innovative investments in green technology."

But above all, the paper asserts, the focus on ecological transformation must become all-encompassing if it is to succeed. Quoting from UNEP's formal medium-term strategy for 2010 to 2013, it says that "linkages between environmental sustainability and the economy will emerge as a key focus for public policymaking and a determinant of future market opportunities."

In other words, the green economy requires a green-oriented political revolution. As UNEP's medium-term strategy puts it: "The current environmental challenges and opportunities will cause the environment to move from often being considered a marginal issue at the intergovernmental and national levels to the center of political and economic decision-making."

The authors of the UNEP "discussion" papers see that organization — the U.N.'s principal environmental watchdog — and especially its governing "Governing Council/Global Ministerial Environmental Forum," as the central nexus of that new eco-centric regime — and that strengthening its authority at both the national and international levels will be a growing theme as the 2012 Rio Conference looms nearer.

"It is clear that environmental ministers alone cannot meet today's environmental challenges," asserts yet another Bali discussion paper. "One step towards strengthening their standing vis-à-vis other sectors is to strengthen the national [environmental] governance system."

Meantime, UNEP's GC/GMEF "is mandated to bring all environmental aspects together and to formulate broad policy advice and guidance" in the area of "international environmental governance reform" — with the aim of having it all ratified, eventually, by the U.N. General Assembly.

Click here to read the discussion paper on international environmental governance.

In all of this, it appears, the 2012 Rio Conference on Sustainable Development and the preliminary meetings that will determine its agenda is intended to play an important role in focusing attention on the agenda being discussed at Bali, and in creating the suggested frameworks of future "international governance." Above all, the planned Rio summit will be a framework that welds together the UNEP framework of environmentalism with the U.N.'s traditional anti-poverty agenda — which also involves huge investment transfers to poor countries from rich ones.

The two agendas come together in the rubric for Rio: sustainable development. As the paper on governance turgidly puts it: "eradicating poverty, changing unsustainable patterns of production and consumption and protecting and managing the natural resource base of economic and social development [are] overarching objectives of and essential requirements for sustainable development."

Vast international wealth transfers, crash investments in "green" technologies for energy, food, transportation and virtually everything else, with the aim of making enormous cuts in carbon emissions by 2050 — the sum of all the discussions underway at Bali appears indistinguishable from the Copenhagen agenda that was declared dead in December.

Except the U.N. and many nations — including the U.S. — apparently don't think so. Indeed, a series of new Copenhagen process negotiations have just been set for Bonn in April, with another set for late May to early June.

Their official aim is to bring Copenhagen back from the dead by the end of this year at a final negotiating session in Mexico.

In a press release announcing the negotiating round, Yvo de Boer, head of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), which manages the Copenhagen negotiating process, declared that "this constitutes a quick return to the negotiations" — and a continuing determination to put a new treaty in place as the capstone of the Green World Order.

But at the same time, he made clear that a deal by the end of the year is unlikely; 2011 is more feasible.

If that happens, de Boer won't be applauding from his current position. He has resigned, effective July 1, to become a consultant.

The first major preparatory meetings for the Rio summit in 2012 will be held at U.N. headquarters in New York City in mid-May.

George Russell is executive editor of Fox News.

Rethinking Poverty

UNU-ONY will hold a book launch to discuss issues raised inRethinking Poverty: Report on the World Social Situation 2010,published by the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. The book focuses on the challenge of achieving poverty reduction, which remains an ethical, political and economic imperative.

The negative economic and social impacts of the recent food and energy crises, combined with the threats posed by climate change, challenges the assumption of the sustainability of poverty reduction. Rethinking Poverty: Report on the World Social Situation 2010 disputes the current technocratic vision of poverty reduction and affirms that eradicating poverty requires actions leading to sustainable economic growth, productive employment creation and social development as part of an integrated framework of economic and social policies for the benefit of all citizens.

The event will feature Dr. Jomo Kwame Sundaram, United Nations Assistant Secretary-General for Economic Development in the UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA), and (Honorary) Research Coordinator for the G-24 Intergovernmental Group on International Monetary Affairs and Development.

The Q&A session following the presentation will be moderated by UNU's Director Dr. Jean-Marc Coicaud.

Date: Tuesday, February 16, 2010

Time: 3:00 p.m. to 4:30 p.m.

Venue: Conference Room C, Temporary North Lawn Building (TNLB), UN Headquarters

Background Readings:

• Rethinking Poverty: Report on the World Social Situation 2010 - Executive Summary - PDF
• Rethinking Poverty: Report on the World Social Situation 2010 - Full Report - PDF
• The Global Economic Crisis after One Year: Is a New Paradigm for Recovery in Developing Countries Emerging? - UNU Policy Brief - PDF
• Policy Responses to the Global Economic Crisis in Africa - UNU Policy Brief - PDF
• Vulnerability in Developing Countries - UNU Research Brief - PDF
• Fragile States - UNU Research Brief - PDF
• Poverty Reduction in China: Is High Growth Enough? - UNU Policy Brief - PDF
• Can We Eradicate Hunger? - UNU Policy Brief - PDF
• Fiscal Policy for Poverty Reduction, Reconstruction, and Growth - UNU Policy Brief - PDF
• Resolution 56/177 adopted by the General Assembly. Implementation of the outcome of the World Summit for
  Social Development and of the twenty-fourth special session of the General Assembly - PDF

Speaker Profile:


Dr. Jomo Kwame Sundaram, United Nations Assistant Secretary-General for Economic Development in the UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs

Moderator Profile:


Jean-Marc Coicaud, Director, UNU-ONY



***





Dr. Jomo KS (Jomo Kwame Sundaram) has been UN Assistant Secretary General for Economic Development in the United Nations' Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA) since January 2005, and (Honorary) Research Coordinator for the G24 Intergovernmental Group on International Monetary Affairs and Development since December 2006. During 2008-2009, he serves as adviser to the President of the 63rd United Nations General Assembly, and as a member of the [Stiglitz] Commission of Experts of the President of the United Nations General Assembly on Reforms of the International Monetary and Financial System. Jomo was Professor in the Applied Economics Department, Faculty of Economics and Administration, University of Malaya until November 2004, Founder Director (1978-2004) of the Institute of Social Analysis (INSAN) and Founder Chair (2001-2004) of IDEAs, International Development Economics Associates (www.ideaswebsite.org ) where he now serves on the Advisory Panel. He was also on the Board of the United Nations Research Institute on Social Development (UNRISD), Geneva. Jomo studied at the Penang Free School, Royal Military College, Yale and Harvard. He has taught at Science University of Malaysia, Harvard, Yale, National University of Malaysia, University of Malaya, and Cornell. He has also been a Visiting Fellow at Cambridge University and a Senior Research Fellow at the Asia Research Institute, National University of Singapore. Jomo has authored over 35 monographs, edited over 50 books and translated 12 volumes besides writing many academic papers and articles for the media. He is on the editorial boards of several learned journals. In 2007, he was awarded the Wassily Leontief Prize for Advancing the Frontiers of Economic Thought. Some of his most recent book publications include Malaysia's Political Economy (with E. T. Gomez), Globalization Versus Development: Heterodox Perspectives; Southeast Asia's Industrialization; Behind Miracle and Debacle; After The Storm: Crisis, Recovery and Sustaining Development in East Asia; The Origins of Development Economics (with Erik Reinert); Pioneers of Development Economics; the two volumes of The Long Twentieth Century -- Globalization Under Hegemony: The Changing World Economy and The Great Divergence: Hegemony, Uneven Development and Global Inequality; Policy Matters: Economic And Social Policies To Sustain Equitable Development and Flat World, Big Gaps: Economic Liberalization, Globalization, Poverty and Inequality. His books in press include Servicing Malaysia: Labour Market Segmentation in Services (with H. L. Khong) and Regulating Malaysia: Law, Institutions and Economic Development (with others).




Dr. Jean-Marc Coicaud is the Director of the United Nations University (UNU) Office at the United Nations in New York. He was Senior Academic Officer at the UNU in Tokyo from 1996 to 2003. Before joining UNU, he served in the Executive Office of the United Nations Secretary-General as a speechwriter for Dr. Boutros Boutros-Ghali (1992-1996). A former fellow at Harvard University (Center for International Affairs, Department of Philosophy and Harvard Law School, from 1986 to 1992), Coicaud has held appointments such as Cultural Attaché with the French Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Legislative Aide with the European Parliament (Financial Committee), Associate Professor at the University of Paris, Visiting Professor at the Ecole Normale Supérieure-Ulm in Paris and Visiting Professor at Tsinghua University School of Public Policy and Management. He has also taught at the New School for Social Research (New York). He has been a Senior Fellow at the United States Institute of Peace (Washington, D.C.) and a Global Research Fellow at New York University School of Law. Coicaud holds a Ph.D. in political science-law from the Sorbonne and a Doctorat d'Etat in philosophy from the Institut d'Etudes Politiques of Paris. In addition, he holds undergraduate and graduate degrees in literature and linguistics. Jean-Marc Coicaud is a member of the Advisory Board of Carnegie Council's Global Policy Innovations (New York). He also serves as an adviser for the Fondation pour l'Innovation Politique (Paris). Dr. Coicaud has published 14 books in the fields of comparative politics, political and legal theory, international relations and international law. They are available in English, French, Japanese, Chinese, Spanish and Arabic, and include the following single-authored books: Politics and Legitimacy: A Contribution to the Study of Political Right and Political Responsibility (Cambridge University Press, 2002), Beyond the National Interest (United States Institute of Peace Press, 2007), Kokuren no Genkai/Kokuren no Mirai (Future of the UN/Limits of the UN - Fujiwara Shoten, 2007), Mai Xiang Guo Ji Fa Zhi (Towards the International Rule of Law - Sanlian Shudian, 2008). His latest book, co-edited with Hilary Charlesworth, is Fault Lines of International Legitimacy (Cambridge University Press, 2009).

UN hits back at climate sceptics amid e-mails row

The e-mails were posted on the internet last month

TO READ ARTICLE ON BBC - CLICK HERE

The UN's official panel on climate change has hit back at sceptics' claims that the case for human influence on global warming has been exaggerated.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) said it was "firmly" standing by findings that a rise in the use of greenhouse gases was a factor.

It was responding to a row over the reliability of data from East Anglia University's Climatic Research Unit

Leaked e-mail exchanges prompted claims that data had been manipulated.

Last month, hundreds of messages between scientists at the unit and their peers around the world were put on the internet along with other documents.

Some observers alleged one of the e-mails suggested head of the unit Professor Phil Jones wanted certain papers excluded from the UN's next major assessment of climate science.

The body of evidence is the result of the careful and painstaking work of hundreds of scientists worldwide Professor Thomas Stocker and Professor Qin Dahe, IPCC

Professor Jones, who denies this was his intention, has stood down from his post while an independent inquiry takes place.

In a statement, Professor Thomas Stocker and Professor Qin Dahe, co-chairmen of the IPCC's working group 1, condemned the act of posting the private e-mails on the internet, but avoided commenting on their content.

They went on to point to a key finding that states: "The warming in the climate system is unequivocal.

"[It] is based on measurements made by many independent institutions worldwide that demonstrate significant changes on land, in the atmosphere, the ocean and in the ice-covered areas of the Earth.

"Through further independent scientific work involving statistical methods and a range of different climate models, these changes have been detected as significant deviations from natural climate variability and have been attributed to the increase of greenhouse gases."

They added: "The body of evidence is the result of the careful and painstaking work of hundreds of scientists worldwide.

There is an anti-science group, there is a flat Earth group, if I may say so, over the scientific evidence for climate change Gordon Brown, Prime Minister

"The internal consistency from multiple lines of evidence strongly supports the work of the scientific community, including those individuals singled out in these e-mail exchanges."

The row comes ahead of the Copenhagen climate summit which starts on Monday.

Professor Jean-Pascal van Ypersele, vice-chairman of the IPCC, said it was no coincidence the information was released in the run-up to the summit.

He claimed unnamed conspirators could have paid for Russian hackers to break into the university computers to steal the e-mails.

He said the theft was a scandal and was "probably ordered" to disrupt the confidence negotiators have in the science.

Earlier, Climate Change Secretary Ed Miliband told the BBC he would be "very surprised" if there had been any wrongdoing on the part of the East Anglia University scientists.

"We're in a moment when the world is about to make some big political decisions," he said.

"And there will be people who don't want the world to make those big decisions and they are trying to use this in part to say somehow this is all in doubt and perhaps we should put the whole thing off.

"Well, I just think they're wrong about that."

Prime Minister Gordon Brown said the scientific evidence was "very clear" and called doubters a "flat Earth group".

He said: "There is an anti-change group. There is an anti-reform group. There is an anti-science group, there is a flat Earth group, if I may say so, over the scientific evidence for climate change."

'Open and transparent'

Meanwhile, the Met Office said it would publish all the data from weather stations worldwide, which it said proved climate change was caused by humans.

Its database is a main source of analysis for the IPCC.

It has written to 188 countries for permission to publish the material, dating back 160 years from more than 1,000 weather stations.

John Mitchell, head of climate science at the Met Office, said the evidence for man-made global warming was overwhelming - and the data would show that.

"So this is not an issue of whether we are confident or not in the figures for the trend in global warming, it's more about being open and transparent," he told the BBC.

The Met Office said it had already planned to publish the material long before the row and denied reports that government ministers had tried to block the publication.