Post-2015 development agenda session on follow-up and review, 18 -22 May – No 8: Statements by Group of 77 and China and Regional Groups

Following the opening remarks by the Co-facilitators, the Group of 77 and China and the Regional Groups made their opening statements: 

South Africa, speaking on behalf of the Group of 77 and China, referred to the General Assembly Resolution 67/290, which led to the creation of the High-level Political Forum (HLPF) on Sustainable Development. The G77 and China emphasized the need for an efficient, robust, inclusive and transparent follow up and review instrument as a cornerstone for a successful post-2015 development agenda. They reaffirmed the role and authority of the General Assembly as the chief deliberative, policymaking and representative UN organ and stressed the need sustainable development to be integrated further as a key element of the overarching framework for UN activities.

They also reaffirmed strengthening the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC), recognizing its role in achieving a balanced integration of the three dimensions of sustainable development, as well as being a principal organ in the integrated and coordinated follow-up of the outcomes of all major United Nations conferences and summits in the economic, social, environmental and related fields. The HLPF, moreover, is the key forum for follow up and review, recognizing the importance of enhanced coordination between ECOSOC and the GA and other relevant entities on the post-2015 development agenda, supported by the Secretariat of the Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA) for the meetings of the HLPF, under the GA and the ECOSOC. 

The HLPF should aim to advance the integration of the three dimensions of sustainable development in a balanced manner and foster coherence and progress in implementation. Taking into account other parallel inter-governmental processes the G77 and China believe that other mechanisms created to follow up on outcomes of UN conferences and conventions related to sustainable development must ensure in their structure coherence with and reporting to the HLPF to avid unnecessary duplication.

The G77 and China stated that the following guidelines should be taken into account in the follow up and review section of the post-2015 development agenda:

• The follow up and review should be universal in scope and should be owned by each country in accordance with its national circumstances, needs and priorities.
• It must be government-led and voluntary, involving ministerial and other relevant high-level participants.
• The review should also aim to review the activities of the UN system and stakeholders with regards to the SDGs and their means of implementation. 
• The follow up and review should encompass all the 17 SDGs and 169 targets in a balanced and integrated manner, including Goal 17 and MoI-specific targets at the international level. The balance and integration of the framework of goals should be preserved, while recognizing the priority for the implementation of Goal 17 and MOI-specific targets under other goals, given their cross-cutting nature and importance for the implementation of the entire framework of Goals. The Group would like to stress that this vision should in no way seek to prejudge the review and follow-up on progress to be determined for the Financing for Development track.
• The Group reiterates its support to the technology facilitation mechanism for the implementation of the SDGs. The Group also believes that follow up and review endeavours should assess the results of such mechanism in catalyzing efforts to promote and transfer of technology to developing countries.
• The follow up and review process should focus on international efforts  to promote sustainable development, as well as the national assessment of progress, gaps, achievements and challenges in the implementation of the post 2015 development agenda.
• This process should also include the contribution of the relevant UN entities, including the regional level, at the request of states, in line with their national programmes.
• The follow-up and review should be conducted in a constructive spirit in order to foster positive mutual learning and cooperation to assist governments in their achievement of sustainable development. This means that it should be based on long-term orientation and incentives such as sharing lessons learned and experiences, necessary means of implementation, take into account capacity-building and financing needs, facilitate access to technology and other support to be provided by a wide range of actors in a complementary manner to the support provided by developed countries.
• The follow-up and review process should strengthen the follow up and review of the commitments at the international level. In this regard differentiated approach should underpin this undertaking to ensure focus, in particular, on the MOI provided for the attainment of the SDGs. In this regard we stress that the universality of SDGs should enhance consistency with the principle of CBDR with a view to recognizing different national realities, capacities and levels of development while also emphasizing the importance of national policy space. 
• We reiterate our view that, follow-up and review of the implementation of the SDGs framework at national level should be determined by national governments in accordance with national circumstances and level of development including the participation of all relevant stakeholders such as civil society, social actors and the UN development system, in accordance with national legislations.  
• The envisioned undertaking should ensure coherence between the national, regional and global level.
• The basis for the follow-up and review of qualitative national information on sustainable development policies at all levels should be robust data drawn from national progress reports. Data and information from existing reporting mechanisms should be used where possible, recognizing the urgent need for transfer of financial resources, technologies and capacity building for developing countries in accordance with national priorities and strategies.

The G77 and China, in conclusion, reiterated that follow up and review of progress should be central in the implementation of all the outcomes of the major United Nations conferences and summits in the economic, social and environmental fields, as well as their respective means of implementation. 

Nigeria, on behalf of Africa Group, added that the HLPF, as the key forum with its four-year cycle, should be able to take decisions and be provided with a secretariat. The post-2015 development agenda and the FfD processes should run on two separate tracks, recognizing the complementarities, with the independent FfD outcome process feeding into post-2015, together with those of summits and conferences and other processes. It is important to get things right from the outset. The review should be voluntary and state-led, and should be expanded to include activities of UN system and stakeholders, being conducted in a constructive spirit, including access to best practices and taking into account capacity-building. Its approach should be differentiated to focus on different goals, while respecting national policies and priorities. To enhance existing review mechanisms, guided by principles for follow up and review should also at addressed at the regional level. The African peer review mechanism has been very effective. Support will be required from regional commissions, including for data and information collection and use, drawn from national reports. The review and follow-up mechanism should also encompass all the 17 goals and 169 targets.

European Union, focussing on the core elements, said that the success of the post-2015 development agenda depends on countries working together. Monitoring, accountability and review will be important in assessing progress. An important building block is set out in the resolution on strengthening of ECOSOC and HLPF and review of Rio outcome and in the SGs synthesis report.  Member States should seek to build on and improve existing mechanisms, including those of the treaty bodies. Data disaggregation and statistics are beneficial for all.  Each country should ensure that systems are in place. The framework should be combined with national ownership. The main purpose is to monitor and collectively review progress as well as identify gaps to enable measures  ‘to get back on track’. The objective is not finger–pointing but exchanging best practices and leadership including identifying new and emerging issues. There should be one overarching accountability framework including the pillar to be agreed in Addis. Specialized input should be taken into consideration as appropriate. The HLPF will have an oversight role. There is no need for an Inter-Agency Task force. The priority should be to streamline the roles of existing mechanisms. The framework should be inclusive and multi-level with mutual support. Reports from civil society and other stakeholders should be encouraged at all levels, and the contribution of the private sector should also be assessed.

Ecuador, speaking on behalf of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC), referred to mandates of Rio+20 and resolutions 68/1 and 67/290, and the mandate of the HLPF, which should become a dynamic platform for regular dialogue. The follow up and review of the Post-2015 Development Agenda should be universal, according to the circumstances, needs and priorities of countries and voluntary. The UN System should be reformed in conformity with the new universal nature of the Agenda.  Its framework should be coherent with the technical and political balance of the OWS-SDG Report and the delicate balance achieved of the SDGs should be the basis for the follow up and review. CELAC recognizes the importance of the regional dimension of sustainable development and highlights the need to strengthen the cooperation with the United Nations regional commissions and other relevant regional entities.

The goals and targets should be integrated into national policies, taking into account national circumstances, capabilities, levels of development and national priorities and developing countries will need support to strengthen their national measurement and statistical capacities. The global indicators to be developed by the Statistical Commission and could assist in measuring overall global implementation of Post-2015 Development Agenda, with national indicators being developed in accordance with respective national capacities, institutional capabilities, and development stages, on a voluntary basis. The Post-2015 Development Agenda therefore will allow countries to develop and apply its own national indicators, for their follow up, while supporting statistic agencies of developing countries to developed adequate indicators. 

It is also important to address the needs, the multiple or aggravated discriminations, to allow for a specific focus on women and vulnerable groups, such, indigenous peoples, migrants, afro-descendants, among others. It should be also in line with the need to advance in efforts against inequality and structural gaps. by, inter alia, taking into account the multidimensional nature of poverty, 

Tunisia, on behalf of the Arab group, referred to respect for national sovereignty and human rights, including the right to development, and strengthening principles of good governance. He stressed the importance of review and follow-up, saying that their mechanisms must be global and transparent. The role of HLPF should be the mechanisms in charge of review and follow-up and deliberations on the framework of the post-2015 development agenda need to set it on its way to enable it fulfill its functions and to allow it to take decisions and issue reports. The independence of the FfD must be considered something separate understanding that they have points in common with the post-2015 development agenda. Duplication with other review mechanisms such as those related to other UN conferences and summits should be avoided. At the national level, states should have appropriate political leeway to take necessary steps while involving stakeholders. Regional commissions should provide technical support and all stakeholders must be taken into consideration, as well as achievements and challenges of countries.

CARICOM, speaking on behalf of CARICOM, Belize noted that the review and follow-up should track progress for the sustainable development goals and also processes the SAMOA Pathway. They noted the importance of the global indicators and the data that they will generate, currently being developing by the Statistical Commission. These indicators should adhere to core principles such as universality, comprehensiveness (covering all goals and related targets), balance across the three dimensions of sustainable development, integrated, inclusiveness, and providing for timely, high quality, comparable, disaggregated data. There should be participation of all stakeholders, including international organizations and other actors and should be adequately supported. The review and follow-up should be multi-layered with country ownership at the national level, will be key. 

There should be time for alignment of national long-term sustainable development strategies or plans with the global aspirations of the post-2015 development agenda. At the regional level, General Assembly resolution 67/290 provides a basis for input from regional entities/commissions.  CARICOM considers that ECLAC could serve as a platform for sharing experiences, good practices and importantly building understanding of challenges in the implementation of global sustainable development commitments. The challenges of small island developing countries (SIDS) and the implementation of the SAMOA Pathway can be addressed regionally. At the international level, the High- level Political Forum (HLPF) global assessment of progress should cover all countries – developed and developing and include inputs from other intergovernmental entities and also from other stakeholders. 

Maldives, speaking on behalf of the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS), said that the follow-up and review mechanism must recognise the primacy of national ownership of development, while taking into account that one-size-does NOT fit-all. It must be one that strengthens accountability at all levels and be transparent, inclusive, robust and effective, while looking at the three pillars of development holistically. It can no longer continue as business-as-usual. The review and follow up mechanism must be informed by reliable and timely data. 

For SIDS, improved data collection and statistical analysis is required to enable them to plan effectively, follow up on, evaluate the implementation of, and track successes in attaining the internationally agreed goals. The follow-up and review mechanism should make greater use of our national statistics and developmental indicators, where available. International obligations place very heavy reporting burdens on countries such as SIDS, where capacity is severely constrained; therefore they would be weary of proposals to have multiple national reports, and short reporting cycles at the national level. They also recognised the role of regional agencies and commissions in sharing best practises and experiences within the region, as well as the importance of the SAMOA Pathway for SIDS and the need to ensure coherence and those processes feed into each other.  

An intervention was also made by Tonga on behalf of the P-SIDS.