SUMMARY REPORT CONSULTATIVE MEETING OF LDCS AND FRIENDS OF LDS ON THE COMPREHENSIVE HIGH-LEVEL MIDTERM REVIEW OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE IPOA 18-19 February 2016 Dolce Palisades Hotel, Palisades, New York 1
Introduction Member States have decided to hold a comprehensive high-level mid-term review of the implementation of the Istanbul Programme of Action (IPoA) in Antalya, Turkey in May 2016. The mid-term review will undertake a comprehensive assessment of the status of implementation of the IPoA by LDCs and their development partners; share best practices and lessons learned; identify obstacles and constraints encountered, and actions and initiatives needed to overcome them, as well as new challenges and emerging issues. The review will also reaffirm the global commitment to address the special needs of LDCs made at the Fourth United Nations Conference on LDCs. It will, additionally, further strengthen the global partnership for the development of LDCs in all priority areas of the IPoA, in order to ensure the timely, effective and full implementation of the Programme of Action during the remainder of the decade, while building synergies with the 2030 Agenda for sustainable development. General Assembly resolution 69/231 articulated the organizational structure of the mid-term review process of the implementation of the IPoA. As per the resolution, a number of preparatory processes will culminate into an intergovernmentally negotiated and agreed outcome in the form of a political declaration. As part of the preparatory process, OHRLLS with financial support from the government of Finland - organized a consultative meeting of LDCs and Friends of LDCs aimed at catalysing a discussion on the content of the Midterm Review by offering an informal setting for an open and interactive exchange of views. Permanent Representatives of LDCs and the Friends of LDCs had an opportunity to exchange their views on the expectations for the Midterm Review, progress made so far and how lessons learnt from the first five year of the IPoA implementation can be taken forward. The consultative meeting also enabled the participants to develop and discuss concrete deliverables for the Midterm Review. The event comprised a working dinner on Thursday, 18 February and a full day of thematic working sessions on Friday, 19 February, including presentations on specific topics followed by interactive debates and breakout sessions. Opening session The opening session featured remarks from the following speakers: Mr. Gyan Chandra Acharya, Under-Secretary-General and High Representative for the LDCs, LLDCs and SIDS; H.E. Mr. Masud Bin Momen, Permanent Representative of Bangladesh and Chair, LDC group; H.E. Ms. Riitta Resch, Ambassador, Ministry for Foreign Affairs of Finland; and Ms. Helen Clark, Administrator of UNDP. Mr. Acharya started by welcoming all participants to the meeting. He informed participants that the consultative meeting was part of a series of preparatory events leading up to the MTR to be held at the end of May. He noted that the process so far had been inclusive. He explained that at the national level, LDCs have been submitting country progress reports to OHRLLS. At the regional level, ECA and ESCAP led Regional Preparatory MTR meetings of the IPoA in Africa and Asia-Pacific in 2015. At the global level, an Inter-agency consultative group meeting on preparations of the UN system for the MTR was held at the end of 2015. Mr. Acharya also provided a brief overview of the progress made by the LDCs since 2011. He stated that many LDCs have made great strides in their development efforts but that more needs to be done, especially on issues such as building productive capacity and addressing economic and environmental vulnerabilities. He stressed that 2
while several LDCs are at various stages of graduation, others need more support if the IPoA targets are to be met in a timely manner. In order to have concrete plans to accelerate progress in the remaining five years of the IPoA implementation period, Mr. Acharya emphasised that at the MTR, it was important that LDCs, their development partners and other stakeholders be represented at the highest possible political level. He also noted that it was critical to ensure coherence between the IPoA and other important global agreements reached in 2015. He ended by urging all participants to actively participate and contribute during the consultative meeting as the discussions and conclusions of the meeting would serve as inputs into the draft outcome document of the MTR. In his remarks, H.E. Mr. Momen pointed out that with the MTR coming up in three months, it is important to have clear information about the achievements and the challenges faced during the first half of the implementation of the IPoA. He emphasised the need to draw a clear roadmap for ensuring that the IPoA targets are met within the stipulated 2020 deadline. He stated that he was hopeful the consultative meeting would contribute towards a fruitful MTR and would provide direction for successfully implementing the IPoA while taking into account the recent major developments, including the 2030 Agenda, the AAAA, the Sendai Framework and the Paris Agreement. Mr. Momen stressed that LDCs need support from the international community to help them complete the journey of graduation. He highlighted that the LDCs are appreciative of the cooperation by the Member States and other entities, particularly the Friends of LDCs. He also thanked the Government of Turkey for hosting the MTR. Ms. Resch said that she welcomed the ECOSOC Dialogue on the longer term positioning of the UN development system vis-a-vis the support it is expected to provide for the implementation of the 2030 Agenda. She hoped that strong voices from LDCs will be heard during the continued ECOSOC Dialogue as well as in the coming negotiations of the quadrennial comprehensive policy review (QCPR) next fall. She stressed that common goals such as, eradicating poverty, achieving internationally agreed SDGs and enabling the graduation from the LDC category are mutually supportive goals for all global processes. She noted the importance of graduation as a goal for LDCs and that they should be supported in graduating from the LDC status. She informed participants that Finland is committed to supporting LDCs. She noted that in spite of the pressure that economic constraints exert on ODA, Finland has been able to keep its percentage of the GNI to the LDCs close to 0.2%. The keynote speech was delivered by Ms. Clark. She pointed out that 2015 was a remarkable year for setting global development agendas and stressed that coherent and effective implementation of all the 2015 agreements together with the IPoA is needed to achieve poverty eradication and other transformative changes in LDCs. She noted that while LDCs came off a lower base, the group has made significant strides over the past two decades. She highlighted that the HDI value for LDCs increased by 26% between 2000 and 2014, compared to the average increase of 11% for all countries. However, she emphasised that more can be done and that the MTR is an opportunity for LDCs and partners to assess progress since the 2011 Istanbul conference and also the challenges which lie ahead. Some of the challenges highlighted by Ms. Clark include: reducing vulnerability to economic shocks; closing the large investment gaps in infrastructure, transport, access to energy, and ICTs, which continue to hold back the development of productive and trade capacities in LDCs, especially landlocked LDCs; improving access to education, healthcare, productive employment, and decent work; and, coping with climate change. She emphasised the importance of applying the lessons of the IPoA and MDG implementation including, the need to mainstream global 3
development agendas into national and sub-national strategies and budgets. To strengthen the implementation of the IPoA, Ms. Clark highlighted four matters, which she suggested required attention during discussions at the consultative meeting: (i) the need for strong public and private partnerships and innovative approaches to resource mobilisation (ii) affirming South-South Cooperation to LDCs (iii) the need to consider how larger partnerships could be built to support the improvement of data systems in LDCs, which are needed to monitor progress on IPoA and Agenda 2030 (iv) expediting the operationalisation of the Technology Bank. She informed participants that UNDP is closely involved in the preparatory process for the MTR, and will continue to engage in all national, regional, and global level consultations. She also noted that UNDP is assisting with the preparation of a number of national reports for the MTR, and will continue to support the mainstreaming of the IPoA into national development plans and into UN Development Assistance Frameworks and UNDP Country Programme documents. She also highlighted that UNDP will continue supporting LDCs through the UN Capital Development Fund. Session 1: Review of the implementation of the IPoA from 2011 to 2016 The first panel session was chaired by H.E. Ms. Bénédicte Frankinet, Permanent Representative of Belgium and co-facilitator of the MTR and moderated by Mr. Gyan Chandra Acharya, USG and High Representative, OHRLLS. Ms. Frankinet pointed out that the consultative meeting provides a platform for discussing ideas as well as concrete proposals for the outcome document, and noted that the preparatory process for the MTR so far, has been very rich and insightful both in terms of assessing the progress made and challenges encountered in the implementation of the IPoA. She also mentioned the previous week s thematic event hosted by the President of the General Assembly, which showed clear progress made despite all the challenges faced by LDCs. It was thus important to build on the drivers of this success in moving forward. Mr. Acharya explained that the meeting was intended to elicit ideas regarding the further implementation of the IPoA, and recapped that the eight priority areas of the Programme are organically linked and all have a crucial role to play. Experience has shown that where progress was made in all areas, meeting the IPoA goals was much higher. Mr. Acharya expressed his hope for national perspectives to inform the discussions, as the impact of LDCs on the global situation will be even more important in the future. He emphasized the concept of mutual accountability, as LDCs have the primary responsibility for their development on the one hand, while a global partnership is critical for countries with limited means. Mr. Acharya also thanked Turkey for its generosity to host the MTR in Antalya, Turkey. Opening remarks were made by H.E. Mr. Y. Halit Çevik, Ambassador and Permanent Representative of Turkey, the host country for the midterm review. Mr. Çevik pointed out that the MTR has the potential to put LDCs on a path to success by addressing the current gaps in implementation. It offers an opportunity for development partners to renew their commitment to LDCs as well as for building synergy and coherence with global processes. He also noted that the effective implementation of IPoA will contribute to peace and prosperity. The ambassador stressed that high level participation in the MTR was crucial, and encouraged not only LDCs but also their development partners to attend at the highest political level. Finally, he emphasized that the implementation of the Technology Bank is critical to achieving the goals of the IPoA. The Director of OHRLLS, Ms. Heidi Schroderus-Fox, made a presentation on progress towards the implementation of the IPoA and informed that the UN Secretary General s report on the 4
implementation of the IPoA is available on the website of OHRLLS. Ms. Fox pointed out that the last five years of the IPoA implementation are also the first five of the SDGs, and that this makes the MTR a unique opportunity to assess progress, learn from successes and challenges, and create synergies between the IPoA and the other agenda and agreements adopted in 2015. She mentioned that while only four LDCs have graduated so far, ten more are at various stages of graduation, and several additional LDCs have expressed their intention to graduate. One major obstacle remains the lack of structural transformation in most LDCs. Other challenges included low share of LDCs in world trade, falling commodity prices, low enrolment in secondary education, insufficient access to improved sanitation, vulnerability to disasters, stagnant FDI and ODA and low domestic resource mobilization. Successes included increases in access to mobile phones and improved water sources, a reduction in infant mortality, a higher savings rate and stronger financial buffers. She stressed the need to focus on productive capacity building and the crucial role of enhanced support for LDCs. The final presentation was delivered by Mr. Gauri Pradhan, International Coordinator of LDC Watch. Mr. Pradhan stressed that national strategies should be scaled up urgently. He also mentioned the need for enhancing the role of regional mechanisms in the implementation process, for example involving the UN Resident Coordinators, and acknowledged UNCTAD s role for technical capacity building. Mr. Pradhan pointed out that the large percentage of the population in LDCs is under 25 years of age, and the creation of jobs therefore remains critical. He also touched upon food security, social protection and policy coherence issues. Mr. Pradhan called upon the UN, LDC governments and development partners to enhance resources and strengthen mutual accountability. He urged the quantity and quality of ODA to be increased, and called for technology transfer to be accelerated. Interactive discussion Several delegates expressed their appreciation for the presentation of the Secretary-General s Report, noting that the assessments made in the report are in line with the national findings. A number of delegates expressed concerns about the decline in ODA and reiterated that robust international support remains critical for the implementation of the IPoA. The role of international cooperation including South-South cooperation was also highlighted. National leadership was considered as crucial and the need for effective integration into national plans early on including at sub-national level was highlighted. As agriculture is the dominant sector in LDCs, it was noted that structural transformation in the next 5 years will depend on raising agricultural productivity together with the development of other productive sectors. It was also stressed that enhanced international support including technical cooperation and delivery on global commitments will be needed to speed up progress. Concerns were expressed over the new and emerging climate change issues and its impact on economic and social development. It was mentioned that at the national level, a mapping exercise could be an effective strategy to identify the key drivers and game changing sectors where development partners can work with LDCs to catalyse development. The energy sector, which accounts for 30-40% of the national budget in some LDCs, was also identified as a key sector that required prioritised attention. It was noted that ODA and other resources need to be leveraged to promote investment in the energy sector. Some delegates stressed the importance of connectivity as access to ICTs is currently very limited in many LDCs. 5
This area could be transformative for investment and partnerships with the private sector could be useful. Other issues of concern raised were low secondary school graduation, persistently high poverty, food in security and job and revenue losses due to falling commodity prices. There was also a call for enhancing support to develop infrastructure, productive capacity building and a manufacturing base. The importance of youth employment, which is also related to conflicts, was reiterated in the interactive discussions. Furthermore it was stressed that building resilience was very important for LDCs, given their high degree of vulnerability. Suggestions were made to provide an opportunity for LDCs to showcase good practices and discuss concrete country case studies that can be scaled up and replicated in other LDCs during the MTR. In this context, data, monitoring and evaluation were cited as a big part of the process, including DESA modelling tools for SDGs for countries to help make real time decisions based on data. Finally, delegates expressed the wish to agree the draft outcome ahead of the MTR in Antalya, and to dedicate the time in Antalya to forging partnerships Session 2: Building synergies and strengthening implementation of the IPoA The second panel session was chaired by H.E. Mr. Jean-Francis Régis Zinsou, Permanent Representative of Benin and co-facilitator of the MTR and moderated by Mr. Gyan Chandra Acharya, USG and High Representative, OHRLLS. Ambassador Zinsou described the MTR as a critical opportunity to take stock of progress, challenges and the way forward, seen against the 2030 Agenda, AAAA, Sendai Framework, and Paris Agreement, which recommitted the world to eradicating poverty. Mr. Zinsou stressed that LDCs were the litmus test of the new approach to sustainability, placed at centre of the 2030 Agenda with a commitment to leave no one behind. He pointed out that the MTR was an opportunity to ensure coherence and synergy instead of overlap and duplication, and address bottlenecks at the systemic level (e.g. illicit financial flows, the right landscape to unleash PPPs), with a conducive international environment. Mr. Acharya mentioned that the 2030 Agenda was inclusive, integrated and ambitious, and pointed out that poverty could not be eradicated without LDCs, and likewise with hunger, access to energy, education, health, and sanitation. He noted that the IPoA and the 2030 Agenda overlap, and this suggested the need for synergies in terms of approaches, similarities, goals and targets. Mr. Acharya posed the questions of how best to bring these synergies at the policy, implementation and follow up levels, and how to bring the AAAA resources agenda to fruition in the case of LDCs. Mr. David Nabarro, Special Adviser of the Secretary-General on the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, stressed that the 2030 Agenda has put LDC interests at the centre, and that it was a political manifesto for the world - a first of its kind - universal, indivisible and transformative. Mr. Nabarro further pointed out that the 2030 Agenda brought together the three pillars of the international system peace and security, development, human rights and social justice hence the need to address interconnected issues in an integrated manner. He also pointed out that implementation needs to actively involve all stakeholders, utilize mechanisms to bring them together, better quality data, better capacity in government, better suited technologies, better systems of accountability, and a strong Resident Coordinator system. Finally, Mr. Nabarro expressed 6
his commitment to put the challenges of LDCs at the top of his agenda when advising the Secretary- General. Ms. Judith Karl, Executive Secretary of UNCDF, described her organization as one of the support measures for LDC, and focused her presentation on creating synergies on the ground between the IPoA and SDGs using inclusive and innovative finance at local level. She pointed out that the MTR was an excellent occasion to reinforce the catalytic role of ODA in LDCs and unlock other forms of finance where it s needed most, as well as the need to reach the last mile, as investors perceptions of high risk and low return lead to insufficient finance. One example provided was UNCDF using ODA to de-risk local investment spaces in the United Republic of Tanzania, with $6 million in ODA used to leverage $100 million of bank investments in hydro power and warehouse facilities. Ms. Karl further stressed that resources and capacities must be localized, as they don t always get to the last mile where they are scarcest (e.g. channelling green climate funds directly to local spaces, giving them authority over priorities, so they re not only flowing through central planners). Finally, she suggested that the MTR should call to recommit aggressive financial inclusion, such as digital pathways. ODA could be used to incentivize financial providers to go the last mile, help women, small farmers, youth and other populations. The final presentation was delivered by Mr. Sandagdorj Erdenebileg, Chief, OHRLLS, who reported on the thematic PGA event held in the context of the MTR preparations. Key messages from the event included the fact that LDCs had the fastest increase in their Human Development Index scores but needed to build on successes and identify how to do more, especially since the majority of LDCs missed most MDGs. Successful LDCs took agricultural transformation seriously, and also had strong national ownership, priorities and actions. He furthermore stated that the current momentum at the global level offers an opportunity for the MTR to address the gap between goals and reality and that the IPoA and SDGs share common goals and common implementation means. He stressed that harmonized reporting systems for both agendas are necessary to reduce the burden on LDCs, and technical assistance and capacity building, especially in statistics, is critical for monitoring. Likewise the high dependence on commodities combined with price collapses places large pressure on LDCs and there is an important role for domestic resource mobilization, remittances, innovating financing and curbing illicit flows. The fall in ODA jeopardized progress towards meeting goals, and needs to be reversed and increased to 0.15-0.2 of donor s GNI. He concluded by stressing that the LDC identification criteria could be used as aid allocation criteria and that there must be a balance between investing in people and investing in productive capacity. Interactive discussion Several delegates alluded to the need to realign the IPoA with the new agendas. It was pointed out that the LDC group has already started looking at indicators relevant for this purpose, including gaps and challenges, which could be useful for the MTR. It was highlighted that the LDCs are privileged in the sense that many issues of the IPoA has been integrated into the 2030 Agenda, AAAA and Paris Agreement. The need for realignment is important but there are many areas which are IPoA plus in the SDGs and vice versa. As 50% of LLDCs are LDCs, and 9 SIDS are LDCs, it was proposed to have all programmes brought together for coherence for mainstreaming into national development agendas. Coordination was considered as important between IPoA and other agendas, in terms of adequate coordination, implementation, monitoring and evaluation. It was suggested that fragmentation would hamper progress towards both IPoA and the SDGs, but that by the same token, the 2030 Agenda was catalytical to the IPoA and vice versa. Reducing redundancies in monitoring was seen as 7
key, with IPoA data integral to SDGs data, given limited resources. Better coordination at the national level with the full support of UN agencies as well as development partners was also stressed. Therefore, greater coherence was called for in terms of the process, timeline and alignment and monitoring. Some delegates expressed their expectation that the indicators for the 2030 Agenda will be disaggregated for LDCs, LLDCs and SIDS. Several partners expressed strong commitment to lend support for LDCs in providing ODA with reform of concessionality, trade support and technical cooperation. Some delegates stressed that since goals were cross cutting, there should be coordination with institutional setup at different levels adequately resourced. It was highlighted that the UN system should be made fit for purpose and needed to deliver as one, for example using QCPR and discussions on the long term strategy of the UN development system. Several delegates emphasized the need to make the process as user friendly as possible, with no duplication, streamlining indicators for both processes, and suggested to develop a matrix to bring agenda 2030, IPoA, VPoA, the Paris Agreement and the AAAA together for LDCs. Finally, it was highlighted that graduation was not just about exiting the LDC category but also about getting on a sustainable development path. Session 3: Breakout sessions (i) Means of implementation The session on means of implementation was chaired by Ms. Marianne Loe, Minister Counsellor of the Permanent Mission of Norway. Delegates suggested that the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, Addis Ababa Action Agenda, Paris Agreement and Sendai Framework provide robust frameworks for the means of implementation, capacity building support and technology transfer to LDCs. They expressed concern that there was not much progress in the areas of ODA, FDI, trade and debt. It was suggested that the guiding principle for the MoI should be leaving no one behind, leaving no country behind and no group of people behind and resources should go where the poor people live. Delegates underscored the need for strengthening the domestic tax base and the tax system and integrating the informal economy into the formal sector. They also suggested getting benefit of the pension funds for long term investment. Participants also called for developing domestic capital market and addressing illicit financial flows and transfer mispricing. There are huge opportunities to mobilize and get access to diaspora resources and to use them for productive sectors, while recognizing that remittances are private funding. Participants expressed concern over the recent decline in ODA and called for reversing the current trend and fulfilling the ODA target to LDCs. It came up in the discussions that fulfilling the 0.2 per cent of ODA target can double the resources for LDCs. Member States underlined that LDCs needed access to concessional lending and suggested to establish a framework that would guarantee LDCs access to private capital market. LDCs need support to create a domestic environment to attract FDI. It was highlighted that there was a nexus between governance, policy and mobilization of resources. Appropriate policies and legal instruments would assist in attracting FDI and investment from domestic market. 8
Participants underscored that the manufacturing sector of LDCs had low technology content which reduces the competitiveness. Connections to global value chains are vitally important. Agricultural products need technological support for product diversification, transformation and domestic value addition. The importance of South-South trade, regional cooperation and integration were also highlighted. It was stressed that LDCs have a lot to learn from the countries of the South especially in capacity building and technology transfer. Southern countries expressed their support to LDCs in the form of experience sharing and targeted assistance measures. It was also highlighted that South-South cooperation is a compliment and not a substitute to North-South cooperation. Delegates called for full operationalization of the Technology Bank. It was flagged that the IPR and funding would be key challenges. Participants requested to build synergy between the Technology Bank and the Technology Facilitation Mechanism. (ii) Resilience building The session on resilience building was chaired by Ambassador Khaled Hussein Alyemani, Permanent Representative of Yemen. In the discussions, participants highlighted that LDCs face a wide range of shocks and discussed the merits of grouping shocks into clusters according to natural disasters, environmental and climate related shocks; economic shocks and commodity price shocks, and conflict inflicted shocks. It was noted such a grouping would allow for more targeted solutions. The session mainly focused on environmental shocks although the importance of commodity diversification and structural transformation to reduce vulnerability to economic shocks was also stressed. The group reiterated the predominance of the agricultural sector in LDCs and the devastating impact of natural disasters and weather related events. The group noted addressing these types of shock will require a holistic approach involving stakeholders across the board. There is also a need to ensure the actions devised are location specific and relevant to the situation on the ground was also noted. The participants explored the linkages between vulnerability and resilience building noting that LDCs remain highly vulnerable to shocks. The special case of small Island developing states such as Tuvalu, in the face of climate change was discussed. In particular the issue of climate induced migration and it consequences was further explored. The experience of risk pooling mechanism, established through the Caribbean Catastrophe Risk Insurance Facility (CRIFF) to strengthen disaster risk management strategies was shared. The session highlighted a number of proposals for building resilience in LDCs. Participants stressed the need to strengthen regional mechanisms for resilience building through sharing of knowledge and expertise as well as technology such as the use of early warning systems to help with disaster risk reduction and disaster preparedness. Others noted the need to increase the level of ODA and the predictability of financial flows to LDCs to build resilience. It was highlighted that too often, funds become available only after disasters have struck, stressing the need to make funds accessible ex-ante as well as ex-post. It was pointed out that investment in resilient infrastructure even though it is expensive in the short-run is more cost-effective in the long-run. Some participants shared experiences on how the implementation of building code regulations and standards for disaster risk 9
reduction can rapidly increase resilience. Furthermore, participants agreed that the effective implementation of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction should help LDCs to enhance their resilience. The role of international cooperation in this regard was also noted. On the issue of climate change, it was noted that, the climate finance architecture is complex and poses a challenge for many LDCs to effectively absorb the resources that are available. There was agreement that modalities to access to climate finance for LDCs should be simplified. Furthermore, LDCs also require technical support to build their capacity to better access funds and implement projects for climate mitigation and adaptation. One participant noted the establishment of a dedicated mechanism for LDCs for resilience building. (iii) National ownership and progress towards graduation The session on national ownership and progress towards graduation was chaired by Ms. Jeanne d Arc Byaje, Deputy Permanent Representative of Rwanda. In her opening remarks, she noted that compared to the MDGs, the 2030 agenda is a more complex and comprehensive agenda. She emphasised that there was need for citizens to understand all issues in the agenda if the implementation is to be effective. She also stressed that it was important that these issues are framed according to the country s own realities. During the interactive session, some participants noted that the definition and practice of national ownership differed across countries. The relevance of arriving at some common understanding about its meaning and how to operationalise it was stressed. Participants highlighted the importance of including actors such as, civil society organisations, the media and parliament in the development process of the country. It was also discussed that in order to strengthen national ownership, it is important to take into account various elements, including national-level planning, coordination, governance and transparency. The importance of building capacity in all these areas was highlighted. Others emphasised that the issue of accountability should be built in from the beginning. It was shared by some participants that national ownership is emphasised in their country plans. Other participants expressed concern that while the 2030 Agenda is universal, awareness is very low at the national level. The importance for the government to inform citizens about the outcomes of the global agreements and the necessary strategies required to implement these agreements was stressed. Participants also highlighted the importance of following an inclusive system of planning (bottom-up approach). Other participants noted that Goal 16 of the 2030 Agenda is at the core of national ownership. One participant gave an example of Rwanda, which is a piloting country for goal 16. The group was informed that indicators to monitor this goal have been developed as well as a score card where citizens rate the services provided by the government. Some participants pointed out that leadership has a key role to play in motivating people to be artisans of their own progress. Others emphasised that ownership and leadership are interlinked. It was discussed that there was need for coordinated action by various actors within different parts of national governments. Some participants expressed the need for flexibility from donors as some of the national projects tend to be ear-marked by donors. 10
Participants pointed out that data is fundamental towards the continued process of monitoring. The importance of strengthening the capacity of national institutions to collect data in order to make informed policy decisions was also stressed. Regarding graduation, participants emphasised the need for support measures towards a smooth and sustainable transition from the LDC category. One participant added that in evaluating LDCs graduation prospects, it was important to take into account high vulnerability levels, especially of low-lying LDCs. Closing Session The presentations of the breakout sessions were followed by an interactive discussion in plenary. Most of the interventions from the participants focussed on complementing the presentations from the breakout sessions. Under resilience building, participants added the following points: that macro-economic and financial stability is also important; that CSOs are important partners in building resilience; and that there is need to explore initiatives such as establishing a trust bank, food bank, etc., at the local, national or regional level, to help LDCs recover after disasters. On national ownership and progress towards graduation, the link between ownership and accountability was stressed by one participant. It was also emphasised that in order to enhance effectiveness, ownership should exist at all stages - planning, implementation and evaluation. On Means of implementation, some participants added that as remittances are based on private income, it has to be understood as such while enhancing its productive use while also considering its possible social costs. Some participants also highlighted that it is important for LDCs not to fall back into the debt crisis. One participant added that resources are not adequate to achieve the IPoA objectives and that there was need to mobilise more resources. In his closing remarks, Mr. Acharya thanked all participants for holding comprehensive discussions on LDCs. He noted that substantive discussions were held on all priority areas. He highlighted that to maximise impact, it is important to build synergy between the IPoA and the 2030 agenda. He noted that there was genuine determination from LDCs and partners to move ahead and achieve poverty eradication in an accelerated manner. He stressed that a multi-stakeholder approach is critical for achieving the IPoA objectives. He emphasised the need to add value and diversify LDCs economies and provide opportunities to rural areas. Mr. Acharya also noted that there was need to leverage domestic resources targeting priority areas of the IPoA and that PPPs have to be made workable for LDCs. Given the high incidence of poverty in LDCs and also their dependence on a single or very few markets, building resilience and reducing vulnerability is a challenge, he emphasised. He noted that the MTR is an opportune time to accelerate progress. He stressed that having a comprehensive, substantive and forward looking political declaration is critical. He concluded the meeting with the message that it was important to have high level political participation from LDCs and development partners at the MTR in Antalya. 11