26.06.2015

Sixth round of post-2015 intergovernmental negotiations

The sixth round of the post-2015 intergovernmental negotiations took place during 22-25 at the UN Headquarters. Member states discussed the Zero draft of the outcome document for the UN Summit to adopt the Post-2015 Development Agenda.

The Zero Draft will have the following components:

  1. The follow-up and review aspect will be comprehensive.
  2. It will support countries making informed policy choices and mobilizing means of implementation and partnerships.
  3. It will be open and inclusive for all stakeholders.
  4. It will build on existing platforms and evolve over time and minimize the reporting burden.
  5. It will be rigorous and evidence based with a focus on disaggregated data, which is linked to leave no one behind.
     

Key points from the negotiations

  • A “final zero draft” will be produced within the next couple of weeks prior the final intergovernmental session during 27-31 July.
  • The co-facilitators foresee the post-2015 negotiations being completed by 31 July 2015 as planned.
  • The post-2015 process is different from other processes, such as the Financing for Development (FfD) negotiations and the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in that the post-2015 development agenda is not a legally binding instrument, but a declaration that will state Member States’ intentions.
  • The global South called for including the report of the OWG in its entirety in the text, including the chapeau.
  • The Financing for Development outcome document is still being negotiated (tentatively to continue next Tuesday)
  • The zero draft recognizes the High-Level Political Forum (HLPF) as the Apex of the follow-up and review process.
     

Persons with disabilities

Leave no one behind

  • Mexico called for the inclusion of all groups, especially the most marginalized and excluded in the post-2015 outcome document.
  • The United States stated that “leave no one behind” must be a core aspect of the agenda with a commitment to the most vulnerable.
  • Sweden supported the concept of leave no one behind and supported adding age throughout the document.
  • Nigeria called for the outcome document to address the overarching challenge of poverty eradication.
  • Pakistan called for the participation of civil society and other stakeholders.
  • The Netherlands would like to concretize the notion of leaving no one behind.
     

Responses to the zero draft

  • Member States were largely receptive to the zero draft and that it provides a good basis for the negotiations.
  • There is strong interest to change the title of the document.
  • Member States largely called to reinforce the economic aspect of the zero draft.
  • Not all Member States emphasized participation.
  • Member States would like to see an increase in the relationship between FfD and post-2015 outcome documents.
  • On the preamble and declaration, there was consensus that the Declaration should be short and accessible and highlight the transformative nature of the agenda.
     

Civil Society

  • Twenty-eight representatives of Major Groups and Other Stakeholders delivered statements on Wednesday including specific comments on and amendments to the zero draft.
  • A common theme expressed was that Major Groups and Other Stakeholders are not just beneficiaries of the post-2015 agenda, but also important agents of change, their participation being necessary to implement the agenda.
     

Follow-up and review

  • Many Member States expressed that the follow-up and review is too prescriptive and there needs to be clarity on the interlinkages between national, regional and global follow-up and review processes.
  • There was support for a process that is voluntary, country-led, multi-level, transparent, inclusive and evidence-based.
  • There was overwhelming support for stakeholder participation in national-level follow-up and review.
  • While support was voiced for the HLPF on sustainable development as the apex of the review framework, there were different interpretations of what the global-level review would look like and the nature of the Global Sustainable Development Report (GSDR).
  • There was also concern about the UN developing guidelines for national reports and review processes, as opposed to leaving this to governments.
     

Next Steps and Upcoming Events