As the United Nations is embracing an ever more universal development agenda, it needs to transform and expand its operational functions accordingly. Currently, the UN’s operational activity in global sustainable development is directed exclusively at developing countries – in contrast to its other pillars. Human rights, peace and security are organized universally and not along an outdated North-South dichotomy. If the UN with its quasi-universal reach wants to effectively address the challenges of global sustainable development, it must build up an operational cooperation function within high-income countries. For the growing number of middle-income countries, where traditional development cooperation approaches have become increasingly inappropriate, a universal UN development function might also provide answers.
The Pact for the Future draws on patterns from the past
The Summit of the Future, this year’s big event at the UN, was a missed opportunity to universalize UN development work. It was presented as an effort to breathe life back into the stalling 2030 Agenda with its Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and prepare the UN for future tasks. “A more effective multilateralism” was one of the framings used for the Summit, a concern echoed in the 2023/2024 Human Development Report (HDR 2023/2024) that focused on “reimagining cooperation in a polarized world”. Yet, the Summit circumnavigated a key issue that should have been a central part of these efforts, the transformative universality principle introduced into UN sustainable development policy by the 2030 Agenda in 2015. Instead, the Pact for the Future somehow regressed to the conventional approach of “supporting developing countries in the achievement of the 2030 Agenda” but said little about implementation within the richer countries.
Whereas the 2030 Agenda stipulates that its “universal goals and targets … involve the entire world, developed and developing countries alike,” the practical urgency behind the 2030 Agenda’s universality principle does not yet seem to be fully understood, much less implemented in and by the UN – as if the implementation of the 2030 Agenda within rich countries was a foregone conclusion or followed an entirely different logic there.
Although often only seen as just a technical support function or a vehicle for financial transfers, UN development work is also part of the UN’s global governance functions. It's important tasks of service provision, capacity building and policy advice are based on and should stand for global goals and norms. Through policy advice in particular, the UN shapes thinking on sustainable development and contributes to the implementation of international norms and standards through national policies, but currently has no corresponding role in rich countries where the vibrant filed of policy advice is dominated by other actors incl. the OECD.
Today’s development challenges require universalizing UN development
The urgency to embrace universality in the operational UN development system has only increased since the turn of the century. This for two reasons. First, the problem definition of development has changed, and in response to that, a new paradigm of global sustainable development has emerged over the last decade. With growing pressure on planetary boundaries, interlinkages between countries (including through spillover effects), and the “blurring of North-South boundaries”, the need for sustainable development can no longer be seen as a function of a country’s (lower) income status. Richer and poorer countries alike increasingly share not only collective problems like climate change, pandemics, or migration but also common problems like inequality or societal polarization. Without implementing the 2030 Agenda also in the richer countries, most of the SDGs cannot be achieved neither globally nor in the poorer countries.
Furthermore, the willingness of societies to cooperate internationally for achieving global goals largely depends on whether these goals are also seen as being linked to their own societal aspirations. The HDR 2023/2024 makes it clear that “mismanaged” interdependence has negative effects on human development. It joins the calls for a new global public goods approach, which can “spark” a new mindset for how to tackle sustainable development and help to address its inherent complexity.
Multilateral cooperation requires equal relations
The second reason centers on the political need for a new global governance, marked by equal relations and mutual accountability of UN member states. At present, the UN development system operates as a shadow of the traditional development cooperation regime epitomized by the concept of Official Development Assistance (ODA) as governed by the OECD’s Development Assistance Committee (DAC). The basic idea behind this concept is that one group of countries has the problems and the other the solutions. Thus, some rich countries (traditionally from the OECD) provide the resources and practically impact on the policies of the poorer countries that figure as recipients.
While “developing countries” rightly insist on resource transfers, their associated “inferior” position in the global governance of international cooperation has led to growing and strongly voiced discontent. Exclusion not only breeds resentment, but it also undermines the legitimacy of the UN and its ability to effectively address global challenges. If the UN development system is mainly understood as a service provider for “developing countries” only, funded by the rich countries, it only perpetuates symbolic inequalities and fosters operational weaknesses. This makes the UN prone to pursue development in unpolitical, bureaucratic ways, assuming that development works differently “there” than “here” when in reality a new global policy of knowledge and cross-border learning is needed.
Profound conceptual changes needed
Universalizing UN development work requires and presupposes a profound conceptual change. The current state of affairs flows from the unquestioned use of an outdated, geographically grounded, and conceptually limited notion of development cooperation as inscribed into the OECD-DAC ODA regime. In contrast, we suggest a functional definition of development cooperation “as shaping conditions within (other) countries by using cooperative and promotional means”, wherever and whenever required and appropriate. If UN development work is understood in this way, it would sit alongside the normative and regulatory functions of the broader UN system, which already relate to all member states. UN development work would become the UN’s universal cooperative and promotional arm for implementing global goals and norms, complementing monitoring, regulation, and enforcement.
Viewing UN development work in this way, we immediately see both the fundamental problem and a promising opportunity: Under the current system, this form of interference is a one-way route. The UN development pillar does not offer a meaningful mechanism by which “developing” countries as UN member states could shape conditions in “developed” countries that matter to them and the globe. Being able to do so would be the mark of a truly universal system that also reflects the emerging idea of a circular cooperation in which “all contribute, all benefit, and all decide”.
Practical steps towards universality and a global agenda beyond 2030
Introducing universality does not need by a big bang but can be facilitated through a set of rather incremental institutional changes that build on existing structures – that’s the kind of change that usually works best in the UN. The Secretariat’s universal SDG monitoring is already in place – the next step would be to turn data into compelling narratives about change required in rich countries. UN development entities already do some research and advocacy on global issues – this headquarters-based brain function should be strengthened so that they also become a strong voice in societal and political discourses around the globe.
There are UN field offices in “developing” countries - some kind of presence would be required in rich countries to engage in advocacy and bring global perspectives to national discourse, which typically have blind spots. As the HDR 2023/2024 states, a major hurdle for international cooperation are the misperceptions people and decision-makers hold, often connected to polarization as a growing problem in high- and middle-income countries. UN development work could help correct such misperceptions and strengthen cosmopolitan identities.
There needs to be accountability for the UN’s work in rich countries. Again, a simple expansion of existing functions might do the trick: Just as country programs for “developing countries” are discussed in intergovernmental boards of funds and programs, so member states should discuss and adopt the UN’s priorities for rich countries. This would give “developing” countries the opportunity to shape conditions in rich countries.
Universalizing the UN development system would be rather inexpensive. Without the resource-heavy projects and focusing instead on knowledge work and few small but highly visible interventions, the added costs “would not make a dent in [the] overall distribution of resources", as one “universalist” and former UNICEF staffer notes. Politically, there are benefits for all stakeholders. “Developing” countries would gain a new level of equality and voice in global governance without losing the continuous support from richer donor countries. “Developed” countries would gain a more effective platform to address common and collective issues that also affect them. The UN development system might emerge as a politically strengthened player who manages reciprocity and tackles issues that matter politically for the entirety of its universal membership. This might be worth the risk of occasionally taking a position against its “donors”. Middle-income countries and richer non-OECD countries may even see a case for additional investment and (re-)engagement in an upgraded instrument of effective multilateralism.
The Summit of the Future is over, the opportunity has been missed, not even seen. Yet, the need for universalizing UN development work will only increase. The UN and its member states are therefore well-advised to take the universality challenge serious, also with an eye to the discussions of what framework for international cooperation is needed for the world after 2030.
About the authors
Max-Otto Baumann ([email protected]) is a senior researcher at the German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS). During the past ten years, his research and policy advice has focused on operational and political aspects of the UN’s development work.
Adolf Kloke-Lesch ([email protected]) is a former Director General of the German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ). From 2014 to 2021 he was Executive Director of the Sustainable Development Solutions Network (SDSN) Germany.