EL PRESIDENTE: Iniciamos nuestra sesión de esta tarde. Me permito anunciarles que el distinguido colega de Liberia ha enviado una breve declaración, cuyo texto se incorpora a las actas. Recordarán ustedes que algunos miembros de esta Comisión hicieron observaciones y plantearon preguntas, a todas las cuales va a tratar ahora de responder el Sr.Shah, a quien concedo la palabra.
D. BALLAYAN (Liberia): On behalf of the Government of Liberia, the Liberian delegation would like to associate itself with all previous speakers and to register our support for the increase in the TCP fund per project from US$250 000 to US$400 000. We feel that this modest increase is very necessary especially at this time when UNDP funds and IFAD resources are completely exhausted. 1/
V.J. SHAH (Director, Office of Programme, Budget and Evaluation): I would like if I may to offer the Secretariat's reply in two main categories: firstly, dealing with the Review of the Regular Programme as a whole, and then offering replies to the comments made regarding the evaluation of the Technical Cooperation Programme.
As regards the Review of the Regular Programme, in the name of the Director-General may 1 thank all the distinguished delegations who took the floor to express their appreciation for the Review. As you realized, Sir, it involved a great deal of work, with the commitment not only of my immediate colleagues but the substantial contributions of colleagues from the Secretariat. We are very much encouraged by the reaction of the Commission to the Review. As the distinguished delegate of Bangladesh put it, there was hardly anyone who did not welcome the improvements, and there were some who looked for further improvements. The Director-General himself said in the introduction to this Review that we constantly seek to make improvements, and I can assure the Commission that we will pursue our efforts to this end.
The distinguished representative of Bangladesh also enquired why the review of specific sub-programmes and the programme element were dealt with in a separate part of the Review, and not in Part One of the Review - that is to say, more closely related to the performance report. The main reason for this is that because Part One was a performance report, we tried to give comprehensive information in an aggregate manner, and that is why Part One - not only in this Review, but in its preceding versions - has dealt with each of the major programmes before proceeding with the in-depth assessment carried out on specific sub-programmes or programme elements or groups thereof.
The representative of China made some very important comments about the coverage for the period under Review. In particular, he enquired about the partial coverage of this biennium and the reference to earlier years. The first question is a practical difficulty. In order to present this Review to the Conference now, and in order to present it to the bodies who review it as early as December in the case of the Programme and Finance Committees, the Review has to be finalized by the early summer. Our information from divisions and departments therefore can only cover the initial months of 1985. We try to respond to this concern by giving whatever information we have for 1985, making it clear that it is only partial for the year. We make an estimate for the year as a whole, where it is possible to do so, and on the other hand we give information for earlier years in response to the Conference's own request that such a longer coverage would enable it to see more clearly the trends emerging in the implementation of the programme.
______________
1/ Statement inserted in the verbatim records on request.
A few delegates requested that in the future there should be more attempt to assess the impact and identify the beneficiaries. We shall certainly pursue our efforts to this end.
I realize very clearly that whatever coverage we are able to give in future reviews, it is not a question of only giving the positive side of the story . There are also lessons we can draw from programme implementation from whatever shortcomings there may be, and these lessons should be used, it is fully recognized, for even further improvement in the future. This is something which evaluators and certainly the professional evaluators, are, I believe, very conscious of. Just to give one brief example, the Federal Republic of Germany had its technical cooperation projects related to agriculture reviewed, and evaluated. The results of that were published in the quartely Journal of International Agriculture, and these results pointed out factually that of the 24 development projects which were evaluated, 13 had achieved their output and that at the time of handover only six of these 13 had ratings showing a high degree of effectiveness, and this rating subsequently dropped to four some time after the projects had been concluded. There are other lessons. I will not go into the details of this evaluation, but we fully realize that any evaluation indicates useful results.
The representative of Sweden made some valuable comments which were echoed by some other delegations regarding women in agricultural production and rural development. All these suggestions have been very carefully noted. Several delegations called for more interdivisional cooperation and this is being pursued through our interdepartmental Working Group on Women in Development.
Recently, I am informed, a number of divisions have been cooperating in the fields of credit and marketing, statistics, nutrition and small-scale irrigation. New cooperation is planned between various divisions involved in technology related to food crops and the role of women in relation to this.
The interdepartmental Working Group on Women in Development is also emphasizing the need for extension and training to incorporate women at all levels Case studies are being collected, and another division is developing its data on farming systems to collect and analyze the role ofwomen in farm management.
The representative of Sweden has asked that more be done to strengthen FAO's work on women in statistics and I am happy to report that recently, at the end of October, a workshop was held on the improvement of statistics on women in agriculture. It was attended by 21 participants, many from developing countries. They discussed definitions, disaggregation of data, design of questionnaires and questions of data processing. The recommendations of the workshop will be used to review FAO's own statistical methology in our publications, to facilitate the identification of women in agriculture and to improve the coverage and quality of statistics on women in agriculture.
The representative of the United Kingdom referred to our activities on commodity policies and trade. This reference had been made also under the preceding item but it was repeated here. The suggestion was that these activities should be or could be cut in the future and the savings so made should be diverted to more operational areas of the programme. According to this delegate, the work on commodities by FAO is, to a large extent, taken care of by a number of commodity organizations.
I will not repeat the observations I made earlier under the preceding item, but I would like to point out that this work includes an operational component which provides assistance to individual developing countries in the design and implementation of national commodity policies, including export diversification measures under the programme of commodity policy at the country level. This requires me now to clarify, in response to the query, the position of FAO's commodity policy and trade work in relation to that of other organizations. Firstly, FAO's work in the intergovernmental commodity groups focuses on those commodities for which other global commodity bodies do not exist. This is the case for rice, oil seeds -there is a commodity council solely for olive oil, which is relatively minor in global terms -bananas, tea and hard fibres. In the case of grains and meat, there are other international bodies, indeed, but these have special responsibilities only for wheat and for bovine meat.
Secondly, I would point out that in the past we have deliberately reduced to a bare minimum our work on major traded commodities for which international commodity councils exist. This is the case for coffee, cocoa, sugar, rubber and dairy products. We do, however, of course, maintain the necessary contacts with such bodies and collaborate with them. For instance, in the study of major trade and stabilization issues facing sugar, which we published earlier this year - incidentally it seems to have been widely appreciated - we enjoyed the close cooperation of the Secretariat of the International Sugar Organization. We of course collaborate closely with organizations with broad responsibilities for commodity policy and trade such as UNCTAD and GATT. We draw on their work so as to avoid duplication of effort, and whenever needed we provide technical support for their programmes. Such is the case, as a good example, with the recently established International Jute Organization.
We have recently provided technical support to this organization in the preparation of research and development projects. We are also assisting them in a joint jute research study mission funded by UNDP in order to assess programmes and activities for jute agricultural research in the main producing countries.
I have only given these as examples of the ways in which our commodity work fully reflects the competence and activities of other organizations with which we, of course, maintain links. All this-range of work is studied in depth by the Committee on Commodity Problems, and I will therefore not go into further details.
In the .comments regarding the Review of the Regular Programme, the representative of the United Kingdom also made some reference, in the context of increasing effectiveness and economy, to the aspect of the cost of management.
There are a few aspects on which I would like briefly to comment. Firstly, when any representative refers to the total staffin'g of FAO, it might be helpful to distinguish between the staffing which is directly concerned with administration and that which is not. I am quoting figures which are from documents before you in the Programme of Work and Budget and figures which were provided in greater detail to the Finance Committee, as we do once a year. For example, under the Regular Programme, there are 1,087 established posts of professionals. Of this number, 80 are in all the units of the Administration and Finance Department, or 7.3 percent. If you take all the professional posts under all funds, not only the Regular Programme but those funded under support costs, the total number of professional posts is 1,538, of which 141 are in Administration and Finance, or 9 percent.
If you want to consider posts at headquarters and posts in the field, as another measure of where the direction of this Organization is concentrated, of the grand total of some 7 200 posts under all funds in all locations, 2 600 are field staff, over 1 000 are working in regional and country offices, which leaves 3 400 at headquarters.
In relation to this, I would like to draw attention to the cost of management. The Regular Budget of the Organization provides for the cost of programme management. This is given throughout in the document before you. Taking all the technical departments and all the regional offices and the joint divisions, the total provision for programme management for the next biennium is 12.5 percent of the total value of the programme managed by these units.
The representative of the United Kingdom referred to about 15 percent which had been their experience as an acceptable figure,but I am only giving the factual information in the form that I have. And if we deal now with the cost of management of the TCP, the unit which deals with the Technical Cooperation Programme in our Development Department involves a biennial cost, for two years, of $1.1 million, for an appropriation for this biennium of US$57.5 million; I make that 2 percent.
This gives me the entrée to the few comments I need to offer regarding the debate on the Technical Cooperation Programme. I am sure the Director-General will have noted with considerable satisfaction the many supportive comments, the widespread supportive comments made during the debate, both regarding the TCP and its evaluation. However, there were, some if I may say, relatively solitary voices which expressed the desire that the evaluation might have been more independent than it was, or that it might have encompassed more than it did. I think it is necessary for me to recall once again that this was an initiative of the Director-General's. I have before me the
Report of the last Conference. The Conference did not ask the Director-General to carry out such an evaluation. In fact, some Members - this is at the last Conference - felt the need for additional information on its implementation. "They considered" - and I am quoting from the Report - "They considered that it would be desirable to have a further independent review of the Programme. However, the majority of Members considered that such a review would be unnecessary and wasteful since the TCP, like any other FAO Programme, was subject to the wide range of financial and administrative and audit controls and evaluation applied to all Regular Programme and Field Activities." It is this basis which requires me to stress again that the evaluation undertaken was an initiative of the Director-General. It was hence entirely appropriate, I think, that he should have estabblished the Terms of Reference and that the Report which was submitted to the Council was the Report of the Evaluation Team itself. I have noted in the debate that there was a very wide extent of comments praising the Evaluation Team's Report. There were some negative comments or some criticisms but, since they dealt with the Report of the Evaluation team, I may not attempt to answer any of the criticisms which were levelled against the Report. It is the Report by the team which carried out the evaluation. The Director-General certainly had his reaction to this Report and this he submitted to the Council in a separate document giving his reasons as to why he agreed and with what he agreed, and the proposals of which this Commission is well aware, since action was taken on them by the Council.
There were a number of other questions raised regarding the TCP. Firstly, what was the value of projects approved for African rehabilitation. If I recall correctly it was the representative of Australia who raised this question. This information has been given in Conference document C 85/20, "The critical situation in Africa" which has been considered in Commission I, but as it only gave the situation at 15 October, may I bring it up to date. The information in the document said there were 71 projects approved for, up to a total cost of US$11.6 million; this is at 15 October. As of last week, and I regret not having had the time to report on the situation as of today, but as of last week approvals amounted to US$13.4 million.
Questions were raised also about why the TCP appropriation was utilized more in the second year of the biennium rather than in the first year. This is certainly something that is reflected in Table 1 of the Evaluation Mission's Report. We ourselves have noticed this point. I can offer two comments; one is that the number of approvals has to be seen in relation to the number of requests submitted; and secondly, approvals in any one year also reflect particular circumstances, as in the case of projects for a significant amount of money had to be approved such as those designed to deal with the problem of rinderpest in Africa or African Swine Fever in Latin America.
A small number of observations were made about the capacity of the Technical Cooperation Programme to utilize the funds which were appropriated for the TCP. May I report the following, for the appropriations of US$18.5 and one half million for 1976/77, the amount unobligated which was returned to Member Nations, was US$2 023. For the 1978/79 appropriation of US$25.6 million, the amount unutilized was $71 and no cents. For 1980/81 of the appropriation of US$32.6 million the amount unutilized was US$1 590. These comments about the capacity of the Organization to utilize funds are related to comments made in the Finance Committee which call for a number of explanations. The financial regulation 4.3 states "Appropriations voted by the Conference for the Technical Cooperation Programme, together with any funds transferred to the Technical Cooperation Programme under Financial Regulation 4.5 (b), shall remain available for obligations during the financial period following that during which the funds were voted or transferred. Appropriations unutilized at the close of the financial period following that during which funds were voted or transferred shall be cancelled." In brief, what the Conference approved right from the outset for the TCP was that the funds which were appropriated for one biennium, let us say 1976/77, the first biennium of the TCP, could be utilized also during the biennium 1978/79. This went through the entire range of bodies concerned, the Finance Committee, the Council the CCLM and the Conference itself. I will not go through these records which the Conference is well aware of, but what I think is also necessary to stress is this regulation was looked at by the External Auditor many years ago, in 1980. The comments of the External Auditor were submitted to the Finance Committee which considered the matter, and the report of the Finance Committee was submitted to the Council which discussed the situation in detail. The Council considered that the regulation was valid and was applied correctly and in this connection as, if I recall correctly, one of the distinguished representatives who queried this aspect explicitly or by implication was the representative of Canada. I would like to refer to the verbatim record of the 78th Session of the Council. As the invention is very brief, may I be permitted to quote it. (Continues in French)
"Encore une fois, nos félicitations au Comité des finances pour la présentation très brève et les notes très précises qui ont été présentées dans le document CL 78/6.
Je voudrais seulement attirer l'attention du Conseil sur les paragraphes 3.48 à 3.51 qui soulèvent un petit problème d'ordre financier. On remarque que certains projets du Programme de coopération technique s'étalent sur un peu plus de temps et que certaines économies sont faites à partir de certains projets, mais que les rentrées de ces économies sont remises á l’année suivante et que de ce fait le Directeur général a penser à utiliser ces économies dans le bienniurn suivant.
Apparemment, qui est en dehors de la question peut se poser le problème de savoir si cela est constitutionnel ou non, si c'est contre les règlements financiers. Puisque le Comité des finances est d'accord, je crois que nous pouvons entériner cette conclusion du Comité des finances.
Le Programme de coopération technique est un des plus valables de la FAO et de la décennie actuelle. Il est inévitable, étant donné la nature des programmes de cet ordre, que les dépenses s'échelonnent sur plus longtemps qu'une période de deux ans." (continuation en anglais.)
That intervention goes on very briefly but I think the point is made. A final point about the relation of the TCP to project activities under other sources of assistance. Recently our colleagues in the Development Department carried out an analysis in consultation with the FAO Country Representatives, and covering 65 countries and a total of 298 TCP projects. And they reported from this analysis that TCP projects related to over eight programmes, constituted about 40 percent of all approvals in this sample and the remaining 60 percent were in direct support of the Government's own activities.
There are other details from this analysis. For the sake of brevity I will not go into them. But the point I wish to emphasize is that the TCP does not compete with any source of assistance, whether extra-budgetary or with the Regular Programme. This is a point which on behalf of the Secretariat I find of some puzzlement because in some interventions it has been suggested that the TCP might be an element of competition for the rest of the Regular Programme. This is not at all what was intended of the TCP from the outset, nor is it how the Director-General sees it. The TCP is an integral part of the technical and economic programmes of this Organization. There is no question of competition between TCP and other programmes. In some cases, it has been suggested that there are questions about how the TCP is managed or operated. The reply to that is, very frankly, that the TCP unit, to which I made reference earlier, receives the requests for assistance, but these requests are handled with the same care and with the same close examination as any request for assistance under any other source, including any extra-budgetary requests. Where we have FAO representatives, these requests are submitted through them so that we ensure their comments on these projects. They are submitted to all the technical and economic units involved at Headquarters in order to appraise the soundness of the project and ensure its validity before any request is approved.
Mr Chairman, I have tried to answer in as brief a time as possible what I thought were the main questions raised. I believe I have covered most of them, at least the questions which were raised by more than one delegation. I will not presume any more of your time, Sir, but I am always ready to provide more information if necessary.
EL PRESIDENTE: Gracias Sr. Shah. Espero que todos los miembros de la Comisión estén satisfechos y agradezcan al Sr. Shah las aclaraciones y respuestas que ha ofrecido.
Sobre este tema 13, han intervenido 61 oradores; voy a hacer un resumen breve. Ya conocen cuál es la intención del resumen del Presidente: indicativo y no obligatorio. Pienso que en general la Comisión opinó que el documento C 85/8 contenía un análisis muy útil y era una valiosa fuente de información sobre los éxitos y los fracasos logrados en el Programa Ordinario en los años 1984-85. Se opinó que su texto era analítico y que su presentación y contenido habían venido mejorando al
recogerse las orientaciones de los órganos rectores. Se opinó que este texto permitía evaluar la eficacia y eficiencia de las actividades para aplicar las experiencias obtenidas en la elaboración del mismo documento para los bienios futuros. Unas pocas delegaciones, si bien reconocieron los progresos logrados en la presentación del documento, pensaron que podrían aclararse otros aspectos, programas y subprogramas, que convendría evaluar el impacto del programa sobre desarrollo a la luz de los recursos invertidos; que también convendría definir mejor la función de apoyo de la FAO a otras organizaciones y a las instituciones nacionales sobre investigación y, esas mismas delegaciones, consideraron que se podía lograr una mayor transparencia en algunos de los programas.
La Comisión apoyó decididamente el mayor apoyo a la participación de la mujer en las actividades rurales hasta que a las mujeres lleguen verdaderamente los esfuerzos para su desarrollo y que las mujeres deberían tener más cabida en las Organizaciones Internacionales. Igualmente que en las regiones deberían difundirse y divulgarse más intensamente las informaciones que contribuyan a lograr todo esto a favor de la mujer, que no debe seguir siendo sujeto pasivo, sino que debe participar activamente en todo el sistema.
Se apoyaron también, entre otros, los programas sobre el aumento de la producción de alimentos, pesca, agricultura, producción pecuaria, destinados particularmente a pequeños ganaderos, sistema de información y alerta, políticas de precios y evaluación de prioridades para el Africa. La Comisión estuvo de acuerdo en la necesidad de que la investigación se lleve a efecto en áreas y sectores prioritarios con la posible intención de objetivos a largo plazo. Algunas delegaciones apoyaron lasOfi-cinas Regionales y las redes de cooperación.
En relación con el documento LIM.17, o sea la decisión tomada por los gobiernos dentro de su autoridad sobre el informe de evaluación hecho por expertos consultores externos, la mayoría de los miembros de la Comisión apoyó esas conclusiones por considerar que el PCT tiene una gran significación para los países en desarrollo por la flexibilidad de su acción catalizadora y destacaron el hecho de que la verdadera evaluación del PCT la hacen los propios gobiernos beneficiarios. Por lo tantp esa mayoría de delegaciones se felicitaron porque esa evaluación hubiera sido llevada a cabo en consulta de expertos idóneos y competentes. Esas delegaciones apoyaron los límites propuestos para el aumento de los proyectos a un nuevo tipo de proyectos catalizadores CPTD y asimismo insistieron en que los recursos del PCT deberían seguir proviniendo de fondos del Programa Ordinario.
Otras delegaciones aún reconociendo el valor mismo del PCT y su valiosa contribución y aún apoyando el concepto global y la orientación general, opinaron que no estaban de acuerdo con las propuestas sobre el PCT en cuanto a aumento del límite de los proyectos y del nuevo tipo de proyectos. Por el contrario, opinaron que el PCT tendría que verse limitado a situaciones de emergencia, a actividades a corto plazo, a ser solamente catalizador de las actividades del PCT y debería programarse sobre bases constantes y que los recursos del PCT no deberían provenir de los recursos ordinarios del Programa sino de fuentes extrapresupuestarias.
A la luz de las diferentes opiniones, la Comisión tomó nota, repito, tomó nota de la decisión del Consejo sobre el informe de evaluación del PCT.
Al concluir este ensayo de breve resumen, con todo respeto para el distinguido Presidente y miembros del Comité de Redacción me permito dirigirme a ellos para rogarles que traten de encontrar en esta redacción aproximada una fuente de acuerdo sobre las dificultades que han surgido en el Comité de Redacción, que espero no vayan a repetirse en relación con este tema 13.
He tratado de presentar dos párrafos equilibrados a mi manera pero que serán perfeccionados por el Comité de Redacción, un párrafo con lo que opina la mayoría y otro párrafo con lo que opina la minoría y la frase final que se refiere a la decisión del Consejo.
Creo, y así lo he manifestado al Presidente del Comité de Redacción y a los miembros de ese Comité, que una solución semejante podría lograrse esta tarde cuando vayan a considerarse los cuatro párrafos que quedan pendientes sobre el PCT. Ojalá que esta buena voluntad mía pueda merecer la mejor atención por parte del Presidente y miembros del Comité de Redacción.
Antes de cerrar el debate sobre el tema 13, me permito recordarles que aún queda pendiente .parte del tema 13, el proyecto de resolución presentado por el Grupo de los 77 sobre cooperación técnica y económica entre países en desarrollo. Ese proyecto de resolución formará parte del tema 13 porque
se refiere al Capítulo 11 de la parte tercera del documento C 85/8. El Comité de Resoluciones, en su reunión de esta mañana consideró ese proyecto de resolución y esta tarde será distribuido con el número LIM/26. Ese proyecto de resolución será discutido en la Plenaria de esta Comisión en el momento oportuno y de todas maneras después de que se concluya la discusión del tema 14
J. Winkel, Vice Chairman, Commission II, took the chair
J. Winkel, Vice-Président, Commission II, assume la présidence
Ocupa la presidencia J. Winkel, Vicepresidente, Comisión II
CHAIRMAN (original language German): Dear colleagues I would like to thank Mr Bula Hoyos,our Chairman,for his kind words and similarly I would like to thank you for the trust you have shown in me and I would also like to thank those who congratuled me. Now I think that this was in the hope that we would manage to work with despatch and indeed I shall do my best. Might I refer you first of all to the document which sets out our agenda and we are supposed to deal with other current agenda items in four meetings. We have in fact already spent one session on the concluding debate of agenda item 13, but I hope that despite that and despite the various other things that we are going to have to do in the meantime, we are going to be able to conclude our discussion of agenda item 14 by Tuesday evening. First of all I would like to give the floor to the Assistant Director-General, Development Department, Mr Lignon, to introduce this agenda item.
R.S. LIGNON (Sous-Directeur général, Département du développement): Les programmes de terrain exécutés par la FAO représentaient, au début de 1'année 1985, environ 2 500 projets répartis dans 141 pays et ayant un coût total de 1 700 millions de dollars. Pour exécuter ces projets, la FAO a utilisé 1 500 experts sur le terrain - experts dans des postes établis - plus environ 1 000 consultants ou experts en courte durée.
Comme pour la précédente session, le rapport qui est soumis à la Conférence est un document qui se propose d'analyser la situation actuelle du Programme. Ses perspectives y sont contenues, ainsi qu'une évaluation franche et précise des projets de terrain. Ce document a déjà été examiné par le Comité des programmes et le Comité des finances ainsi que par le Conseil lors de sa dernière session. Je voudrais 'brièvement le présenter et souligner quelques caractéristiques importantes en vue du débat de la Commission.
Comme à l'accoutumée, ce document comporte quatre chapitres. Le premier chapitre décrit la situation, les tendances et les perspectives de ce programme et montre qu'au cours de ce biennium, les Programmes de terrain de la FAO ont enregistré une croissance modérée malgré une 'stagnation à un niveau bas des activités financées par le PNUD. Mais grâce aussi à une augmentation des ressources provenant des fonds fiduciaires qui ont montré un accroissement continu et relativement fort, cette croissance des projets exécutés sur des ressources provenant des fonds fiduciaires est le témoignage de la réponse généreuse des partenaires de la FAO et des pays bénéficiaires et c'est un encouragement pour les efforts du Directeur général visant à améliorer de façon permanente son efficacité. Cette augmentation des fonds fiduciaires provient en partie des projets financés par des ressources provenant des institutions financières internationales, notamment le groupe de la Banque mondiale, qui sont accordées aux pays bénéficiaires, et qui contiennent des composantes d'assistance technique dont l'exécution est confiée à la FAO.
Vous savez que la Banque mondiale est le plus gros fournisseur d'assistance technique actuellement puisque, tous secteurs confondus, le montant de l'assistance technique financée par la Banque s'élève à 1,3 milliard de dollars par an, soit environ 400 millions pour l'agriculture, 10 pour cent a peu près des crédits d'assistance technique fournis par les banques consacrés à l'agriculture sont exécutés par la FAO.
D'autre part, le Programme de coopération technique a contribué pour 10 pour cent au financement du Programme de terrain. D'une façon générale on peut considérer que ce Programme paraît atteindre un palier et que peut-être nous sommes dans une phase de redressement.
Je voudrais aussi rappeler le rôle du Centre d'investissement qui, malgré les difficultés de renouvellement des fonds des ressources de l'AID ou du FIDA notamment, a maintenu une activité très importante au cours de ce biennium. Depuis 1967, le Centre d'investissement a préparé des projets approuvés par les agences financières représentant plus de 20 milliards de dollars, et, dans la seule année 1984, 1,67 milliard. Il est bien évident que si ce problème de reconstitution des fonds se poursuivait, cela aurait des conséquences sur les activités du Centre d'investissement.
D'autre part, je voudrais souligner que le Centre d'investissement s'est attaché à suivre des projets financés par le PNUD et exécutés par la FAO qui présentent un potentiel d'investissement. En 1984, par exemple, 35 projets ont été identifiés et 14 ont révélé des possibilités d'investissement représentant environ 200 millions de dollars. Depuis 1979, 16 projets financés par le PNUD et exécutés par la FAO ont donné lieu à 420 millions de dollars d'investissement dont 256 ont été financés par des agences internationales de financement.
Le deuxième chapitre de ce document est un exercice d'évaluation du Programme de terrain. Comme vous avez pu le constater, cette évaluation a été faite à partir de deux sources. La première source est une évaluation faite à partir des représentants de la FAO sur le terrain qui ont analysé environ 1 200 projets sur les 2 500 qui sont en cours actuellement, c'est-à-dire près de la moitié. Ils ont examiné un certain nombre de critères qui permettent d'apprécier la conception, l'exécution et le suivi de ces projets. Vous trouvez dans ce chapitre II un certain nombre de résultats et commentaires qui nous ont été communiqués par les représentants de la FAO sur le terrain.
A côté de cet exercice, noirs avons procédé à un autre système d'évaluation qui porte sur 220 projets environ et s'étale sur cinq ans. Nous avons dépassé le biennium actuel pour avoir une meilleure analyse et en tirer des conclusions plus pertinentes. Cette évaluation s'est faite au cours d'exercices tripartites, c'est-à-dire en général entre le pays bénéficiaire, l'organisme de financement - que ce soit le PNUD ou un gouvernement participant au programme de coopération FAO/gouvernement - et la FAO. Comme vous pouvez le constater, il est clair que cet exercice permet d'avoir une évaluation assez précise des qualités et des défauts que l'on rencontre dans d'autres programmes de terrain.
Il est clair que l'évaluation des programmes de terrain n'est pas une chose aisée et facile à normaliser. C'est la raison pour laquelle nous avons utilisé ces deux approches, ce qui nous a permis de faire une synthèse qui se trouve en conclusion de ce chapitre II.
Le point sur lequel je voudrais attirer votre attention, c'est que la participation du gouvernement et le soutien qu'il peut apporter au projet apparaissent clairement comme des facteurs essentiels de la réussite des projets. Les aspects logistiques, qui paraissent a priori les plus importants, n'apparaissent pas dans l'évaluation à laquelle nous avons procédé comme des facteurs fondamentaux de la réussite et de l'impact des projets.
Je pense que de toute façon ce qui est important c'est d'avoir des projets ayant des objectifs immédiats proches, clairement identifiés, et en outre la définition de ces objectifs étant parfaitement claire, que l'exécution du projet avec le soutien du gouvernement - parce qu'il faut rappeler que ce sont des projets du gouvernement - puisse être mise en oeuvre correctement.
Le troisième chapitre est un exemple de l'assistance technique de la FAO dans le domaine forestier. L'activité forestière a été retenue, dans le cadre de cet exercice, pour différentes raisons, notamment parce qu'il y avait le Congrès mondial forestier à Mexico, notamment parce que c'était l'Année internationale de la forêt mais aussi et surtout parce que tout le monde est convaincu du rôle de plus en plus important que la forêt joue dans les programmes de développement de l'espace rural, de la lutte contre la désertification et de la lutte contre la dégradation de l'environnement d'une façon générale.
L'analyse de ce chapitre montre clairement que le développement de l'activité forestière est de plus en plus en grand et s'élargit de plus en plus, notamment dans des secteurs qui permettent de mieux contrôler les problèmes de lutte contre la désertification et en particulier dans l'étude de la forêt comme source d'énergie et de bois de feu, et enfin aussi dans le rôle de la forêt pour la sécurité alimentaire qui a un rôle qui n'est pas négligeable.
Je voudrais dire que les activités du Programme forestier ont été financées par différentes sources: le PNUD bien sûr, notamment dans les problèmes d'inventaire forestier des ressources; les fonds fiduciaires, c'est-à-dire les projets financés dans le cadre des programmes coopératifs FAO/ gouvernement, sont surtout orientés vers les problèmes de reforestation communautaire au niveau villageois. Le Programme de coopération technique pour sa part a contribué de façon substantielle pour environ 8 à 10 pour cent dans les activités forestières pour faire face à des actions plus urgentes liées par exemple à la lutte contre les incendies, la lutte contre les parasites, ou dans certains cas la préparation de semences forestières.
Le chapitre 4 de la revue est un chapitre dans lequel on essaie de voir les principales évolutions du programme. En particulier, actuellement, 40 pour cent des experts qui sont sur le terrain dans des postes affectés aux projets proviennent des pays en développement, et le rôle des institutions et des directeurs nationaux s'est sérieusement accru parce qu'il y a maintenant plus de 430 projets qui sont dirigés par les directeurs nationaux. L'évolution se fait aussi dans le domaine de la formation, parce qu'on a essayé d'adapter notre programme de formation à des activités très opérationnelles.
Je voudrais aussi pour conclure souligner que 40 pour cent des activités sur le terrain sont consacrées à l'Afrique au sud du Sahara, et que si l'on prend le continent africain dans son ensemble, en incluant l'Afrique du Nord, l'Egypte et la Libye, c'est à peu près 50 pour cent de nos activités de terrain qui sont consacrées au continent, africain.
Dernière remarque, ce programme de terrain est étroitement lié aux programmes de la FAO. Il en est le complément sur le terrain et les résultats des programmes de terrain de la FAO constituent prati-quemment la mise en oeuvre sur le terrain des grandes actions et des grandes orientations politiques définies par les organes directeurs de la FAO.
Monsieur le Président, je voudrais vous remercier de m'avoir donné la parole et je suis à votre disposition si vous avez besoin d'explications ultérieures.
CHAIRMAN (original language German): Thank you very much Mr. Lignon. I think that in the light of this very clear statement we have a very good grasp of the main features of the document before me and our first speaker for the first debate under item 14 is the distinguished delegate for Angola.
R.F. DE JESUS NETO (Angola): J'aimerais au nom de ma délégation, remercier le Directeur général pour l'avant-propos clair et concis qu'il a fait au document C 85/4, Examen des programmes de terrain 1984-85. Je remercie également le Secrétariat pour la qualité excellente du document qu'il nous a présenté et qui, croyons-nous, est plein d'enseignement.
Permettez-moi de faire les commentaires suivants sur ce document. Ma délégation se réjouit du bilan positif qui s'est dégagé de tout le volume des programmes de terrain de la FAO exécutés au cours de l'exercice biennal 1983-85 et de leur croissance modérée enregistrée à cette période par rapport au fléchissement marqué constaté en 1982-83.
Nous sommes heureux d'apprendre que l'assistance technique de la FAO financée par des fonds fiduciaires a connu un développement. Nous sommes cependant préoccupés par les réductions répétées des contributions du PNUD à l'assistance technique auxquelles nous assistons depuis 1980. Nous craignons que ce renversement de tendance crée un précédent et remette en question l'avenir même du PNUD.
En tant que citoyens d'un des 21 pays africains les plus affectés, couverts par le Programme de relèvement de l'agriculture en Afrique, nous remercions encore une fois le Directeur général pour les efforts combien louables qu'il a déployés pour non seulement sensibiliser l'opinion publique
internationale sur la crise alimentaire catastrophique en Afrique, mais aussi canaliser l'assistance de la FAO auprès des pays concernés. En effet, mon pays, la République populaire d'Angola, a bénéficié du financement de deux projets importants présentés à la réunion des donateurs à Rome, le 29 mars 1985, à savoir le projet de la réhabilitation de la vallée de Cavaco à Benguela et le projet de réhabilitation des eaux pastorales de Chibia dans la province de Huila au Sud du pays.
La répartition par programme des dépenses extra-budgétaires au titre des projets de terrain nous indique, à la page 12 du document, que plus d'un quart des allocations de l'assistance technique de la FAO (26 pour cent) ont été absorbées par le dévelopment et l'amélioration des cultures alimentaires et qu'il y a eu accroissement du pourcentage des ressources consacrées au développement de l'élevage (17 pour cent) et de la foresterie (16 pour cent). Il y a de quoi s'en féliciter.
Le chapitre 2 du document C 85/4 nous semble le plus important et nous espérons qu'il méritera une attention particulière de nos pays qui pourront se rendre compte des efforts du Directeur général visant à améliorer l'efficacité des programmes de terrain. Nous avons beaucoup apprécié les évaluations des projets de terrain faites par les représentants de la FAO dans leurs pays d'affectation par le personnel de terrain et les missions d'évaluation de la FAO ou encore par les directeurs nationaux des projets.
Néanmoins, nous souhaitons que des efforts supplémentaires soient faits pour éviter des résultats décevants tels que ceux mentionnés au tableau 2.7, page .39.
Ma délégation réitère son appui total à l'incorporation des "nouvelles dimensions" dans les projets de terrain de la FAO, c'est-à-dire le recours aux experts et institutions des pays en développement et à la promotion de la CTPD. De l'autre côté, l'affectation aux projets des experts nationaux lorsqu'ils seront disponibles, fera partie intégrante des "nouvelles dimensions" et pourra, comme nous l'avons déjà dit dans notre intervention antérieure sur le Programme de travail et Budget, contribuer à combattre l'exode des compétences du monde en développement vers les pays développés.
CHAIRMAN (original language German): If you would allow me, I would like to make a point which occurred to me when listening to the distinguished delegate of Angola. This question of page numbers poses difficulties: could I invite you to always mention the paragraph numbers, so that even if the page numbers are not the same in the different languages we can still identify the part of the text to which the speaker is referring.
If I could make another proposal: under Item 13 we discussed TCP at considerable length and in considerable detail. I think each delegation has had the opportunity to express its thinking on the Technical Cooperation Programme; since the TCP. is not of primary importance under Agenda item 14, Review of'Field Programmes, might I suggest that we do not discuss TCP at any length - or perhaps even at all. However, please do not take this as any attempt on my part to over-ride any of you.
T. SAITO (Japan): First of all I would like to commend the Secretariat for the very informative and analytical introduction to document C 85/4 which is before us. Before touching upon some specific remarks on the content of the document, I would like to express my general view on the FAO field activity as a whole.
My delegation fully appreciates the important role of the FAO field projects in promoting food and agricultural development in developing countries. We are also pleased that, while the UNDP funds have been reduced, the increasing trend of the Trust Fund resources clearly reflects the importance of these activities, which are well recognized by the donor countries. We feel that in order to bring about a greater effect and impact by the field projects, it is of utmost importance to formulate projects which will be cost-effective and respond directly to the actual needs of recipient countries. Furthermore, due consideration should be given to the relationship between the field projects and activities which are implemented under the Regular Programme in the course of project formulation. In this connection I strongly hope that the Review of Field Programmes in the future will include an analysis of the relationship between the field projects and the regular programme.
Let me now touch upon the content of C 85/4. Firstly, we very much welcome the objective analysis in which the outcome and effects of the project performances have been clearly indicated in the document in such a way as to group the evaluation results into categories of "good", "satisfactory", and "not satisfactory" according to the assessments made by both the FAO Representatives and the Joint Evaluation Commission. We hope that these efforts in reviewing the FAO's field activities will be further strengthened in improving of the field projects.
The document implicitly points out a number of programmes relating to the project performance from various aspects, such as government involvement, transfer of skills, and so on. We suggest that since close inter-relations exist among all these aspects, a continuous effort is needed in order to further improve the method of project planning and designing, implementation, monitoring and evaluation, as described in the concluding remarks of the document.
Paragraph 29 of the document refers to the positive relationship which exists between the achievement of good output and the degree of appropriate technical backstopping. One of the advantages of international assistance through FAO's field projects, we believe, is that the technical expertise accumulated by FAO can be fully utilized. Therefore in the implementation of the project every effort should be made to assure. sufficient and appropriate technical support by the experts of FAO Headquarters, Regional Offices and Country Offices. We note the fact that most projects' indicators are ranked lower than in the case of LDC's. According to the analysis, the main cause of the problem is lack of government involvement. In this connection we would like to urge the recipient governments, particularly those of the LDC's, to make a commitment in order to ensure successful implementation and impact.
With regard to the regional distribution of FAO field projects, we welcome the fact that a series of field activities in Africa will continue in the 1984-85 biennium, and we agree that priority should be given continuously to Africa in the next biennium as well, because special measures to help African countries tackle the food crisis are still required. However, at the same time we hope that due attention will be paid to various programmes in other regions.
I would like to turn now to forestry assistance, which is described in Chapter 3. We appreciate the fact that assistance in the field of forestry has recently been diffused throughout the FAO field projects. The conservation of forests and the development of forestry are quite important, not only in maintaining a favourable-environment for agricultural production, but also for improving the standard of living of rural people. We therefore strongly hope that activities in this field will be further strengthened. We also welcome the increasing trend of assistance for community forestry and fuelwood. The document reports that within the FAO's central forestry assistance, assistance for community forestry and fuelwood had increased from 3 percent in 1980 to 20 percent in 1987
We believe that the action of promoting country forestry is quite an effective way of maintaining and increasing forestry resources and forestry development in developing countries.
Finally, I would like to briefly comment on TCP, which has been considered one of the resources in FAO's field activities. Since our position on TCP was clearly stated in previous agenda items, I should not reiterate the points. However, I would like to request the Secretariat to provide us with more information on TCP performance, and periodically submit an evaluation of TCP performance at every Session of the Conference in addition to the document, Review of Field Programmes.
I would like to conclude my statement by expressing my Government's commitment to and continuous support of the FAO's field projects. Japan has been increasing its contribution to the Trust Fund for the FAO's field projects since 1980. In 1985 we plan to provide US$2.6 million for the aid projects.
G. ERICSSON (Sweden) : First, I would like on behalf of the Swedish delegation to commend the Secretariat for another Review of Field Programmes, one in a series of Reviews, which, as the Director-General has said in his Foreword, "have always generated strong interest among Conference delegates". The document is comprehensive and very concise, but not easy to cover in a few brief comments.
However, I will take up a couple of principal issues which are based on a thorough study of the excellent document. I will start from the latter part, chapter 4, with what is said about the influence of WCARRD on field operations. In the 1983 Conference we discussed the report on the follow-up of actions by FAO and on the recommendations of WCARRD in positive terms. It is encouraging to note that the application of the WCARRD approach is further pursued in the implementation of the Field Programme. This has meant more attention and support to small farmers, artisanal fishermen and rural populations dependent on forestry through community and cooperative approaches based on people's participation. We also note with satisfaction the increased attention given to activities initiated and implemented by national NGOs. We want FAO to pursue this approach even further and we are looking forward to the next full report on the WCARRD follow-up scheduled for the 1987 Conference.
Section B, in chapter 4, Specific Measures to Promote Self-Reliance, reports on measures taken to involve governments more in the management of technical cooperation projects. We have on earlier occasions commended FAO for being in the forefront in adopting a "New Dimensions" approach. We note that the number of projects with a national project director has increased and that a considerable expansion of integration of national professional staff in FAO project activities has taken place But as clearly indicated in the careful comments in paragraph 4.18, FAO is still far from generally accepting direct government execution since it provides its professional knowledge as advisory services in project design and formulation and in technical backstopping.
The projects and programmes are still FAO projects and programmes, supported, as it is put, by the governments. This is reflected in the earlier chapters of this review, as exemplified, for instance, in paragraph 2.35 where it says: "Many FAO Reps still praised national and local authorities for the support they had provided for projects." Based on experience from our own bilateral development cooperation,we strongly argue that the technical assistance projects should be integral parts of ongoing projects within the national development plans. The technical assistance projects mean additional resources to accelerate development and should thus be government-executed. Many of the problems described in Chapters One and Two have their roots in the fact that they have not been conceived in that perspective, have not taken into account the existing institutional framework or, a point which has become so evident during recent years, have not been formulated with the full awareness of the demands on scarce government resources for recurrent costs or of the need for a continuous flow of even more scarce foreign currency. The implications of this situation on project and post-project activities are referred to in paragraph 2.33, where it is also said that "this aspect should not be ignored." We think that this is an understatement.
We would in this connection also like to comment on the role of the FAO country offices, which are closer to the field than the Rome-based headquarters. When they were established we supported that move with the understanding that this was the first step in a decentralization process. Further developments have not justified that hope; the project officers still report directly to headquarters. It is our belief that FAO field activities would be far more efficient if more resources were reallocated from the operations divisions in Rome to country offices. With more professional people at the country level, more decision-making power could also be delegated to the FAO Representatives in the implementation of the projects. This aspect is touched upon in paragraph 2.100.
Chapter Three deals with forestry. From the Swedish point of view it is gratifying that special attention has been given to forestry in this Review. The increased emphasis on village forestry is particularly welcome. As we have already dwelt on that issue in our statement under the Programme of Work and Budget, I will here only refer to that statement.
There is one more issue I would like, on behalf of my delegation, to bring to the attention of this Commission, an issue which is strongly related to future planning and implementation of field projects.
The United Nations General Assembly has declared 1983 to 1992 to be the Disabled Persons' Decade. General Assembly Resolution 3828, relating to the World Programme of Action concerning Disabled Persons, calls upon all organs, organizations and agencies of the United Nations system, through reallocation of existing resources, to continue to ensure the early implementation.of this Programme.
The World Programme of Action concerning Disabled Persons is directed to all member countries irrespective of level of economic development. It calls for national programmes in each member state for action in support of the handicapped. Rather than emphasizing the traditional view that care of disabled persons is something left to institutions, it stresses a more comprehensive approach. Handicaps must be prevented as much as possible; those who are handicapped must be offered adequate rehabilitation, and more importantly,society must adapt to the needs of the disabled and guarantee equalization of opportunities for them. The activities within the different areas of economic and social life must be geared to give the disabled the same possibilities to participate as in given to others.
In Sweden, these views have been the basic policy with regard to disabled people for many years. Although a lot has been done, still more has to be done. As an example I would like to mention that our Prime Minister has recently appointed a disabled person as Minister of Health. This Minister, who is blind, has also been a member of parliament for a number of years.
The estimates tell us that in the world today, no less than 500 million people suffer from a disability of one form or another, of whom 350 million are estimated to be living in developing countries. This fact has given greater emphasis in our bilateral development cooperation to issues concerning disabled persons. A special task force has been set up within SIDA, the Swedish Agency for International Development Cooperation, including representatives from the disabled people's own organizations, to ensure that bilateral projects and programmes take into full consideration the views expressed in the World Programme of Action and to devise ways and means to support governments in the implementation of national programmes.
We find it equally important that FAO explicitly state its response to the General Assembly Resolution mentioned and the Swedish delegation proposes that the following text be inserted as a decision by the Conference in the Report:
"The Conference urges the Director-General to intensify FAO's activities towards the prevention of disability in the rural environment, and to increase technical assistance and support to those developing countries endeavouring to create national plans and programmes in the field of disability prevention, rehabilitation, and the equalization of opportunities for disabled persons with the aim of improving their quality of life, and the possibilities for their social and economic development."
We are confident that this, our proposal, will get support from other delegations in the statements which follow.
CHAIRMAN (original language German): Thank you, I think our Swedish colleague has made a proposal very much within the context of the humanitarian traditions of his country in reminding us of the programme for the disabled. I can only recommend that we should indeed take up the Swedish statement as an FAO statement.
R.C. GUPTA (India): My delegation would like to commend the FAO Secretariat for this extremely informative and useful document. We would also like to congratulate Mr Lignon for his comprehensive and very precise introduction to this document. In fact, I felt that the whole scenario was more or less recalled, it was extremely useful to recapitulate the document, our discussion earlier in the Programme Committee and the FAO Council in its Eighty-eighth Session.
With regard to the trend of the field programmes, the document brings them out clearly, concisely and comprehensively. Mr Lignon gave us certain numbers, 2 500 field projects in 141 countries, for an investment of US$ 1.7 billion. These figures look very impressive but in the overall context, considering the needs of the developing countries, I wish to invite the attention of delegates to the statement of the Director-General himself contained in his Foreword to the document: "The current volume of activities must, however, be considered disappointing in the face of massive needs for improvement, in food production and agricultural development in Africa and the least developed countries as a whole."
We are also worried about the stagnation in the UNDP funding of activities which are undertaken through FAO, and particularly UNDP funding Óf agricultural projects in general. These funds have more or less stagnated. The increase in the Trust Fund, whether bilateral or unilateral, is most welcome. We would like to place on record our concern about the fall in UNDP resources.
Another area of concern, while I am talking about Chapter One of this paper, is the recent activity or perhaps the activities undertaken by the UNDP. We had occasion to talk about the setting up of the Office of Project Execution (OPE) by the UNDP. In the last Council Session, some explanations were given as to why the UNDP considered it necessary to start undertaking the execution of projects where specialized agencies exist for this purpose, but we found the explanation rather unconvincing. We believe that the representative of the UNDP may be here and perhaps at the end of the discussion on this subject we could have further explanation as to why it was considered necessary by the UNDP to start this project operations office themselves. We recently found that they had established another unit, the human resources and project preparations facility. All of us are aware of the scarcity of funds, of finances available in the UN system or in any case with the financing agencies,and whether they are bilateral or multilateral, there is a scarcity of resources. We are not clear why these agencies are duplicating these activities when specialized agencies exist for a particular purpose, and we fail to see why this work should be undertaken by UNDP themselves. Let me indicate that we support UNDP as we support FAO and we have the fullest confidence in both these Organizations. Nevertheless, we would like to know the rationale for duplicaiing these functions.
With regard to Chapter 2, we fi,nd the evaluation which has been conducted by FAO representatives and by the internal evaluation of the Organization an extremely truthful exercise. It is interesting to note the candidness of the result. If I were to invite your attention for a second to paragraphs 2.43 and 2.46 of the document C 85/4, paragraph 2.46 mentions projects which were evaluated in terms of their effects or in terms of the effectiveness for which they were set out; 164 projects were evaluated for results; 33 projects were found to be categorized as good and 31 satisfactory and 36 unsatisfactory. That is, 64 percent of the total projects were either in the categories of good or satisfactory, which is a measure of the candidness with which this work is being done. I would also like to comment on the section on concluding remarks, this is paragraph 2.39 to paragraph 2.103. Certain conclusions have been drawn, particularly the conclusion in 2.102 which says "Concerning factors which can hinder project implementation, the evaluation synthesis has identified the performance of national staff and project management as crucial, along with government policy support and the quality of international experts." Now some of these remarks have given an opportunity to our colleague from Japan to call for greater support from the developing countries' governments themselves to these projects. We find no evidence in this document to come to that conclusion. This is an often repeated and baseless statement that governments do not give support to such projects. We would have liked to have had more evidence before arriving at such conclusions.
Now with regard to Chapter 3, the importance of forestry cannot be overstated. We are aware that the annual loss of forest areas is as high as 11.5 million hectares. We are happy that 12 percent of the Field Programme budget is allocated to forestry; this has increased from a percentage of 10 percent during the last biennium. This document also states that certain projects have been undertaken in our own country and we are fully satisfied with these activities.
A word about Chapter 4, we commend the Organization for delivering thesefield project to carry out the programme of work set out at the World Conference on Agriculture and Research Development. We are also happy to note that about 45 percent of the experts now engaged in these projects are from developing countries, and 430 project managers come from countries where these projects are being undertaken.
We fully support the help being given to Africa, particularly the area south of the Sahara where 40 percent of these projects are concentrated. Overall we would encourage the Organization to continue its useful work to improve the flow of feedback and data to bring about greater effectiveness in their projects so as to use the scarce resources available to the Organizations of the United Nations system to the utmost.
A. EL SARKY (Egypt) (original language Arabic): I would like first of all to commend the very comprehensive document C 85/4. This is indeed a very good and sound basis for discussion. We welcome this all the more since field programmes have been primarily directed towards the developing countries particularly in Africa and we note that there has been an increase in the Trust Funds available for which we thank the States involved. We are, however, very disturbed by the decrease in the funds made available by UNDP. We feel that this is a tendency that cannot but have negative effects and we very much hope that it will be reversed for the general good of the developing countries, particularly the least developed countries. We would also hope that there will be a greater degree of cooperation between the TCP, the UNDP, and the NGOs, as well as the institutions in the field so that optimum results can be achieved, those optimum results that we all seek. We feel it is important to strive for greater effectiveness in terms of investments and for that reason we support replenishment of the IFAD funds. Moreover, we noted with considerable satisfaction how many countries have implemented agricultural projects based on the new possibilities offered them in terms of technical assistance for development and we should like to emphasize the importance of increased training in the field, greater use of local expertise, as well as use of experts on short-term contracts. We should not overlook the importance of involving national experts in these development activities.
The delegation of Egypt warmly welcomes the new impetus which derived from the WCARRD Conference particularly with regard to all small farms and small holdings and we hope that the broadline directives for assessment in evaluation will be revised in the light of progress made and we particularly welcome the work done in forestry.
By way of conclusion we would like to thank Mr Lignon for his excellent introductory statement.
D. APANPA (Nigeria): My delegation wishes to congratulate the Director-General and his Secretariat for the efforts taken in preparing the comprehensive document under discussion, that is the Review of Field Programmes, otherwise tagged as C 85/4. Again we congratulate the presenter of the document for the brilliant way he adopted his presentation.
It is quite noteworthy that two major features are well identified on the Paper under discussion, one linking features between the Regular and Field Programmes and the other identifying the biting food crisis in Africa.
However, we think much is still expected from the FAO and other relevant financing agencies in view of the recent cutbacks from the UNDP.
Again much has to be pursued within the areas of project planning and implementation, most especially for the developing countries.
It is gratifying to note that project expenditures in Africa registered 40 percent in the outgoing biennum and that this figure will rise in the next biennium. This will certainly do much to benefit many developing countries in the African region.
The FAO has done a good job by sending evaluation and review missions to assess the field programme. This idea has enabled specialists to interact with the FAO field officials and their national counterparts. Through these endeavours, clear views of the projects are presented. Achievements are noted, logistic problems are identified, and solutions are proposed.
Lastly, the increase in the extra-budgetary expenditures,as given elsewhere in the FAO, in the Fisheries Field Programme will go a long way in the development of the sector.
H. MALTEZ (Panamá): Permítase en primer lugar, felicitar al Sr٠Lignon por la excelente presentación del tema 14, actualmente en examen. Para nuestro país, Panamá, los programas de campo de la FAO han sido siempre motivo de gran reflexión; por tal razón, no sólo hemos prestado particular atención al alcance de las actividades operacionales de esta Organización, sino que nos hemos interesado también en forma especial en su contenido, siguiendo muy de cerca sus tendencias y prioridades. Dentro de este contexto, el contenido del examen de los programas de campo que hoy analizamos,
nos ha suscitado un especial interés, ya que, a nuestro juicio, en él se efectúa un análisis abierto y constructivo de las características, tendencias y perspectivas de dichos programas. Consideramos de manera global que se han alcanzado significativas mejoras en las actividades de campo, que se ha avanzado en aspectos tales como la calidad de los expertos y particularmente en que los proyectos parecen corresponder cada vez más a las prioridades determinadas por los propios gobiernos. A nuestro juicio, las evaluaciones realizadas han permitido reconocer las causas fundamentales de las deficiencias en la ejecución de las actividades de asistencia técnica y permitirán, por lo tanto, encontrar las medidas prácticas necesarias para corregirlas. Por todo esto, mi delegación manifiesta su complacencia e insta a la FAO a encontrar nuevas mejoras, sobre todo en lo refeŕente a la preparación y planificación de los proyectos, así como cuando, subrayamos, ello sea posible, a la determinación de los objetivos cuantificables de producción.
La delegación de Panamá reitera su apoyo pleno a la prioridad dada a Africa en la distribución regional de los £ondos de cooperación técnica-. Ello no sólo nos parece justo sino necesario. Respecto a la situación africana, deseamos evidenciar el hecho de que fue la FAO la primera Organización en dar la alerta acerca de la inminente crisis alimentaria en ese continente y, que desde entonces, su Director General, ha venido desplegando enérgicos esfuerzos para ayudar a los países más necesitados. A tal propósito, nosotros concedemos una muy particular importancia al Programa de la Rehabilitación de la Agricultura en Africa. En efecto, aunque reconocemos el enorme valor de la ayuda alimentaria de urgencia, consideramos que ambas tienen que ir coordinadas pues sólo de esta manera los países afectados pueden recuperar la capacidad de producción perdida, superar la situación de emergencia y evitar una dependencia cada vez mayor de los otros. Nos complace, y lo subrayamos, tanto la amplia gama de proyectos que para tal fin se realizan, como la rapidez con la que los mismos se ejecutan. Nos complace asimismo sobremanera, la participación de ciertos países en desarrollo en parte de las actividades de apoyo.
Mi delegación desea, sin embargo, manifestar su preocupación por la situación de nuestra región, América Latina y El Caribe, en lo que respecta a la distribución de las asignaciones para los proyectos de campo, ya que, como puede apreciarse en el Gráfico 1.4 así como en el Cuadro 1.3 del .documento C 85/4,se nota una disminución progresiva de dichas asignaciones para nuestra región. Estimamos, por lo tanto, conveniente que para alcanzar el justo equilibrio regional se siga concediendo a nuestra región la asistencia que tanto necesita en materia de dichas actividades de campo.
Por lo que se refiere al Programa de Cooperación Técnica (PCT), ya nos hemos referido a él en forma amplia durante el desarrollo de los dos temas anteriores. En esta ocasión deseamos tan sólo evidenciar cómo a pesar de sus limitados recursos, de los injustos ataques a los cuales están sometidos por unos pocos y que parecieran no considerar adecuadamente nuestra participación modesta pero soberana en las actividades de la FAO, el PCT desempeña una función de suma importancia en los programas de campo de esta Organización, de manera general tal y como se viene reconociendo por la casi totalidad de los Estados que participamos en esta Conferencia.
Dentro de ese marco de referencia, no podemos dejar pasar la ocasión sin destacar el hecho que consideramos de una importancia significativa, a saber: la utilización cada vez mayor de los recursos de los propios países en desarrollo para la ejecución de sus proyectos de campo.
Destacamos un aumento de los fondos fiduciarios unilaterales financiados con recursos facilitados por los propios países beneficiarios. Tales esfuerzos, a nuestro juicio, deben evidenciarse, en efecto y aunque lamentablemente los mismos no son suficientes, y por lo tanto se seguirá dependiendo de la ayuda exterior, la cual en muchos casos se hace desear, es utilizada como elemento de presión política y económica o simplemente se niega. Tal hecho señala la voluntad de los países en desarrollo, a pesar de la grave crisis económica, de tratar de depender cada vez menos de la mencionada asistencia externa; y se da así respuesta a quienes cuestionan nuestro interés por mejorar las cosas, a quienes piensan que subdesarrollo es sinónimo de indolencia, a quienes subestiman nuestra voluntad de seguir adelante.
Mi delegación estima, asimismo, oportuno manifestar su complacencia por la expresada tendencia a contratar más directores de proyectos y expertos nacionales, en cuanto considera no sólo que tal práctica da mayores y mejores oportunidades de labor a nuestros técnicos, sino también, sobre todo, porque la misma constituye un aliento y contribuye, por una parte, a ęstimular la tan necesaria capacitación de los elementos nacionales de los países beneficiarios y, por otra, a lograr una par-. ticipación más real y efectiva en la formulación y aplicación de modelos de desarrollo propios de tales países.
De la misma manera, expresamos nuestra satisfacción por la importancia que seda a la cooperación técnica entre países en desarrollo, a la que consideramos como uno de lo s pilares del estabecimiento del nuevo orden económico interncional. Consideramos que este es unobjetivo que debe perseguirse activamente.
Nuestra delegación estima favorable el hincapié que se hace en el actual examen del desarrollo forestal. Para nosotros es importante, indispensable, acabar con lo que definimos la tendencia a fabricar desiertos. Es indispensable reconocer y hacer conocer la relación que existe entre desarrollo forestal y rural y la producción de alimentos. Es éste el mejor homenaje que se puede hacer al Año Internacional del Bosque proclamado por la FAO.
Respaldamos, asimismo, de manera decidida, la labor del Centro de Inversiones de la FAO. Nos preocupan, al mismo tiempo, las continuas dificultades con que tropieza la Asociación Internacional de Fomento (AIE) y especialmente el Fondo Internacional de Desarrollo Agrícola (FIDA) para movilizar cantidades suficientes de recursos, por lo cual se afectará negativamente, de eso estamos seguros, la corriente de inversiones destinada al.sector agrícola. A tal propósito, insistimos, como lo venimos haciendo en todas nuestras intervenciones, en que se concluyan en forma satisfactoria antes de fin de año las prolongadas negociaciones para la segunda reposición de recursos del FIDA.
Expresamos nuestra satisfacción por los importantes efectos que los criterios de la Conferencia Mundial sobre Reforma Agraria y Desarrollo Rural han tenido en las actividades de campo de la FAO, ya que ellos comportan la participación de los sectores más pobres de la comunidad en los planes cooperativos, incluso en lo concerniente al mejoramiento de la condición de la mujer.
Manifestamos también nuestra complacencia y especial interés por el considerable aumento del componente de capacitación que se imparte actualmente a través de las actividades de campo, así como de los importantes efectos del gran número de becas concedido anualmente en el marco de dichos proyectos. Y es que mientras para algunos el conocimiento significa la clave del poder, para nosotros la capacitación representa la clave del desarrollo, razón-por la cual la anhelamos.
Queremos destacar en esta oportunidad la importancia que mi delegación otorga al problema de los impedidos en el mundo rural, ya que ello es parte de nuestra política nacional. Esto no sólo en el contexto de los innegables aspectos humanos que el mismo tiene, sino sobre todo por el gran significado que para el sector productivo rural significa la plena y eficaz incorporación de los mismos. Por estas razones, entre otras, es por lo que la delegación de Panamá desea expresar su más decidido apoyo a la declaración que en tal sentido nos hiciese la distinguida representación de Suecia.
Como último aspecto, la delegación de Panamá desea expresar, una vez más, su seria preocupación por las tendencias, cada vez más generalizadas, de reducir la asistencia internacional, en condiciones de favor o no, para el sector agrícola. Nos preocupa que mientras otros proclaman a los cuatro vientos su apoyo al multilateralismo, las acciones en la práctica desmientan tal hecho. Nos preocupa el hecho de que tal tendencia pareciese ir dirigida, de manera particular, hacia aquellos organismos que, como la FAO, practican la acción multilateral. Nos preocupan los fines que se persiguen con ello. Nos preocupan cuáles podrían ser sus consecuencias.
Dentro de este contexto y a pesar de la moderada recuperación experimentada durante el presente bienio, nos preocupa el volumen que las actividades programadas de campo de la FAO puedan prestar a las crecientes necesidades y demandas de los países en desarrollo, especialmente de Africa y de mi región: América Latina y el Caribe.
Motivo de particular preocupación, en ese sentido, son las sensibles reducciones que desde 1981 se han venido registrando sucesivamente en la cuantía de los recursos del Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Desarrollo, PNUD, asignadas para asistencia técnica a la alimentación y a la agricultura; y es que nos preocupa también que los propios recursos del PNUD hayan ido disminuyendo.
Nuestra delegación manifiesta, dentro de este marco de referencia y a la luz de la duplicación en la atención de particulares sectores de la asistencia, tal como parece ser el caso de la Oficina de Ejecución de Proyectos del PNUD, que, a nuestro juicio, la FAO es el organismo especializado y con experiencia, dentro del sistema de las Naciones Unidas, para ejecutar el apoyo técnico y sectorial requerido. Por esta razón le expresamos nuestro apoyo.
La delegación de Panamá ha prestado particular atención a los aspectos relacionados con la importancia creciente de los fondos fiduciarios en los programas ejecutados por la FAO. A este propósito, desea evidenciar la manera con que la asistencia técnica prestada por esta Organización, financiada con dichos fondos, se amplíe. En efecto, la misma ha aumentado al punto de representar en la actualidad el mayor porcentaje de los recursos extrapresupuestarios que la FAO destina a actividades de campo. Al respecto, deseamos expresar nuestra satisfacción, ya que la disponibilidad de tal apoyo permite, por lo menos, la continuidad de la asistencia técnica, vital en muchos sectores prioritarios afectados por las reducciones de los programas FAO/PNUD y l proporciona también la flexibilidad para responder a importantes necesidades de asistencia y cooperación técnica que va surgiendo. En este contexto, deseamos destacar la participación generosa y altruista de los países nórdicos y de Italia en esos fondos fiduciarios.
Deseamos terminar manifestando nuestra preocupación, muy seria, por la carrera armamentista, que absorbe importantes recursos que debieràn ser dedicados a los procesos de desarrollo, así como los esfuerzos tendentes a la erradicación del hambre y malnutrición. Exhortamos, por lo tanto, a todos los gobiernos para que, como homenaje a este 40° Aniversario de la FAO, se comprometan nuevamente a fortalecer los órganos multilaterales y se pueda contribuir de esta forma a cumplir con el principal objetivo de esta Organización: la noble tarea de garantizar la alimentación en el mundo.
M. HJORTSØ (Denmark): Denmark has for a number of years been among the major contributors to FAO's Field Programmes through our joint multi-bilateral cooperation. On this background we have studied the Review of Field Programmes 1984-85 with great interest. This review of past experience should present us with some lessons of value for future activities. Where the financial situation is concerned, the Review states that the Trust Funds as a funding source currently represent a dynamic element in the Field Programme delivery. Judging from the experience of the past few years the Trust Funds seem to stabilize themselves at a level of approximately 50 percent of the resources available for the FAO Field Programmes. The UNDP-funded share on the other hand dropped from 90 percent 15 years ago to around 40 percent today. Denmark finds this development regrettable, since it partly reflects the precarious financial position of the UNDP which we like to see as the main funding and coordinating agency in the UN development effort.
As for our own contribution to the FAO Trust Funds, we do not foresee any real term increase in that contribution for reasons I will revert to shortly.
We have noted with satisfaction that the allocation for field projects in Africa will rise to 40 percent of the total for the biennium 1984-85. It is likewise with satisfaction that we have noted that approximately 40 percent of the funds will be diverted to LDCs. My delegation commends and supports this development.
As regards the recent development in the distribution of expenditure on programmes, we have noted with some surprise that for the biennium 1984-85, a period which has been particularly marked for its preoccupation with the food crisis and hunger situation in Africa. The only two programme areas which have experienced a nominal as well as relative decline in FAO Field Project expenditure are crop development and nutrition. The Review of Field Programmes contains as interesting synthesis and analysis of evaluation reports this year from no less than 222 projects evaluated in the years 1980 through 1984. Although the statistical methods behind the analyses of course are open to question, my delegation appreciates the frank presentation of the results. We find that the analysis and the knowledge gained from those evaluations must be food for thought for donor countries as well as recipient countries,and in particular,for the FAO itself. The analysis confirms one thing which is well known to all of us. The undertaking of development activities is indeed a difficult task. Allow me, Mr Chairman, to quote a few results from the analysis which are of a rather disturbing nature. In nearly half of the projects in LDC countries where the project effect was assessed,the effect was deemed unsatisfactory. This could be said to be not as bad as one might expect considering the difficult situation in LDCs. On the other hand, it certainly leaves ample room for improvement in project design and implementation. The unsatisfactory result should also not lead the FAO Field Programme to shy away from projects in the LDCs. Obviously the challenge ·and the potential is great in these countries. We also thought it disturbing that in the projects where these elements were assessed, the immediate objectives and the design of the projects were found to be unsatisfactory in more than half the cases. Even more surprising is the information that the FAO technical backstopping seemed to be unsatisfactory in 55 percent of the projects where this element was assessed.
Let me now turn to some current considerations in my country on field activities for development, based partly on our experience with our participation in the FAO trust fund programme and our cooperation with other agencies. The public debate in Denmark on development policies and principles has for the last few years been quite intensive. One recurring feature in the debate has been a demand for cost-efficiency and qualitative improvements in our development assistance, be they bilateral or multilateral. There has been and still is a broad public support for a substantial Danish contribution to the international development effort. This is evidenced by a decision in Parliament to increase the Danish ODA:GNP ratio from the present 0.76 percent to 1 percent in 1992. It is my Government's position that this quantitative improvement should be accompanied by a qualitative improvement in the aid performance. On the multilateral side this implies that our increased resources will be channelled through those organizations who work most effectively and who give due consideration to cooperation and coordination with other agencies.
In a recent statement, our Minister for Foreign.Affairs singled out a few organizations who seemed to qualify in this respect, and the FAO was not among them. Consequently we do not foresee any real term increase in our contribution to the FAO Trust Fund programme.
I have mentioned the importance we attach to cost-efficiency and cooperation in the planning design and implementation of Field Programmes. Coordination among agencies at country level is of utmost importance in this connection. We wish to point to the central role in this respect given to the UNDP by so-called consensus resolution from 1970. The setting of priorities according to the needs of recipient countries is another important aspect. Concentration on priority areas is necessary when the best use is to be made of scarce resources. A close cooperation with the UNDP in connection with the country programming exercise of that organization is recommended.
Evaluation is a subject which has attracted increasing attention in bilateral, as well as multilateral, aid organizations. My Government attaches much importance to this crucial aspect of the field activities. For our Trust Fund activities we require timely and independent evaluations for projects and occasionally for whole programme areas. For the time being an evaluation of the entire FAO Fertilizer Programme is carried out. This evaluation was a Danish initiative which was only with some reluctance accepted by the FAO.
On the question of women in development much has been said and much deserves to be said. We believe that it is generally recognized that women play a very important role in agriculture in developing countries. The role of women was once again highlighted during this summer's United Nations Conference on Women in Nairobi. Stịll we find that the role of women and their integration in the development process is only reflected in the FAO Field Programme to a very low degree. We do not, however, call for field projects designed especially for women, but we would indeed like to see the aspect of women in development incorporated to a much higher degree in the Field Programme.
Let me make an Òbservation on the TCP Programme. This issue is of course dealt with under another agenda item but nevertheless the TCP forms part of the FAO Field Programme. In the review before us the FAO Country Representatives put on record that the TCP Programme is considered the most successful of the Field Programmes. There can of course be various reasons for this assessment. One reason could be that the TCP projects are usually very small, quick-delivery projects, their average size being only $70 000. This makes them hardly comparable to other field projects and we have some doubt as to the contribution of the TCP projects towards the longer term solution of the great problems facing developing countries. Anyhow we can only take note that our multi/bilateral Field Projects with the FAO are only rated second best at the most. I wonder whether this fact should enter our own consideration on where our tax-payers' monies are put to the best use for developing countries.
Lastly let me express my Government's support for activities to the benefit of disabled persons carried out in the various UN agencies within their respective mandate + existing resources. In this spirit,my delegation can support the initiative taken by the Swedish delegation in this connection.
V. STOYANOV (Bulgaria): I shall be very brief. First of all I should like to join the previous speakers congratulating you as Vice-Chairman and the Chairman of the Commission the distinguished delegate of Colombia, Ambassador Bula Hoyos, and to wish you success in the future work. I want to thank Mr Lignon, the Assistant Director-General, for his concise and clear introduction. I wish to
offer my condolences to the Colombian delegation in connection with the grave calamity that happened a few days ago.
Today we are discussing the activity on the Field Programmes for the period 1984-85. It equals about 1 170 FAO projects which are of medium-term and about 443 TCP projects. We should notice that the number of the projects included in the proposal is impressive. We are of the opinion that these programmes are very important and useful for the development of the individual countries. The observations of the Secretariat are along the same lines. On the other hand we should notice that the resources allocated for the development of agriculture are not significant and there is a need for an increase in that amount. Priority should be given to the solution of that problem in the country itself.
At the last FAO Council session we noted that TCP projects are complementary to the Regular Programme's activities. In such a way direct assistance is being given to the developing countries. For this reason we support technical cooperation programmes as a rational system of action.
I should like to express my conviction that FAO's field programmes, having accumulated a lot of experience for the last thirty years, will contribute to the improvement of the agricultural condition.
L. GANSORE (Burkina Faso): Je voudrais tout d'abord remercier M. Lignon pour son introduction claire et concise et féliciter le Secrétariat pour la présentation de ce document.
Au chapitre I de ce document, nous lisons: "le programme a connu une légère croissance malgré une baisse constante des activités financées par le PNUD, baisse entamée depuis 1983."
Si d'une manière générale nous nous réjouissons de l'apport des fonds fiduciaires, sûrs que les principaux partenaires ont de plus en plus confiance en la FAO, il n'en demeure pas moins que nous sommes inquiets de la réduction des fonds du PNUD. Notre inquiétude se justifie d'autant plus que les activités financées par le PNUD auraient à gagner si elles bénéficiaient de l'appui technique de la FAO.
Par ailleurs, comme l'ont indiqué le Comité financier et le Comité de programme lors de leurs sessions en 1984, il faudra à tout prix éviter que les activités de la FAO et du PNUD arrivent à un double emploi. Un double emploi qui risque de nous faire perdre de l'énergie et surtout des fonds à un moment où les besoins ne font que croître, besoins dus pour la plupart aux récentes crises alimentaires; à un moment où l'aide accordée à l'agriculture ne fait que régresser; à un moment également où le FIDA et 1'IDA connaissent des difficultés très sérieuses.
En ce qui concerne le chapitre 2, nous apportons notre appui aux deux formes d'évaluation du programme de terrain, à savoir, l'évaluation des représentants de la FAO sur le terrain et l'évaluation tripartite regroupant les pays bénéficiaires des sources de financement FAO.
Nous sommes également d'accord sur la mention faite sur la participation effective des populations locales à l'exécution des projets. Nous pensons que l'organisation et la formation des populations sont des moyens privilégiés d'une transformation qualitative des individus en tant qu'acteurs et sujets de leurs développement à venir.
Chapitre 3: nous voudrions féliciter la FAO pour avoir accordé une priorité aux activités forestières, particulièrement au niveau des pays sahéliens. Nous mesurons l'importance de ces activités comme moyens de lutte contre la désertification. C'est pourquoi nous appuyons les efforts entrepris par la FAO dans ce domaine au niveau de notre sous-région, au niveau du Comité permanent inter-Etats de lutte contre la sécheresse dans le Sahel, CILSS.
Au niveau du Burkina Faso nous avons engagé une bataille pour la sauvegarde de notre écosystème par une sensibilisation des populations sur les effets nocifs de coupes abusives de bois et des feux de brousse. Des actions de reboisement sont entreprises sur toute l'étendue du territoire.
Enfin au chapitre 4, nous ne pouvons que féliciter la FAO pour son initiative de faire participer de plus en plus les cadres locaux à la direction et à l'exécution des projets, pour l'accent mis sur la formation et la priorité réservée au continent africain dans le programme de terrain.
R. SEVCOVIC (Czechoslovakia): We appreciate the clear presentation of document C 85/4, particularly the suggestion of the trend and expected future development of the FAO field programmes. Our opinion is that the projects and other actual operating activities in the field are the main links in the work of the organization in the development of agricultural production, forestry and fisheries in the developing countries. Because the Council has already treated these problems in detail, I shall make only several comments.
We are glad that the document is not a mere list of operating activities. However, we think that it does not sufficiently analyze the causes of UNDP s deviation from agricultural and food development programmes, i.e. causes of lowering UNDP's contribution to the agricultural sector now when special attention has to be given to the development of agricultural production, particularly in Africa. We also assume that the data in Table I of the Annex to the Report are nominal values, bearing no relation to the growth of the prices of technical services and material caused by inflation. It would be interesting to know what is the real value of the FAO/UNDP programme in the 1970 prices, or at least in the prices as of 1981, i.e. before the start of the present third five-year programme cycle. Perhaps the Secretariat could at least now, in discussion, suggest the present and expected development in this respect.
The 32nd Session of the UNDP Managing Council decided to call its extraordinary meeting at the beginning of 1981 to evaluate Cycle IV National Programmes. We also assume that the FAO Country Representatives or, possibly, special missions, discuss with the FAO Member Governments the conception of the national programme in the field of agriculture, fisheries and forestry. My delegation is interested in what preparation to the above-mentioned extraordinary Session of the UNDP Managing Council is being secured by the FAO Secretariat.
My further remark concerns the regional FAO/UNDP programmes. Tables apply to interregional programmes, but the data on regional programmes are perhaps included in the global data according to regions. Our opinion is that the regional projects in the field, which assume an ever-increasing importance in relation to national programmes, should be analyzed separately in the next report.
We appreciate that 1 200 FAO projects have been analyzed in detail as to their results as well as their methodological aspects. It follows from what is said on pages 34 to 43 of the presented report that, as we see it, the work of experts and consultants on the preparation and implemention of every project is of very high importance. It is undoubtedly correct that when preparing a project, FAO experts seek contacts with small farmers and peasants to find their needs. However, a peasant cannot avoid determining his priorities on the basis of his own knowledge and acute needs. Further development and .possibilities of choosing priorities should be suggested by an expert or consultant who thus becomes a motivating factor of the development and modernization of ineffective obsolete forms of farming.
The classification of Country Groups in Table 3 seems not to be logical enough: the LDC's are given first, followed by Europe, and the largest category receiving the largest proportion of allocations is simply denoted as "other". The terminology used should obviously be corrected. Furthermore, the list of the European countries includes some having no national UNDP/FAO programme on agriculture or those having used only a very small sum for FAO fellowships, whereas the enumeration of countries in the quoted table, including Czechoslovakia, gives the impression that all these countries have participated to an equal extent in the UNDP, TCP and TD programmes.
As mentioned by the head of the Czechoslovak delegation in the general debate in the plenary session, we are interested in improving the geographical representation of different countries as to experts, consultants and cooperating institutions. ' Our country is not represented proportionately to the high standard and long-time tradition of her technical institutions. The possibilities for education and training at Czechoslovak universities, research and other technical institutes are also insufficiently used. Hence, there remain great reserves in the cooperation of my country with the FAO and we are convinced that these reserves will be used during the preparation and implementation of the Fourth UNDP Programme Cycle.
SEONG-BAE SUH (Republic of Korea): I, first of all, would like to express my appreciation to the Secretariat for the work done in the preparation of documents for this discussion. Since so much work has been done by the Secretariat and the Council', my comments on this agenda item will be rather brief.
First, my delegation appreciates the increase of financial resources for field projects during the 1984/85 biennium through the expansion of Trust Fund resources, which more than off-set the decrease in the UNDP fund. At the same time, my delegation would like to register our deep concern for the continual contraction of UNDP funds both in absolute amounts and in the relative share of allocation to FAO field programmes within total UNDP fund resources. My delegation, therefore, hopes that somewhat more concerted efforts by FAO and UNDP to make changes in these undesirable trends are made. It is my view that the stability of field programmes would be seriously affected otherwise due to this financial difficulty.
Secondly, we feel that it is especially timely and appropriate to allocate more field programme resources to the African region, in meeting the deeply-felt need in that region, since most field programmes are of a quick-response nature.
Thirdly, my delegation believes that increased involvement of manpower and institutions in developing countries for the implementation of field projects, as shown in document C 85/4, is particularly of great importance to further promote the TCDC activities in food and agriculture. It is my delegation's view that such experts' recruitment and the use of institutions in developing countries will certainly make a great contribution to the betterment of project performance, primarily because of their experience in the developmental process. It is also a firm position of the Government of the Republic of Korea to fully share its agricultural development experience through various forms of technical cooperation with the developing countries, in particular, the least developed, food-deficit countries. In this context, it is my delegation's opinion that further efforts should be made to develop an explicit and closer linkage of TCDC to FAO field projects.
Fourthly, we find it is important to expand forestry projects described in the document. However,we feel that it is inevitable for the success of these projects to obtain wider and deeper integration with other inter-related programmes at the recipient countries' level to maximize the participation of available local resources.
Finally, my delegation is deeply appreciative of the evaluation works carried out by the Secretariat and FAO field representatives as presented in Chapter Two. We feel that it is very precise and comprehensive to provide useful information for the better design and the more efficient management of field projects. We therefore strongly hope that those evaluation results will be fully utilized so as to improve the programme's efficiency and effectiveness. It is our firm belief that with such a live feedback, many achievements could be made available for us, even with the same investment of resources. For this reason, it is our wish that such evaluation efforts by FAO should be further strengthened, and that feedback of such evaluation results be made accessible in the future for the development of successive projects.
Li ZHENHUAN (China) (original language Chinese): With your indulgence, I wish to make a few comments on document C 85/4.
Firstly, as is indicated in the document, notwithstanding the resumption of significant economic growth in the developed countries, economic stagnation and even decline continued in some developing countries, particularly in those African countries who are experiencing severe natural calamities. However, during the same period, the resources of UNDP, which is an important agency providing assistance in the UN system, decreased by 45% as compared with the preceding cycle. This is extremely unfavourable for those low-income and food-deficit countries where. external aid accounts for a considerable proportion of their national investment for agriculture. This is a cause of concern to us.
Secondly, we are satisfied to note changes in the regional allocation of FAO resources for technical assistance, changes in areas covered as well as in the project structures. The share of assistance to Africa increased, both the relative and absolute amount of expenditure on training went up markedly, and there were relative increases in the share of resources devoted to forestry and livestock development. However, we have also noted with concern that in the past
four years in the projects funded by FAO/UNDP, the absolute value of expenditure on equipment declined from US$50 million to about US$20 million, that is, the proportion went down from 30 percent to less than 18 percent. Concerning the expenditure on personnel involved in the execution of projects over the past four years, though its absolute value declined because of the reduction of the total amount of resources, its share of expenditure still rose from 57 percent to 63 percent. We hope that efficiency in project execution will be further improved, and that under the pre-requisite of ensuring the project effectiveness, expenditure on international and national staff should be reduced and shifted, as appropriate, to the supply of equipment. This does not mean that we should neglect the due importance and role of technical training in the projects. At the previous session of the Conference, the Chinese delegation, in its intervention, drew the attention of the Conference to the declining share of equipment in projects. However, this tendency has not been effectively checked over the past two years since. Therefore we feel it is necessary once more to draw attention to this issue.
Thirdly, we have always held that for developing countries, self-reliance in the economy is the foundation for the consolidation of political independence. Therefore, the Chinese Government has always maintained that while recognizing the positive role of external assistance, there should be full awareness of the importance of self-reliance. As a result, we fully endorse the view expressed in paragraph 4.11 of the document, that "the ultimate aim of FAO's technical assistance and cooperation is to build up the capacities of recipient countries themselves to carry out programmes of rural and agricultural development". We are delighted to note that the "new dimensions" principles of FAO's assistance demand that in executing projects, the resources of expertise and institutions of developing countries should be tapped, national personnel should be absorbed to participate in field project operations and action should be taken. to promote technical cooperation among developing countries. During the 1980-84 period national officials were appointed as project directors in a growing number of FAO-supported field projects, more local experts were recruited in field project operations,and more recipient countries were entrusted with the responsibility of executing the projects. This has resulted in expanded technical cooperation among developing countries. We wish to express our appreciation for this new development.'
FAO has provided China with generous assistance for its agricultural development, and rendered valuable support for its agricultural development projects funded by other international agencies as well as for the assistance projects it has undertaken in other countries. Most of the projects executed have achieved tangible results. This should be attributed to FAO's correct policy in providing assistance as well as to the hard work of its Secretariat and its international experts. I wish to take this opportunity to express our sincere gratitude to them and our readiness to continue our cooperation with FAO in the years to come.
E. MARTENS (Belgium): The Belgian delegation has greatly appreciated the concise, frank and constructive analysis contained in document C 85/4.
My actual statement will be somewhat more lengthy than usual because of various reasons; first, the excellent presentation and easy reading contents of the document; second, the advantage of it being discussed after a long rainy weekend that gave us more time for reflection ; third, our special interest in the field programmes; fourth, the intimate links between Regular and Field Programmes enabling us to make further reference to aspects of the Regular Programme we may have overlooked during discussions on item 13 ; and last but not least, the field being the only place where the real impact and effect of any activity can be concretely measured.
The Director-General remembered in his Foreword that FAO was among the first to sound the alarm on the dramatic food crisis in Africa during this biennium. We note with satisfaction that quick remedial action was taken through FAO's programme for rehabilitation of food production in 21 African countries. Moreover, I am very proud to be able to mention that Belgium was the first donor to respond actively and concretely to this ARPA programme by approving four projects at the beginning of June this year. Our total contribution amounts to US$2.2 million,and two projects should be operational by now.
Now referring to budgetary resources for the field programmes, we very much appreciate the recent recovery from the low levels during 1982-83 that were essentially conditioned by successive cutbacks in the amounts of UNDP funding. I feel obliged to mention in this respect the close relationship between UNDP funds available for food and agriculture on the one hand and the priorities put forward by the developing countries as shown in the Indicative Planning figures on the other hand. This means that corrective measures to be taken will depend mainly on recipient governments themselves.
However, the recovery has mainly to be attributed to the significant increase in the share of Trust Funds. This situation reflects the genuine commitment of Trust Fund donors in their endeavour to actively assist world food security.
Investment support activities remained strong in spite of recent constraints on concessional resources for agricultural investment. Many delegates have made a special reference to the replenishment problems of IFAD resource's. My delegation fully shares their concern.
As to the Freedom From Hunger Campaign/Action for Development Programme, the Belgian Government is very much in favour of this assistance mechanism. It facilitates the identification and formulation of projects that involve the most needy target group, the rural poor. This type of activity enables more efficient NGO donor funding. My government is actively involved in this area with a specific co-financing policy. Belgian NGOs may obtain uncorfcessional subsidies of up to 75 percent of their approved project cost propositions.
The increasing participation of FAO technical inputs for WFP projects deserves our full support, as it is our own policy that food aid can only be effective when channelled through development projects, or at least closely related to them.
Unilateral Trust Funds have become the second most important category of Trust Fund assistance, representing 27 percent of this funding in 1984, as compared to only 12 percent in the late 1970s. This very encouraging evolution shows the growing thrust being given by recipient countries to FAO's special expertise and experience. It appears that governments benefiting from international financial institutions' assistance are always responsible for the overall execution of investment projects under this assistance scheme. Therefore we sincerely hope that the˙many calls for increased budgetary resources may also lead to an effectively larger appeal on FAO services in the context of Unilateral Trust Fund arrangements within the international financial institutions' assistance scheme.
It is not at all my intention to add to the burden of work that is already involved in preparing the review of the field programmes. Nevertheless, I think it will be of common interest if we could have access to one more table. My delegation would find it most useful if the Secretariat could present a table ˙comparing the basic subject matter distribution for the three major extra-budgetary fund sources. The basic subject matters I am referring to are the categories utilized in the Programme of Work and Budget, and the three major fund sources of the field programmes would be: FAO/UNDP programme, FAO/Government Cooperative Programme, and Unilateral Trust Funds.
This type of complementary information related to table 1.4 on page 14 will certainly allow for a better comprehension of the concrete signals that recipient countries on the one hand and donors on the other hand want to send out for future orientations in budget allocation. It would, moreover, be interesting to be able to assess how far they are converging.
Now I would like to make some remarks on the fertilizer programme. First of all, allow me to mention that Belgium has been contributing to this very important programme, so vital for food production improvement, since its inception in 1972. Moreover, Belgium has been one of the major Trust Fund donors ever since. Even though we consider the majority of the fertilizer projects as success stories, I would like to make some comments on two issues: first of all, my delegation would insist on more attention being given to the organic recycling activities, in such a way that they form an integral part of the package of improved production systems concentrated on fertilizer use. This aspect is our special concern because of the limited economic possibilities of the poor farmer to use exclusively chemical fertilizers and because it is also related to the second issue. The second issue I want to mention is the availability.of fertilizers
for the small farmers at reasonable prices, in quantities as needed and at the right time. This, of course, presupposes an efficient distribution and credit system that is normally foreseen as one of the objectives of the project design. Nevertheless, we think it appropriate that fertilizer projects would seek and receive acceptable assurances on this issue before implementation would start.
Another aspect of our concern relates to the rural development and increased food production assistance. We detected that these activities were mainly hampered by the lack of essential inputs, in particular in African countries. Moreover, even when inputs are readily available, the credit supply system is inadequately oriented and adapted to the needs and capacities of small farmers. Of course, marketing and price policies form an integral part of these services that are equally essential for any improvement. Therefore we find it disappointing that sub-programmes like marketing (under category 2.1.5.5) and credit (under category 2.1.5.6) have been neglected. Altogether they only represent 9 percent of the budget allocation to the Rural Development Programme in the current biennium, and they stagnate at the same level for the next biennium. We would like to see that special attention be given to this aspect.
We welcomed very much the chapter on the Assessment of Field Projects and appreciated in particular the frank and objective analysis contained in it. The two ways of assessment do seem to complement one another. It was striking that project planning and design resulted in being a weakness in too many cases, in particular in the project evaluations. We therefore strongly support the idea of a more direct intervention of the FAO representatives in this aspect.
Now turning to the expanding role of forestry assistance, we very much appreciate the fact that a whole chapter is dedicated to this vital programme. The World Forestry Congress in July 1985 amply recognized the role of forestry in contributing to rural development. However, the new strategy of forestry for development did already received full support from Trust Fund donors since its inception in 1980. It is very significant that field activities focusing on community forestry and fuel wood represented 20 percent of extra-budgetary expenditure in 1984 against 3 percent in 1980.
It is commonly approved that tree planting activities have vital ecological functions in safeguarding agricultural land. Moreover, they are of major importance in meeting the ever-growing needs of expanding rural populations for fuel wood, fodder, food, farm implements and building materials. At the same time, they enable the creation of new job opportunities and additional income for the rural poor. When taking all this into account, it cannot be stressed enough that forestry development should receive an even greater support than only 4 percent of the budget allocation for the next biennium.
Moreover, we should not forget that fuel wood is for the majority of rural people the only energy source for cooking and heating, thus demonstrating its direct and vital role in feeding and nutrition.
Before ending, I would like to mention the impact of forestry on arid zones and desertification control. Paragraph 3.57 on page 75 of the document C 85/4 gives us a marvellous example of the successful results that can be obtained in marginal ecological zones when government involvement goes hand in hand with well developed techniques. I refer to the case of reforestation activities in Cape Verde where successful tree planting has been experienced, even though the major area is classified as too arid for any vegetation. I would like to draw attention to the fact that the main feature of the first phase of this project has been the development and design of a special planting technique. It is my great pleasure to be able to indicate that the major European Trust Fund donor mentioned in this context is Belgium.
A.M. QURESHI (Pakistan): First of all allow me to say how pleased we are to see you in the Chair presiding over our deliberations this afternoon. We wish to thank Mr Lignon for an excellent review of the document C 85/4. We appreciate the format and the contents of this review which is both frank and comprehensive. As members of the Programme Committee, we had the occasion for an in-depth study of this document, therefore we will confine ourselves to only a few remarks.
FAO has indeed done an excellent job in initiating and undertaking 2,500 projects in about 141 countries to augment agricultural and food production. FAO's role in this respect is no doubt laudable and we support these activities.
We are distressed at the declining trend in resources made available by the UNDP to the agricultural sector, although the gap is more than filled by the availability of extra-budgetary resources in the shape of Trust Funds- Yet we would urge a larger allocation of the UNDP resources to the agricultural sector which is of critical importance to the economies of the developing countries. We would like to join the delegate of India in looking for a satisfactory answer with regard to the duplication of some activities by the UNDP.
We appreciate the thrust of the programme on Africa and commend the Director-General for directing the Organization's energies towards the rehabilitation and development of infrastructure in Sahelian Africa afflicted by unprecedented drought and famine.
We would also like to commend the good work being done by the Investment Centre in collaboration with IBRD. Finally, we welcome the document C 85/4 and appreciate the candid manner in which the review has been undertaken.
A. REDL (Austria): Perhaps I can start by congratulating you very warmly on your election. The Austrian delegation was interested in document C 85/4 and studied it most intensively. As is known, we have technical aid projects in developing countries. Austria helps in all fields of food and agriculture. In 1983 we had more than 3,000 such projects. We help local institutions support research and help to evolve new technologies and techniques. We are glad to see that there are many projects in which local personnel are working in such a way that when the project is terminated there can be local and national follow-up measures taken.
The initiative for the field projects lies with the countries requesting FAO help wherever the funds come from. We are glad when joint planning can be worked out. The recipient country makes its own experts available and also supports the project in other ways. Where international experts or particular apparatus are required, then wherever possible they are made available from other developing countries. This means joint efforts and exchange of technical resources. There is a great deal which this can do to promote development of agriculture. New methods, new processes and new abilities can thereby be disseminated over an area which is much bigger than that covered by a single small project.
The Investment Aid Programme, which the FAO investment aid agency operates, helps developing countries to find foreign capital - we think the foreign capital they need to develop their agriculture. It also helps donors and recipients of loans in developing planning. Austria has not only continued its cooperation with international bodies but indeed developed it.
As regards TCP projects, at the 88th Council Meeting and indeed in the course of this Conference, Austria has made its views quite clear. Perhaps by way of conclusion I can express the hope that the FAO's field programmes will in the future be developed in close cooperation with the recipient countries.
M. MAHI (Cameroun): La délégation du Cameroun remercie M. Lignon pour la présentation claire et précise du document que nous étudions. Il ne semble pas nécessaire d'insister sur cette clarté, mais nous devons la relever quand même puisque le mérite du secrétariat ne saurait être passé sous silence.
Nous commencerons par appuyer la déclaration de la délégation suédoise visant à intégrer les handicapés dans nos préoccupations quotidiennes et dans celles de la FAO. Les handicapés effectivement méritent toute notre attention, étant des personnes comme nous tous, mais des personnes qui attendent beaucoup de nous en raison de leur état.
Cela dit, le document que nous étudions, à savoir l'examen des programmes de terrain, fait"le point des activités de la FAO sur le terrain. Il est certainement l'un des plus intéressants rapports que l'on puisse attendre d'une organisation qui s'occupe du sort des déshérités, les ruraux, hommes, femmes, jeunes et moins jeunes.
Dans le premier chapitre de ce document, nous trouvons tous les détails sur les tendances et perspectives des projets et réalisations sur le terrain. Ce qui frappe de prime abord, c'est le fléchissement des fonds du PNUD constaté depuis 1982-83, alors que le développement des activités financées par le Fonds fiduciaire de la FAO connaît une certaine expansion.
De même, l'accroissement de l'aide du PCT rencontre notre agrément et l'agrément de tous les pays bénéficiaires qui sont en fait des pays sinistrés en majeure partie, mais nous pensons qu'il n'est pas superflu de le réaffirmer.
A la page 17 du document français. on nous fournit les composantes de l'aide. On y constate que le volet "formation" passe de 5 à 11 pour cent de 1980 à 1984. Mais il n'atteint pas les proportions consacrées à l'équipement. Ceci présente un certain danger dans la mesure où la formation constitue le support du transfert de technologie qui reste un préalable à la mise en place et à l'utilisation rationnelle de cet équipement. C'est-à-dire que la FAO doit avant tout privilégier la formation essentiellement professionnelle.
C'est également avec satisfaction que nous constatons l'accroissement de l'apport des pays en développement dans la conduite des projets. Ces fonctionnaires possèdent à n'en pas douter l'avantage de mieux connaître le terrain ou de s'y adapter avec plus de rapidité que leurs homologues des pays développés. Mais ce souci ne doit en rien sacrifier à la compétence et à l'expérience indispensables. Le programme de relèvement de la production alimentaire dans 21 pays d'Afrique est alléchant, et son impact dans le cadre de ce redressement est attendu avec impatience.
Dans le Chapitre 2-, nous trouvons tous les détails sur 1 ' évaluation-des projets. Il faut quand même une évaluation souple. Le choix des critères d'évaluation doit en tenir compte pour admettre une correction éventuelle au cours de l'exécution, tout en recherchant la poursuite des objectifs fixés.
Quant à la forêt, son rôle est indéniable. Nous devons mieux organiser la gestion forestière, car l'exploitation des forêts donne souvent lieu à des gâchis et sa revalorisation est négligée. Nous continuons à exiger de renforcer la recherche et la formation dans .le domaine de la foresterie.
Enfin, la formation technique mérite d'être l'une des priorités dans les pays les moins avancés. Elle doit être dispensée sur place dans le milieu où l'opération s'exécute. Je pense essentiellement aux stages de courte durée, aux démonstrations techniques.
En dehors de ces quelques observations, ma délégation approuve le document sur le programme de terrain, et je ne peux m'abstenir de féliciter la FAO qui consacre beaucoup d'efforts au relèvement économique des pays les moins avancés.
CHAIRMAN (original language German): Thank you to all of you for your spirit of discipline today which enabled the Chair to conduct the meetings in a fairly smooth way.
The meeting rose at 18.00 hours
La séance est levée à 18 heures
Se levanta la sesión a las 18.00 horas
