UNITED
NATIONS
E
Economic and Social Council
Distr.
GENERAL
E/ECA/ECM.2/6
13 - 15 Octobec 1986 Original: ENGLISH
ECCJNJMIC· COMMISSION FOR AFRICA
Second Extra-ordinary session of the Conference of Ministers
Addis Ababa, Ethiopia 13 - 15 October 1986
t
i ,
•
j•
"i
_.J\f
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SUBSTANTIAL NEW PROGRAMME OF ACTION FOR TIlE 1980s FOR TIlE LEAST DEVELOPED COUN'1lUES
Introduction
1. At its thirty-8IOOIld _asion, the Governing Council welcened the
introduction by tlO' of IIIl illproved format for the round-table process. I t
requested the Mministrator to ensure that this process provide IIIl enective instrllllent for the 1IIplementation of the Substantial New Progranme of Action
(SNI'A) and, in particular, for the praootion of a dialogue between LOC
Governnents, and bilateral and IIUltilateral donors. ~ Cowlcil also
requested the Mministrator to review periodically the round-table lIll!Chanisn
·with a view to ensuring that it responds to the needs of the least DevelOped Countries end of the donors in the efforts to achieve effective aid
oo-ordination in the Least Developed COUntries·. It 813reed in principle to the financing of the
Various
activities related to the round-table process during the fourth progranming cycle frClll Special Progranme Besources andrequested the Mminiatrator to mke the necessary rECClilliendations for this financing at its thirty-third _ion. Pinally, the Governing CouIcil
endorsed the Aaninistrator'. proposals for the revitalization of the Special Measures Pund for the IA!last Developed COUntries (SF) and requested h1m to
report on the arrangtlllellts .cIe by him for the utilization and JlIana9enent of SMF resources at its thirty-third seasion.
2. 'lbis note presents the steps already taken within tHP to carry out the round-table process in accordance with the new format prCl£'OSed, reviews the first exercises and SU!Nest IICIIE new orientations for the future. It then lIIlalyses the different CXl8ts entailed by the round-table process for moP and
presents the 1JIplications for the fourth progr~cycle. Finally, the note presents the arrangements IlIIlde for the utilization and IIIIlIVl9f!I1IEnt of the
Special MellBUre Pund for the-IA!last Developed Countries. A schedule of plISt and forthc::allinl round-table-related activities is given in the Amex.
I. m:ENT RXm-17\BLE ElCPERIEICES
3. In the
new
format, the round-table process is viewed as a recurrent cycle, a CXll'ltinuing process of consultation, information and negotiation withthe donor camunity. I t focuses on bolo groups of closely related events: the round-table oonference and its related activities on the one hand, the
aectoral and epecial progr... oonsu1tations on the other. '1be round-table confereroe takes place in a _jor Europeal'l cityJ participation in this meeting
is restricted to the prir¥:ipal develqllEnt funding partners. '.ft1e CXll'lference is the first step in the dialogue between the
ux:
Government and its min donors on JIIilICro ecoilclllic: and sectoral developlEnt policies, as well as on its priority requir. ..,ts: it should result in policy ocmnitments on the part of the LOC Goverment as well as CCIIIlIitments of the participating donors. later theux:
Goverment MY convene IIIl 1n-country oonference in the form of a review _ting of all interested aid partners, including United Nation agencies and non-gcwernnental institutions, to report on the conclusions of the round-table CXll'lfereroe and to elicit support for agreed poliC'f and progrannes./
...
E/ECA/ECM.2/6 English
Page 2
4. The sectoral and special programne consultations are c:oniucted in the country with the development partners concerned. 'lhey address major sectors of the ec<lI~ or specific development issues, programnes or projects, and should lead to concrete actions in support of the country's develapnent
efforts. --
5. During the last several months, UNDP has taken a nuntler of actions to brin:J the roun:i-table process in line with the new format adopted. A policy paper has been prepared, translated (in Arabic, French, Portuguese and
Spanish), and distributed widely within and outside mIlP, to explain to the main part~c;ipants the rationale and characteristics of the modified
process. 1:1 Draft guidelines have also been prepared for the use of the persons responsible for the preparation of the various stages of the process
lID.: officials, resident representatives, round-table consultants), they are now used on an experimental basis and will later be finalized and more widely circulated. seminars or meetings have been organized to explain further to the main actors (Least Developed Country Governments,· UNDP staff, United
Nations agerries, donor aid agencies) the features and the iJlplications of the new format. The UNDP internal machinery for round-table preparation has been reviewed and strengthened with the establishment of an
ux:
Support andCo-ordination UnitJ this Unit, to be headed by the Co-ordinator of Assistance to the lOCs, is placed in the Regional Bureau for Africa, where
it is responsible for the preparation of round-tables and the control of documentation quality.
6. In the twelve months since the adoption of the new round-table fOJ:11lllt, several factors have somewtlat hanpered UNDP efforts to modify and iJlprOlle the process. The first, which should be of a tenporary nature, stems fran the fact that certain round-table activities had started before the modified fomat was adopted. While significant adjustments have been made to bring
~__h"se activities more in line with the new appr,lllCh, it has often F-coved i;7\;.J:;:;ible to make the far-reaching changes that would have been necessary, fer instarx:e in the docllll'entat1on and schedules of round-table activities, tl,,,r.e is not as yet calplete coherence between the activities already '.••
p"ogress and the modified format •
., Anot."er, and possibly more durably significant, factor has been the insufficient understanding by many participants of the new round-table
format.
ux:
officials, donor representatives, United Nations agencies, while formally accepting the modified approach of the roun:i-table process, do not always appear to have fully appreciated the iJlplications of this new format for their own participation. 'lhis, of course, is not to say that lA'lDP performan::e has been flawless: as the following paragraphs show, serious/ ...
short:cclnlings still exist, which taP int:eBis to remedy as ax:h as possible over the caning IlIlnths. But clearly, IUCh of the corrective work which lHlP will now have to undertake has to do with expla!nin3 to the round-table participants the
new
roum-table process and the role they are expected to play in it. 'As will be seen fran the various problems presented below, thereis only so IIIJCh that tH>P, as the lead age~, can do to iJlprove the
roum-table process: in the end, the governing factor will always remain the willingness of the various participants to accept and put into practice the new pattern that has been prcpcsed 'to them.
8. A conspicuous exanple of the above weaknesses concerns the rudler of participants at the round-table conference. While the new format calls for a limited nuntler of the main developnent funding partners to participate in the conference, sane of the round-table conferences that took place last year
involved COWltries that are not donors (or donors only marginally concerned with the recipient UlC) and United Nations agencies. More often than not, these participants had been officially invited by the UlC Goverment before the new format was formally accepted and these invitations could obviously not be rescinded
cn::e
it was accepted that IlIOre limited participation wasrequired. UNDP should, and shall in the future, endeavour to iJlpress upon the UlC officials at an early stage of the roum-table preparation that limited participation is necessary for a IlUClCessful outeane. It would be useful, in
fact, if these invitations could be sent either by moP or jointly with the GOverment. Li.kewise, UNDP will bring to the attention of United Nations
agencies the iJlprqlriety of seekiB3 invitations directly fran recipient
GOvernments for this stage of the round-table process. It is clear, however, that tHlP efforts will only be IlUClCessful if the UlCGoverl'lll!!nts and all other parties are themselves convinced of the need to limit the nuntler of delegates at this stage of the round-taI)le process if it is to be successful. In fact, discussions with UlC GOverl'lll!!nt officials often reveal that on the contrary,
they still would like large participation of donors and non donors at the round-table conference, in the belief that it would lead to IIDre substantial eatIlIitments fran the donor camunity. In the course of these discussions in the future, tHlP staff will point out that the round-table conference should focus IIDre on policy discussions and that this would be IlIOre effective with limited participation. On the other hand, it should be the _in purpose of the subsequent review Ill!etiB3 to IIIllrshall as large a support as possible for the Government developnent strategy. While these argl.lllel1ts are generally accepted when explained, they are not yet wholeheartedly shared by all UlC officials concerned with the roum-table process and so long as such views continue, round-tables rrey not be as effective as they could be.
•
•
9. '1be selection of the venue for the round-table conference and its lIllU'IiIgement obviously coucecn the UlC Goverment, but they also concern the donors, and IIDre directly, moP. Past round-table conferences have shown various shortcaniB3s in this respect. '1bese conferences have been held either
I ...
E!ECA!ECM.2!6 English
Page 4
in the recipient country or in different European cities (Brussels, Geneva, Lisbon, Par is), depend~on the interest expressed by particular
ux:s
or donors. '!be drawback, however, hu been that with each ~ round""table, donors have to fma111arize themBelves with a different location. In the au.way, the tNP delegation has to ~ each time with a different conference staff, unfEliat with the round-table process, and to make certain that the arrangements for conference rOClll8, offices and equipnent are 'ldequate. "To
keep the round-table conference, as a rule, always in the same venue would enable UNDP and the host institution to establish a long-term relationship and develop the habits that would permit a smoother rUM~ of the conference.
The Palais des Nations in Geneva has, in the past, proved to be a very convenient venue and UNm' will in the future use it as a rule, to host the round-table conferences, in the absence of overrid~ reasons to hold t:heIll in a different location. UNm' will also endeavor to streamline and standardize the staff, locale and equipnent of the conferences.
10. To facilitate the di.alcgue on 1IllIlCro-ecollom1c: and sector strategies between the IDe Goverrmmt and its main partners, UNOP has restructured the agenda of the round-table conferences. It has proved useful to s~le out as agenda items the overall ecOIlCmiC situation and strategy, as well as the policies proposed or inplemented in each of the main sectors. For each of these items, the IDe Goverment has been encouraged to prepare a detailed oral presentation, to which the donors can react by provid~cawelts or
requesting additional information. By identify~the main ecalOllli.c questions in this manner, this type of agenda has limited the scope for general or
diplanatic statements and encouraged businesslike discussions on the
Government policies. '!bere is still roem for iJlprovement, however. FirsUy, the identification of the main agenda items should be started earlier, at the stage of the preparation of the round-table documents. '!be round-table
consultants, the UNDP field econcmists and the resident representative should in this respect play a very iDportant role in id~ntify~ the /ll)st iDportant economic issues, in co-ordination with the Goverl ment and the donors'
representatives in the country. Secondly, the Lo.:: officials should be made /ll)re aware of the III)dus operandi of the round-table conferences, the
statements they are expected to make and the type of questions they are likely to be asked. In that area too, round-table consultants, UNDP econcmists and resident representatives should have substantial responsibility. Finally, in
the course of its contacts with donors, UNDP will encourage t:heIll to be fort.hc:aniIY3 in their C<lTIIIitments and declarations of support during the
round-table conference. While everybody would agree that. the policy dialogue and aid co-ordination that the round-table process facilitate's are a major factor for the effectiveness of aid, it cannot be denied that they make certain demands on the prerogatives of a sovereign Government. '1be LOCs cannot be expected to adopt risky adjustment policy and politically costly econanic reforms in the course of a round-table process, without clear and firm C<lTIIIitments fran the donors to support tbf!se changes. Few countries - be they developed or develop~- would be will~ to go through such an exercise for its
own
sake, in the. absellce of /ll)re tangible results that can"be shown to/ ...
danestic constituents
am
pu,blic: opinion. Donor countries lUSt be aware that, whatever the intrinsic value of the round-table proceS$ for the UlCs' economic deve1opllent, it llight involve difficult decisionsam
80IIIe political costs forux:
Goverrnents and that these GoYenwnents willnc>t be willing to ~ this price unlessthey receive 80IIIe concrete support and can show in their own country tangible evidence of the eventual usefulness of the process.ll. 9le new fomat eRIlhasizes the continuirJJ nature of the round-table
process of consultation, informati<Xl and negotiati<Xl, and thus IIUCh ilIportance is given to the sectoral and special progrlllll1l! consultations. Durin3 the' round-table conferences, considerable time was devoted by UNDP in the course of informal discussions with donors and
ux:
officials to identifyin3 the themes JD:ISt appropriate for this type of consultation. At times, tHlP found it useful to organize, in agreement with theux:
delegati<Xl, an informal meeting of the main donors to identify the donors' _jor concern, define the context and schedule of the follow-up consultations, and agree on the rules of the various participants to these meetin3s. One agenda item was often·specifically devoted to these follow-up meetings so that a formal decision could be taken on future c»-ordination and consultation activities. While the inforDllll discussions throughout the round-table conferences have been useful in preparing the agreement <Xl future follOW-l4l activities, it aR?ears
necessary to identify better, indeed before the round-table conference, the sectors and issues which may warrant specific follow-up consultations. 'Ibis should be done as part of the preparation of the round-table conference,
durin3 the drafting of the documentation and in the course of discussions with donors at the country levels.
12. Indeed, sectoral consultations constitute a IIIIjor element of the new round-table format. For this part of the consultation process, the respective agencies of the United Nations system have priority involvement, particularly as re<3ards the preparation of the documentation. While resident
representatives and the round-table consultants play a leading role in the exercise, substantive inputs are sought frm the agency concerned.
Preliminary experiences in this respect have proven to be quite satisfactory with FPO's involvement in Gantlia for consultations in the agriculture and fisheries &eCtors, as _11 as its invol_nt in Benin for consultations in the forestry and rural development sectors, together with its involvenent in Burundi for consultations in the fisheries and food creps sectorsJ with ~'s
involvement in Guinea-Bissau for consultations in the health sector as well 55
its involvement in Rwanda for consultations in the _ter secWlJ and with tJNESCX)'s involvement in Rw3nda as well as in Burundi for consultations in the education sector, and with WFP's involvement in Sao '1'cIIe and Principe for consultations in the area of food security.
13. A final point concerns the chairmanship of the round-table ueetings.
While the situation has varied, dependin3 an the country or the region, the ueetirJJs are usually chaired by the
we
GoYerment and co-chaired by tNlP (inthe case of the meetings for the Asian LDCS, however, UNDP has chaired the /
...
E/ECA/ECM.2/6 English
Page 6
meeting, the goverl'lllel1t being oo-chairman). When the follow 141 meeting to round-table conferences are held in the IllC country ( u in the cue of review meetings, or for sector and special progr_ consultations) it i8 indeed fitting that the Government chair the meeting. In the cue of the round-table conference held In Europe, however, having tHlP chair the meting may present certain advantages. As an honest broker betwen the IllC and donors, tIV might be in a better position to act u a chairmBn and II1Dderator in _ t should ideally be a concrete and businesslike di8C\l8Sion. In addition,
because of its familiarity with the round-table procesa and its contacts with.
LOCs and donors, UNIP is often better able to wderstand the respective
expectations of the various participllnts conoerning these meetings. Finally, UNIP senior staff, with their fairly extenaea experience of round-table
conferences would be in a good position to steer a meeting through various potential pitfalls and under tight schedule. With all these considerations in mind, UNIP intends to propose in the future to IllC Gove~ts, &Iring
round-table preparations, that tHP chair the E'CUld-t,llble confere1Oewith the Government assuming oo-chairmanship.
II. PINNCDG C. 'DtB ~, PlO...SS
14. To make an estimate of the total coet of round-table activities over a1fI extended period of time such u the five-year span of the fourth progrBllllling cycle is a particularly hazardous enterpri8e. Firat, it is not possible to estimate meaningfully the nuntler of round-table activities that will take place over such a lqthy period. To start with, the round-table conferences, the high point of the round-table cycle, should be linked to the plaming cycle of the recipient IJX:. '1he duration of this cycle varies frOll one country to the next and even fran one cycle to the next within the same country, there are also cases ~re no planning processes actually exist.
Furthermore, various factors, for the _ t part unf,'reseeable, can lead to deviations fran the initial schedulel delays in pr8l.latation, change of Government, significant econcmic events. Whereas the round-table confere1Oe
is a vital stage of the round-table cycle, the country review meeting is not"
and many tees have chosen not to hold one. It is, of course, iJIIlossible to foresee whether an IllC ~ich has not yet requested tRIP to assist in preparing a round-table Conference aoc:ording to the new format will elect to have a . review meeting later on. 'Dte nllltler of sectors or special consultation
meetings that will take place after a round-table conference. varies greatly fran one country to the next, in art:! case, decisions about -the organization of these follOW-I4l meetings are made only during the course of the round table conference and it is iJIIlossible to know ahHd of time the iuItler and types of meetings that will eventually be convened.
15. Secondly, the cost of each of these round-table activities i8 also very difficult to forecast. In the past, these costs have varied widely for the various round-tables. '1he cost of holding a meeting, be it a round-table conference, a review meeting or a follow-~ meeting, is not going to vary
greatly ~lIdingon the country, thcugh it will vary significantly,-of course, /
...
depending on the kind of meeting: it should be cheaper to hold a follow-up meeting than either a round-table confererx:e or a review meeting. However, the technical assistance required for the preparation of the documentation will. This,' of course, results from the differences in such factors as the availability of qualified local staff to participate in the preparation, or the degree of elaboration of the country plan. To sumnarize, both the I1tIItler of round-table activities and the unit costs of these during the next
five-year period will vary so widely, depending on the country, as to render meaningless the idea of an average cost for a round-table cycle and make less than reliable any estimate of the future cost for UlDP of round-table·
activities during the next progranming cycle.
16. In the past, the average cost. to UlDP for the preparation and
iJlplementation of a round-table conference (outside of the country) has been
$200,000; for an in-country review meeting it was $90,000. Costs of
in-country sector consultations arE: more difficult to estimate, given the very limited available experience so fan a rough estimate would be $105,000 (see table) •
17. Based on recent experiences, it can be asslmled that an average
round-table cycle will CCIIPrise one round-table conference
and
two sector or special progranme meetings to be financed by tN:>P.one
can expect that certain bilateral donors, am:>ng the most iJlportant partners of an UX::, or other IlUltilateral organization will finance part or all of the cost of certain of the follow-up meetings.we
assume that lH>P would finance two of these, others might exist, but would be financed differently.we
also assume that a review meeting will be requested in only one out of two round-table cycles. If it can be futther assumed that durilJ; the next tN>P progrllllllling cycle all UX::s where round-table activities have been undertaken in the past(or a similar number of countries, i.e. 22) will go on average through a CCIIPlete round-table cycle, the total cost for UNDP would then cane to $10.4 million.
18. By its decision 85/11, the GovernilJ; COuncil agreed in principle that various activities related to the round-table process be financed during the fourth prograllllling cycle (1987-1991) from Special Progranme Resources. '1be
note by the Administrator (DP/1986/2), contains a proposal to establish a nvtional planning figure of $13.5 million for financilJ; different activities related to aid co-ordination, includilJ; UNDP assistance to the round-table process. lloCOrding to the above c::onputations, some $10.4 million out of this total could thus be devoted to round-table activities in LOCs.
19. Monitoring arr8!J;Jements have been established within tHlP to ensure that costs of organizing and follow-up activities for the entire round-table cycle are properly controlled. .
/ ....
E!ECA!ECM.2!6 English
Page 8
Table. Illustrative cost est_tea for various
P -
of
the
rOUii1-tibIecY!?li
(in
iii)
Costs estimates based on the &SlUIPtion of a \mit ooet of '10,000 per lllIIn-month.
Preparatory. 2 x $4,000
Participation Rl'. 5 x $2,000.
3 x $6,500.
6 x '4,000.
2 x $4,000.
1 x $4,000.
No interpretation provided.
No translatiOn of the documentation.
I ...
III. urILIZATIQl AND MIINP'tGI!H!Nl' CR 'DIE SPB:IAL ME:ASU1lES fUI) ~ 'DIE ux:s 20. By its decision 8S/li, the Governing Co-.mci). D.lao endorsed the
Adn1n18trator's prCJlXlNl that the Special MMsu:e.. i'....1d for the
ux:a
be used -for austail'll!d assistance to UlCs in such ar~Ui c;f epacial OOllcelltration where the lI(:pl1cation of additional resources could rilake o!il difference ard haveJIPlIC1a1 iJlpact on a country's caprlbility teo 1lWla9'" its oovelllPllMt process-.
21. PartiMI'ar priority areas had been pr,~ l:!;o- the l;,ministrlltor
(II'/1985/11) and specifically accepted
b:.'
ti'lf: (iO\mming COuncil.n-.e
fir,tiSI -the strengthening of national CllpllCity to (Il) oor.duct ae::ro economic structural and policy ~lyses to serve as a framework for policy refoIlll W deYelcpent planning, and progrRlling and ~nt: (b) cori!lX:t technical oo-qleration needs aseeaments in order to c!eterm1ne aectoral requir.-nts and relative priorities, (c) forJal1ate'h&JMn reg,urces developr.ent strategies and plans, and (d) conduct action-oriented feasibility ~rd viability lltUdies to lIlIbstantiate national develCl(lllel1t progc_s ~ FrClj~.~ Another priority area 1Iihich
was
endoned is -the strengthening ?f IlWl""90\i'e~taleooliCllic activity inux:a
suchas
grass-roots progr";'!If,es, ~r4ting activities in the rural eector. the strenqt:hening of extension ,'!rid support eervices, and iDplsEntation of structural IIdjuatment with r;. direct eff~ on the prodlX:tive c:apacity of the poorer segllents of t.~ ~l"\;i,,a" '!lnU t.''le pralDtion of 1\JdilIIj(transfer of krlawledge through expatriate j',s.tj."I'all';, United Nations volunteer. and (PAS (operational assistaMe).
22. New guidelines have been approv-Jd fa:: t.l:o :,.~ c[ L~ Special "e'8'1res Fund follows the GCM!rning Council decision a."'.d ':lH gil:".; ~·f this Is eet out below•.
23. 'DIe financing of the SMF will 00t'! :-.0 C:'Jr.i_"'lr,~.n.t;;J in tIo:o particular sectors. ~ lIIIIin are« of conoenl:ratic.·, -.:!..·::r.:::';lC!-':!iJ to ti'~ first priority singled o.Jt by the Governing Council, l.::l BPE:!fied in tha fO·E categories (a) to (d) IIlllI1tioned above. Priority within t!:,s ··If''?'' ,,1.11 l:Je given to projects aimed explicitly at strengthening national pt,Hc~' ~rt activities of tK)p,
such u rouna-tables, National Tec:hni.ceJ ~::at1on Assessment and
Progr... (Na'lCAP) or aid oo-ordinatiOtl, 'icile"",v1:!r wch x:tivities exiSt.
'DJie
secoild
area
for SMF financing will be the l!l.lPP"rt of qress-roota and Non-GaYerrwnental Organizations activities.24. In this oonnectlon, an additiorlAl ~1'.lbr:nof 11." millj.on has been made fran the SMF to the Special Public WOrk ~cO':Jr;r.~rre (SPWI') executed by the International Labour organisation (ILO). 'Ibis progr!l1lll11! hail in the put been financed by the 9'lF. An evaluation of the tHlP..fir.anced activities of the SI'WP will be carried o.Jt early in 1986. 'l'he Governing CoUncil will be
informed of the results and requested to gh~ gul~'lOG concerning future tHlP
financing of SPWP. .
/ ...
E/ECA/ECM.2/6 English
Page 10
25. 'nle new orientations given to the SMF!UX= make it necessacy to l1IOdify the present management of the fund. Atx:ordingly the following system will now be irrplemented:
(a) OUt of the total SMF contributions available in 1986, presenUy
standing at-$10.59 million, $1.4 million will be sK aside to finarlce the SPWP, (bl Of the aJlIJUl1t remaining, 80 per cent (approximately $7.35 million) will be allocated notionally to the regional bureaux, using the SlIIIle criterion
(pr9 rata of the IPF) as used heretofore, but without actual distribution to indlvidIJa1 countries,
1:) 'nIe resident representatives will establish a pipeline of priority projects in the areas indicated above and send their prqx-sal. to the regional bureaux. Consideration should.be given to supplement SMP financing with IPP resources whenever appropriate, in particular when limitations on SMF funding could lead to a reduction of the project scope be10lr
a
viable size,(d) SMF funding will be al10cated within each bureau by the reepec:tift Project Appraisal Comnittee (PAC), on
a
project basis. '1bese pAC meetings will be attended by the Co-ordinator of Assistance to the UlCs, who willreceive a COf1:I of the project pr'V'N1 and any COilllllilts the regional bureaux might have,
(e) '!he balance of SMF resources (about $1.84 million) will be centrally managed. 'nlis allocation, to be managed by the Co-ordinator of Assistance to the UX::s, will be used to eatplement the SMF allocation of the regional
bureaux and provide sane flexibility to the regional distribution of the SMl".
Project financing through the central allocation should be considered only after the regional allocations have been exhausted.
26. Allocations of previous SMF resources by c:ounlry, for 1985 and before, will remain in force until 1 June 1986. '!hese allocations should be uSfd in _ accordance with the norms that have governed SMf' financing until now, namely without restriction
as
to the sector of activity, regional bureaux ard field offices, however, have been requested to give priority whenever possible to the concentration areas singled out by the Governing Council. Funds allocated by country during 1985 and pr ior years which have not been CQIIIlIitted by 1 June 1986 will revert to a Catm::ll\ pool. They will then be managed in a way similar to the 1986 SMl" fundsI 80 per cent will be allocated to the regional bureaux and 20 per cent will remain centrally managed.Notes
--':""'7"-=' Y
'!he Round-Table Cycle (Policy and Procedure)I . ..
•
ANNEX
E/ECA!ECM.2/6 English
Annex
Schedule of Round Table-related Activities
al
Country
AnICA Benin
Botswana
Burkina Faso Burundi
Cape Verde
Central African Republic
Past Meetings
RT held frOl/l 28 February til 4 March 1983
RT held 8-11 February 1984 in Bujumbura
RT held 21-23 January 1982 in Praia
RT preliminary review meeting held 11-12 Karch 1986 in Bangui
Forthc01lling meetings
Suvalau-Porga Highway tentatively sCheduled for end 1986
Sectoral consultations tentatively planned for telecommunications and for Civil Aviation in late 1986
Modalities for possible sectoral conaultations under consideration
RT Conference tentatively planned for late 1986, with In-country Review in 1987
Sectoral consultations for rural development planned for mid-1987 and for energy and
education under consideration RT Conference scheduled for 22-24 October 1986 in Geneva with
In-country Review meeting scheduled for 30 November-4 December 1986 in Praia
,
RT Conference planned for early 1987
~I Schedule of World Bank-conducted Consultative Group Meetings are alsO included wben Imown.
