Dr. Thomas Gass, Assistant Secretary-General, Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA)
UN General Assembly
Technology dialogue #3, Wednesday 4 June 2014
Thomas Gass, Assistant Secretary-General for Policy Coordination and Inter-Agency Affairs, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, UN
Excellences, Ladies and Gentlemen,
You are moving into a critical juncture in our dialogues on technology facilitation. How you conclude this session will have a determining effect on how you organise the final dialogue on 23 July.
So I am pleased to take this opportunity to make some remarks on how we as the Secretariat can be of use to your dialogue.
Presumably, our ultimate objective is to help generate a leap in the worldwide availability, and affordability, of technologies that can help achieve sustainable development, including the sustainable development goals.
Thus, the objective of these dialogues, is to help you – the representatives of member states, international organisations and other stakeholder communities – come to a closer convergence in your views. This will help the President of the General Assembly to propose recommendations that can garner sufficient support to move closer to that ultimate objective.
In my view, this third dialogue, and in particular this session, would be most useful if we came out of it with a shared understanding of all the elements we have at our disposal for decision making, including the nature of the problem – or problems – we are trying to solve, and the options on the table to help us solve them.
Of course, the dialogues are not decision making events. But our decision making bodies are not designed for detailed fact-based dialogue either. In order to be valuable, this discussion needs to broker a strong convergence of views. We have to see this as a sort of “shadow decision making discussion” from now on. Here is how I see the ingredients of the process:
• You have a specific, concrete proposal (for a kind-of Advanced Research Projects Agency -ARPA-SD) that aims to address, in a decisive manner, one of the several problems, or gaps, we have identified in the international technology facilitation landscape. Namely, the deficiency of research, development and demonstration of clean and environmentally sound technologies that could be of benefit to developing countries. This is not everything, but it is significant and meaningful.
• You have a Secretariat note titled Summary of Issues for Discussion Arising from Dialogues 1 and 2, which outlines a broader set of questions and options on the full range of needs, gaps and possible fragmentation that we have identified in our workshops, and dialogues, of the last 14 months.
• And two separate but closely inter-related elements, include, first, a project that the UN could encourage and promote as an idea, and perhaps even launch, if a group of countries and players agree to develop it. The other is a discussion on what we may need to do at the UN level to improve information and awareness on ongoing technology facilitation efforts, improve coordination among them, as well as facilitating analysis and dialogue on remaining gaps.
• In addition, you still have on the table options proposed by the Secretary-General in his two reports on technology facilitation. His 2012 proposal for a detailed technology facilitation mechanism attracts interest and support from many, though not all of you. His 2013 proposal – which includes some options that can be undertaken relatively easily within the existing institutional framework – perhaps deserves greater attention than it has received so far.
• Beyond these, there is a rich harvest of statements, proposals and presentations submitted by participants and panellists thus far in the structured dialogues, and in last year’s technology workshops.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
The Co-Moderators, in their summary notes from the first two dialogues, have provided a succinct description of the gaps that would need to be bridged if there is going to be any further movement in this process towards agreed actions.
Whether and how this rich collection of ingredients can be turned into a constructive recipe for strengthening technology facilitation is – at the end of the day – in your hands as member states and other participants. I sincerely hope that, on the basis of the dialogues we are having, you are able to identify possible initiatives which may receive consensual support as ways to move forward.
The Secretariat stands ready to help your dialogue in whatever way we can.
• For example, given the mandate, we could delve deeper into an analysis of needs and gaps in clean technology facilitation. How? By developing a more detailed and up-to-date map of existing mechanisms and new initiatives in this area. This would give you a better picture of which countries, or groups of countries, are being reached by which of them.
• Or, we could study options for further capacity building initiatives to help countries, especially the smaller and less developed economies, in navigating the international landscape of technology facilitation.
• At a minimum, we could undertake an information and awareness activity where we would help interconnect existing publicly available information on technology facilitation online, in a user-friendly and accessible manner.
Co-Moderators, distinguished participants, I look forward to a stimulating dialogue.
Thank you.
Technology dialogue #3, Wednesday 4 June 2014
Thomas Gass, Assistant Secretary-General for Policy Coordination and Inter-Agency Affairs, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, UN
Excellences, Ladies and Gentlemen,
You are moving into a critical juncture in our dialogues on technology facilitation. How you conclude this session will have a determining effect on how you organise the final dialogue on 23 July.
So I am pleased to take this opportunity to make some remarks on how we as the Secretariat can be of use to your dialogue.
Presumably, our ultimate objective is to help generate a leap in the worldwide availability, and affordability, of technologies that can help achieve sustainable development, including the sustainable development goals.
Thus, the objective of these dialogues, is to help you – the representatives of member states, international organisations and other stakeholder communities – come to a closer convergence in your views. This will help the President of the General Assembly to propose recommendations that can garner sufficient support to move closer to that ultimate objective.
In my view, this third dialogue, and in particular this session, would be most useful if we came out of it with a shared understanding of all the elements we have at our disposal for decision making, including the nature of the problem – or problems – we are trying to solve, and the options on the table to help us solve them.
Of course, the dialogues are not decision making events. But our decision making bodies are not designed for detailed fact-based dialogue either. In order to be valuable, this discussion needs to broker a strong convergence of views. We have to see this as a sort of “shadow decision making discussion” from now on. Here is how I see the ingredients of the process:
• You have a specific, concrete proposal (for a kind-of Advanced Research Projects Agency -ARPA-SD) that aims to address, in a decisive manner, one of the several problems, or gaps, we have identified in the international technology facilitation landscape. Namely, the deficiency of research, development and demonstration of clean and environmentally sound technologies that could be of benefit to developing countries. This is not everything, but it is significant and meaningful.
• You have a Secretariat note titled Summary of Issues for Discussion Arising from Dialogues 1 and 2, which outlines a broader set of questions and options on the full range of needs, gaps and possible fragmentation that we have identified in our workshops, and dialogues, of the last 14 months.
• And two separate but closely inter-related elements, include, first, a project that the UN could encourage and promote as an idea, and perhaps even launch, if a group of countries and players agree to develop it. The other is a discussion on what we may need to do at the UN level to improve information and awareness on ongoing technology facilitation efforts, improve coordination among them, as well as facilitating analysis and dialogue on remaining gaps.
• In addition, you still have on the table options proposed by the Secretary-General in his two reports on technology facilitation. His 2012 proposal for a detailed technology facilitation mechanism attracts interest and support from many, though not all of you. His 2013 proposal – which includes some options that can be undertaken relatively easily within the existing institutional framework – perhaps deserves greater attention than it has received so far.
• Beyond these, there is a rich harvest of statements, proposals and presentations submitted by participants and panellists thus far in the structured dialogues, and in last year’s technology workshops.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
The Co-Moderators, in their summary notes from the first two dialogues, have provided a succinct description of the gaps that would need to be bridged if there is going to be any further movement in this process towards agreed actions.
Whether and how this rich collection of ingredients can be turned into a constructive recipe for strengthening technology facilitation is – at the end of the day – in your hands as member states and other participants. I sincerely hope that, on the basis of the dialogues we are having, you are able to identify possible initiatives which may receive consensual support as ways to move forward.
The Secretariat stands ready to help your dialogue in whatever way we can.
• For example, given the mandate, we could delve deeper into an analysis of needs and gaps in clean technology facilitation. How? By developing a more detailed and up-to-date map of existing mechanisms and new initiatives in this area. This would give you a better picture of which countries, or groups of countries, are being reached by which of them.
• Or, we could study options for further capacity building initiatives to help countries, especially the smaller and less developed economies, in navigating the international landscape of technology facilitation.
• At a minimum, we could undertake an information and awareness activity where we would help interconnect existing publicly available information on technology facilitation online, in a user-friendly and accessible manner.
Co-Moderators, distinguished participants, I look forward to a stimulating dialogue.
Thank you.