H.E. Ms Simona Miculescu, Vice-President of the 68th Session of the United Nations General Assembly
1
Remarks
by
H.E. Ms Simona Miculescu
Vice-President
on behalf of
H.E. Mr. John W. Ashe
President of the 68th Session of the United Nations
General Assembly
General Assembly Structured Dialogues
on Technology Facilitation Mechanism
Closing Session, Dialogue II
New York
30 April 2014
Please check against delivery
2
Excellencies,
Distinguished Guests,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
On behalf of the President of the General Assembly, I would like to thank you for your participation and fruitful contributions over the past two days to the Structured Dialogue on technology transfer. We have had the opportunity to learn about the assessments and experiences of practitioners in the area of technology, as well as hear from representatives of countries or regions already involved in technology facilitation cooperation.
Yesterday and today, we explored both the scale and scope for technology facilitation, the ongoing efforts at the international level in this regard, the issue of fragmentation and duplication, as well as the existing gaps. We have heard arguments both in favor and against a facilitation mechanism.
Allow me to draw your attention to some important points that have emerged.
First and foremost, there is agreement on the clear, undeniable need for more action in the area of technology facilitation. The views around the table are diverse not on the final objective, but rather on how we can reach this objective. Some interventions highlighted that discussing the overarching purpose of such a mechanism might help us to advance the discussion on how to realize it. We also heard requests for more focused debates on how to move towards such a mechanism. Others called for a more prudent approach, inviting more reflection on existing tools and needs before deciding to set up new structures, which will add a new governance level in a process already complex. In this context, we were reminded that the Secretary General's 2012 report proposes several options to advance further on technology facilitation.
In terms of key points, the idea of an "umbrella framework" was mentioned by several delegations, as well as the importance of more coordination, which numerous delegations thought should be the first task for the technology facilitation mechanism. The function and importance of "monitoring" was also mentioned.
3
Others highlighted that the challenge at hand is much broader than technology transfer as such. For example, while the transfer of commercially viable technologies is a private sector issue, governments do facilitate an enabling regulatory framework, including good economic governance and effective enforcement of rules, including on International Property Rights (IPRs).
Science, Technology and Innovation (STI), as well as ICT for development, were widely recognized as crucial elements for a future mechanism, while many specific initiatives and tools were mentioned over the two-day Dialogue. We heard about the technology bank for the Least Developed Countries (LDCs), which generates high expectations from Member States. A number of participants said that some form of online "platform" seems to be regarded as a useful tool for a mechanism.
Much was also said about the role of private sector and multi-stakeholder partnerships in the context of a broader intergovernmental oversight framework. It was widely acknowledged that the private sector holds the greatest share of property rights that are relevant to sustainable development. In this regard, IPRs were seen as a means to stimulate innovation and technology transfer and development. Collaboration with the private sector was mentioned as relevant both at the local level, in collaboration with Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) and private non-profits, as well as at the international level, with transnational companies.
We also had the opportunity to hear strong pledges in favour of strengthening the capacity of Member States to assess their own needs. In addition, we also heard how important it is to enhance research and development, and promote education, which is an important enabling factor in order to facilitate technology transfer. Increasing the number of engineers and expanding vocational training were also considered as targets to be met.
We heard many different concerns about fragmentation, related to geographical fragmentation (different needs of different countries), fragmentation amongst international bodies engaged in technology facilitation, fragmentation between finance providers, beneficiaries and technology facilitators, and fragmentation across different stages of the technology cycle. The difficulty of coordinating technology
4
facilitation by a diverse set of international organizations and institutions with their own distinct governance arrangements was also highlighted.
Some of you questioned why, if the international community is moving towards an integrated post-2015 sustainable development agenda, technology facilitation activities seem to happen still largely in sectoral or institutional silos. On the one hand, some argued for a more “systemic” approach to technology facilitation at the international level. On the other hand, others suggested that an accurate diagnosis of the deficiencies of the present set-up must precede any next steps.
Your comments also focused on how to move this discussion forward, as mandated by Resolution 68/210. Several of you asked that the remainder of these dialogues be squarely focused on discussing the modalities and functions of a technology facilitation mechanism, building on the important work being done by multiple actors, scaling it up and making it more effective.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Regarding next steps, everything that has been said here will be part of a summary with emerging action points, which will be prepared by the moderators. This summary will be sent out to you in the next days.
I encourage you to reflect upon ideas that you have heard and prepare your inputs for the next dialogue, which, as you know will look into the potential for development, transfer and dissemination of clean and environmentally sound technologies. Our next dialogue will also identify options for the way forward, which will take into account preliminary views expressed during the first dialogues.
During the 4th and last dialogue, our ambition is to look more into the details of the possible arrangements to enhance technology facilitation.
On behalf of the President of the General Assembly, I extend my appreciation for your contributions.
5
Thank you.
***
Remarks
by
H.E. Ms Simona Miculescu
Vice-President
on behalf of
H.E. Mr. John W. Ashe
President of the 68th Session of the United Nations
General Assembly
General Assembly Structured Dialogues
on Technology Facilitation Mechanism
Closing Session, Dialogue II
New York
30 April 2014
Please check against delivery
2
Excellencies,
Distinguished Guests,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
On behalf of the President of the General Assembly, I would like to thank you for your participation and fruitful contributions over the past two days to the Structured Dialogue on technology transfer. We have had the opportunity to learn about the assessments and experiences of practitioners in the area of technology, as well as hear from representatives of countries or regions already involved in technology facilitation cooperation.
Yesterday and today, we explored both the scale and scope for technology facilitation, the ongoing efforts at the international level in this regard, the issue of fragmentation and duplication, as well as the existing gaps. We have heard arguments both in favor and against a facilitation mechanism.
Allow me to draw your attention to some important points that have emerged.
First and foremost, there is agreement on the clear, undeniable need for more action in the area of technology facilitation. The views around the table are diverse not on the final objective, but rather on how we can reach this objective. Some interventions highlighted that discussing the overarching purpose of such a mechanism might help us to advance the discussion on how to realize it. We also heard requests for more focused debates on how to move towards such a mechanism. Others called for a more prudent approach, inviting more reflection on existing tools and needs before deciding to set up new structures, which will add a new governance level in a process already complex. In this context, we were reminded that the Secretary General's 2012 report proposes several options to advance further on technology facilitation.
In terms of key points, the idea of an "umbrella framework" was mentioned by several delegations, as well as the importance of more coordination, which numerous delegations thought should be the first task for the technology facilitation mechanism. The function and importance of "monitoring" was also mentioned.
3
Others highlighted that the challenge at hand is much broader than technology transfer as such. For example, while the transfer of commercially viable technologies is a private sector issue, governments do facilitate an enabling regulatory framework, including good economic governance and effective enforcement of rules, including on International Property Rights (IPRs).
Science, Technology and Innovation (STI), as well as ICT for development, were widely recognized as crucial elements for a future mechanism, while many specific initiatives and tools were mentioned over the two-day Dialogue. We heard about the technology bank for the Least Developed Countries (LDCs), which generates high expectations from Member States. A number of participants said that some form of online "platform" seems to be regarded as a useful tool for a mechanism.
Much was also said about the role of private sector and multi-stakeholder partnerships in the context of a broader intergovernmental oversight framework. It was widely acknowledged that the private sector holds the greatest share of property rights that are relevant to sustainable development. In this regard, IPRs were seen as a means to stimulate innovation and technology transfer and development. Collaboration with the private sector was mentioned as relevant both at the local level, in collaboration with Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) and private non-profits, as well as at the international level, with transnational companies.
We also had the opportunity to hear strong pledges in favour of strengthening the capacity of Member States to assess their own needs. In addition, we also heard how important it is to enhance research and development, and promote education, which is an important enabling factor in order to facilitate technology transfer. Increasing the number of engineers and expanding vocational training were also considered as targets to be met.
We heard many different concerns about fragmentation, related to geographical fragmentation (different needs of different countries), fragmentation amongst international bodies engaged in technology facilitation, fragmentation between finance providers, beneficiaries and technology facilitators, and fragmentation across different stages of the technology cycle. The difficulty of coordinating technology
4
facilitation by a diverse set of international organizations and institutions with their own distinct governance arrangements was also highlighted.
Some of you questioned why, if the international community is moving towards an integrated post-2015 sustainable development agenda, technology facilitation activities seem to happen still largely in sectoral or institutional silos. On the one hand, some argued for a more “systemic” approach to technology facilitation at the international level. On the other hand, others suggested that an accurate diagnosis of the deficiencies of the present set-up must precede any next steps.
Your comments also focused on how to move this discussion forward, as mandated by Resolution 68/210. Several of you asked that the remainder of these dialogues be squarely focused on discussing the modalities and functions of a technology facilitation mechanism, building on the important work being done by multiple actors, scaling it up and making it more effective.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Regarding next steps, everything that has been said here will be part of a summary with emerging action points, which will be prepared by the moderators. This summary will be sent out to you in the next days.
I encourage you to reflect upon ideas that you have heard and prepare your inputs for the next dialogue, which, as you know will look into the potential for development, transfer and dissemination of clean and environmentally sound technologies. Our next dialogue will also identify options for the way forward, which will take into account preliminary views expressed during the first dialogues.
During the 4th and last dialogue, our ambition is to look more into the details of the possible arrangements to enhance technology facilitation.
On behalf of the President of the General Assembly, I extend my appreciation for your contributions.
5
Thank you.
***