World Bank - BACKGROUND Guide

ROME MODEL UNITED NATIONS- 2013 EDITION
WORLD BANK BACKGROUND GUIDE
PREPARED BY Mr. LEE Howon Chairperson World Bank-RomeMUN 2013 and Mr. SPROCCATI Giacomo Director World Bank-RomeMUN 2013

CONTENTS
World Bank BACKGROUND Guide .................................................................................................................................. 1 PRESENTATION CHAIRPERSON AND DIRECTOR-WORLD BANK-ROMEMUN 2013 ......................................................... 3 Council Information ................................................................................................................................................... 6 MDG Introduction ..................................................................................................................................................... 7 TOPIC A-TARGET 8.A ...................................................................................................................................................... 9 Develop further an open, rule-based, predictable, non-discriminatory trading and financial system ...................... 9 A Unique Theoretical Answer? : ............................................................................................................................... 10 An Unequal Access to Markets Where Does the Problem Lie? : ........................................................................... 11 The Specific Case of Agricultural Tariffs How to Create Better Conditions? : ....................................................... 14 Potential Solutions and the Path Forward ............................................................................................................... 16 TOPIC B-TARGET 8.D .................................................................................................................................................... 18 Deal comprehensively with the debt problems of developing countries ................................................................ 18 LAST DEVELOPMENT ON THE ISSUE AT THE UNITED NATIONS ............................................................................... 21 MDG 8.D AND WORLD BANK ................................................................................................................................... 31 Two step process.................................................................................................................................................. 33 Debt relief frees up resources for social spending ............................................................................................... 34 IMF debt relief complemented by other sources ................................................................................................ 35 Challenges remain ................................................................................................................................................ 35 BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................................................................................. 38
ROME MODEL UNITED NATIONS- 2013 EDITION PRESENTATION CHAIRPERSON AND DIRECTOR-WORLD BANK-ROMEMUN 2013
Chair - HOWON LEE- chair_who@romemun.org
Ladies and gentlemen, My name is Howon Lee from Palo Alto, California! Im currently doing my studies in a triple degree program with Sciences Po Paris, Columbia University and the Universit Pierre et Marie Curie, majoring in economics, law, and biochemistry, and later hope to enter intellectual property law. As for MUN, my career began at the beginning of high school and since I have attended nearly 20 conferences from Berkeley to Brussels. This year, I look forward to being your chair in the World Bank at RomeMUN 2013 and to a great week of debate on MDG 8! All the best for the upcoming RomeMUN 2013 Conference!
Director - GIACOMO SPROCCATI- director_who@romemun.org
My name is Giacomo Sproccati and Im a student at the University of Milan since September 2012. I have taken part in the first Model United Nations conference in 2009 at Bocconi University and I remained so enthusiastic about it that I had continued it for 4 remaining years at high school. After MilanMUN I have participated in many other conferences such as GeMUN, RRSMUN, PAMUN and others. I started as a delegate and I experienced different committees, but in February 2011 in Genoa I was a deputy chair for the first time. My last year has definitely been the most successful one: I was President of the DevCom at GeMUN and Secretary General in MilanMUN 2012. In 2010 I was given the fantastic opportunity to take part in the MUN conference for university students in Milan as the Conference Manager Assistant although I was attending the third year of high-school. It has been really an interesting experience, it gave me the chance to come closer to a different reality. Another very different experience happened to me a month ago when I took a group of students to an MUN conference in Chennai, India, as

the second chaperone of the group. Moreover, in GeMUN 2013 Im going to be a chair in the Economic and Financial Committee. As far as my interests are concerned Im a person who enjoys dancing hip-hop and spending time with other people, especially if they come from abroad. I also appreciate a lot traveling, skiing and listening to music.
VERY IMPORTANT: PLEASE REMIND THAT EACH COUNTRY HAS TO PRESENT A COPY OF THE POSITION PAPER ABOUT THE TWO AGENDA TOPICS OF THIS COMMITTEE BY MARCH 1ST , EMAILING IT AS ATTACHMENT IN WORD FORMAT TO position_paper@romemun.org ALL THE INDICATIONS ABOUT HOW TO PREPARE A POSITION PAPER IS NOT IN THIS GUIDE BUT IN THE DELEGATE GUIDE (AVAILABLE ON ROMEMUN FORUM)
COUNTRIES REPRESENTED AT THE WORLD BANK IN ROMEMUN 2013 EDITION Afghanistan Argentina Armenia Australia Azerbaijan Bangladesh Belgium Bolivia Brazil Canada China France Georgia Guatemala India Indonesia Iran Iraq Israel Italy Japan Kenya Latvia Lebanon Libya Luxembourg Malaysia Mauritania Mexico Mongolia Morocco Nepal Netherlands New Zealand
Nigeria Norway Pakistan Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Qatar Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore South Africa Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Sweden Syria The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia Togo Turkey Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uzbekistan Zimbabwe
COUNCIL INFORMATION The World Bank (WB) was founded at the Bretton Woods Conference in 1944 with the goal of helping countries rebuild after World War II. Its first loan was one of $250 million to France, after a stringent application process, which also required France to remove all communist elements from its government. However, the subsequent Marshall Plan forced the World Bank to loosen its requirements for lending and also expand its territorial focus. The World Bank today now has a completely different face and it has transferred its focus from reconstruction to poverty reduction as the overarching goal. It is now part of the World Bank Group (WBG), which encompasses the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD), the International Development Association (IDA), the International Finance Corporation (IFC), the Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency (MIGA), and the International Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID). The World Bank should not be confused with the WBG as the World Bank itself only comprises the IBRD and the IDA. The World Banks headquarters are located in Washington, D.C., although it has personnel working all over the world and its current president is Jim Yong Kim, former President of Dartmouth College. As the World Bank, we will be looking at how to tackle both Millennium Development Goals (MDG) 8A and 8D. Although we will be following RomeMUNs rules of procedure, the World Bank has mandates different from UN organs. Its main means of action is through loans and grants via the IBRD (more focused on middle-income developing countries) and the IDA (focused on the worlds poorest developing countries), but it can also call for assistance and aid to any of the other three WBG institutions and advise global economic policy. It will be up to delegates, what will be the necessary measures to solve the crisis at hand.
MDG INTRODUCTION
In 2000, at the UN headquarters in New York, took place the Millennium Summit, a meeting that saw 189 nations present. The conclusion of this reunion was an agreement: make the world a better and more equal place for each inhabitant, especially for the less privileged. In order to formalize this decision, the assembly created the United Nations Millennium Declaration, a document composed by 8 different achievements, defined as Millennium Development Goals, to be carried out by the year 2015. Moreover, its important to underline that each goal is divided into targets, they can vary from one to four but their aim is always the same: increase the effectiveness. The MDGs are the symbol of the willingness of many nations step forward significantly and its fundamental to bear in mind that this initiative will come true just if everyone put as much commitment as they can in it. Lets analyze briefly each goal:
1. Eradicating extreme poverty and hunger: this doesnt only mean improving food safety and food security but also incrementing jobs in the poorest countries. 2. Achieving universal primary education: make sure that every child of both genders is able to complete the primary school. 3. Promote gender equality and empower women: starting from the school, at the beginning at the lower levels (primary and middle) and then at the higher, eliminating gender dissimilarity. In addition making sure that the presence of women increases under every aspect of our life. 4. Reduce child mortality rates: deflate the number of under-five death children and fighting against illnesses such as measles.

5. Improve maternal health: with this goal, on one hand, maternal mortality ratio will decrease and on the other, will raise universally the access to the reproductive health which means contraceptives and any other kind of support related to the topic. 6. Combat HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases: in order to do it its important to give access to cure to these illnesses and prevent them through knowledge and condoms. 7. Ensure environmental sustainability: making sure that every nation adopts the principles sustainable development in their policies and reduce by 50% the portion of population that doesnt have access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation. 8. Develop a global partnership for development: this goal aims at the creation of a new trading and financial system that will be more open, rule-based, predictable and nondiscriminatory; cooperating with pharmaceutical in order to guarantee access to basic drugs with affordable costs; working for making usable the benefits of new technology, especially in the fields of information and communication, with the participation of the private sector; dealing worldwide with debt problems in the developing countries in order to turn debt into reasonable in long term thanks to national and international policies.
TOPIC A-TARGET 8.A
DEVELOP FURTHER AN OPEN, RULE-BASED, PREDICTABLE, NON-DISCRIMINATORY TRADING AND FINANCIAL SYSTEM
During this committee session, the World Bank will tackle Millennium Development Goal (MDG) 8, which seeks to develop a global partnership for development. The first topic will cover MDG 8A, which, more precisely, seeks to develop further an open, rule-based, predictable, nondiscriminatory trading and financial system, where developing countries gain greater access to the markets of developed countries and least developed countries benefit most from tariff reductions, especially on their agricultural products.1 The World Bank, which has long been a proponent of an open market, must now look to see how it can further help the current situation. The World Bank has notably identified five factors to strengthen a global partnership: promoting debt relief, developing IT infrastructure, expanding trade agreements, improving access to affordable drugs, and increasing poverty-reducing expenditures.2 Of course, not all are pertinent to MDG 8A and delegates must decide those that are necessary to fulfill MDG 8A. It is important to remember that the World Bank does not function in the same manner as UN organs. Thanks to the World Banks collaboration with multilateral and local partners, actors often look towards to the World Bank to quicken progress towards the realization of MDG 8. Delegates will have to be able to balance the traditional World Bank poverty reduction strategies (country-specific focus) and the international policy necessary within the context of RomeMUN 2013.
"A Global Partnership for Development." Millennium Development Goals. United Nations Development Programme. http://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/mdgoverview/mdg_goals/mdg8/. 2 "Develop a Global Partnership for Development by 2015." The World Bank. The World Bank Group. http://www.worldbank.org/mdgs/global_partnership.html.
A UNIQUE THEORETICAL ANSWER? :
Development economics is a relatively new field of economics, finding its roots during the industrialization of Eastern Europe after World War II. Early theories based their analyses on Europe and the United States, which led to the failure of certain early theories, such as the linear-stages-of-growth model, which placed too much importance on capital accumulation as a factor of development. As a result the application of theories such as Rostows stages of economic growth (1960) and the Harrod-Domar Growth model (1947) often failed to materialize in less economically developed countries (LDCs). Furthermore, the Lewis model, which sought to describe the structural change from a traditional subsistence agricultural economy to a more modern industrial economy. However, this often neglected the agricultural sector, which, if applied today, would have devastating effects worldwide, and is notably important when looking at agricultural imports. Nonetheless, development economics soon expanded to include Africa, Asia, and Latin America, the regions of the world that require our focus, and have updated to take into account the factors of todays globalized world.3 The subsequent international dependency (1970s) and neoclassical theories (1980s) took into account some of the specificities of globalization, but failed to deliver an empirical substantiation of development economics. Even the current New Growth Model and the Big Push (or Rosenstein-Rodan) Model fail to curry wide scale approval. The only consensus that seems to appear is that there is no universally accepted or applicable paradigm, meaning that further analysis is required as we move forward in our debate. It is therefore essential to identify the strengths and weaknesses of any proposals put forward by the World Bank and to
Poncet, Sandra. "Classic Theories of Economic Development." Lecture. Development Economics. Sciences Po, Paris. http://ces.univ-paris1.fr/membre/Poncet/SciencesPo/Lecture%202%20seminar.pdf.
10

ensure that a regional approach is considered to avoid the pitfalls that a Universalist approach could bring.4
AN UNEQUAL ACCESS TO MARKETS WHERE DOES THE PROBLEM LIE? :
The first target of MDG 8A is to help developing countries gain greater access to the markets of developed countries. Huge progress has been made in the past two decades, notably in Southeast Asia, where countries have been able to create a strong export economy, but many parts of Africa fail to be able to profit from the advantages of a globalized economy. However, it is important to note that this not mean in any way that LDCs are detached from the boom and bust cycles of developed nations, and during the financial crisis of 2007-2008, suffered greater consequences than developed nations (view graph below). For example, growth in Kenya dropped from 7% in 2007 to 3-4% in 2009.5
5 (Graph p. 2)
Poncet, Sandra. "Contemporary Theories of Economic Development." Development Economics. Sciences Po, Paris. http://ces.univ-paris1.fr/membre/Poncet/SciencesPo/Lecture%203%20seminar.pdf. 5 Willem Te Velde, Dirk. "The Global Financial Crisis and Developing Countries: Taking Stock, Taking Action." Overseas Development Institute (September, 2009). http://www.odi.org.uk/sites/odi.org.uk/files/odiassets/publications-opinion-files/3705.pdf.
11

Nonetheless, world trade bounced back from the collapse and developing countries especially developing countries, whose value of exports now surpasses pre-crisis levels. And despite fears of a return to protectionism, interest groups seeking a renewed nationalism had extremely limited success. Yet the situation is clearly not all hearts and flowers as the Doha Development Round or Doha Development Agenda, which began in November 2001, has still failed to bring about any coherent policy changes despite early successes on access to patented medicines and TRIPS. Major differences exist between the two major blocs, developed nations led by EU, USA, Japan and developing nations led by Brazil, China, India, South Korea, and South Africa, on all issues of market access within the DDA: agriculture, services, and NAMA (Non-Agricultural Market Access).6 The unwillingness of developed nations to eliminate or even lower tariffs demonstrates a will to protect their own economies over the development of LDCs (c.f. next section on agricultural tariffs). This is apparent when looking at the proportion of LDCs benefitting from true preferential trade with richer nations. Although the percentage of LDCs benefiting from either duty-free under true preference or under most favored nation treatment (MFN)7 has steadily increased in the past two decades (see graph below), it has not necessarily helped or given an advantage to LDCs.
Fergusson, Ian F. World Trade Organization Negotiations the Doha Development Agenda. US Congress, Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service (Order Code RL32060), Library of Congress, 2012. http://www.nationalaglawcenter.org/assets/crs/RL32060.pdf. 7 For more information on MFN, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Most_favored_nation.
12
8 (Graph p. 62)
This clear upward trend has created a truly preferential regime for developing and LDCs.8 The World Trade Organization (WTO), which encompasses over 95% of all trade, requires under article I:1 of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT)9 that WTO members grant MFN treatment immediately and unconditionally to the like products of other members with respect to custom duties and import charges, internal taxes and regulations, and other traderelated matters. However, regional preference schemes such as the Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act (CBERA)10, the Andean Trade Preference Act (ATPA) and the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA)11, and the 1999 Preferential Tariff Treatment for LDCs waive or modify GATT Article I:1, which greatly benefit LDCs.12 However, non-LDC developing countries often
The Millennium Development Goals Report 2012. United Nations Publications, 2012. http://www.undp.org/content/dam/undp/library/MDG/english/The_MDG_Report_2012.pdf . 9 For more information on GATT, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Agreement_on_Tariffs_and_Trade. Full text can be found at http://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/gatt47_01_e.htm (GATT 1947) and http://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/06-gatt_e.htm (GATT 1994, must be read with GATT 1947). 10 Permanent in the USA until 2020 (Grimmett, p. 7) 11 Authorized in the USA until 2015 (Grimmett, p. 7) 12 Grimmett, Jeanne, J. Trade Preferences for Developing Countries and the WTO. US Congress. Washington, D.C.: Congressional Research Service (RS22183), Library of Congress, 2007. http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RS22183.pdf.
13

only have access to markets free of duty because that product is no longer taxed under the MFN regime.13
THE SPECIFIC CASE OF AGRICULTURAL TARIFFS HOW TO CREATE BETTER CONDITIONS? :
Reductions of agricultural tariffs remain one of the most important goals for developing countries and it has been evident throughout the Doha Round. Although a generalized preference plan is preferred, developing countries often lack the infrastructure to take advantage of a tariff reduction in automobile exports for example, whereas all countries have at least some sort of agricultural industry. However, agricultural tariffs often do not come in the form of a duty, but rather subsidies, making them much more difficult to resolve, to the point that agriculture has become the linchpin of the DDA. Some African countries are even calling for an end to cotton subsidies in the USA and EU, claiming that these subsidies are destroying the market for smaller African producers. However, these subsidies are invaluable in their role in keeping down food prices. A $1 rise in food prices puts 160 million more people in hunger, whereas a similar drop in food prices has devastating effects on producers. As with market access, the situation has improved over the past two decades (see graph below), but tariffs still exist. The blockade in the DDA today demonstrates a certain unwillingness to enter a completely liberalized agricultural market (mainly due to powerful pressure from farmers at home).14 Nonetheless, there is a general agreement that agricultural subsidies must be eliminated, seen by the pledge by WTO members to eliminate export subsidies and export measures with equivalent effect by 2013 during the December 2005 Hong Kong Ministerial. A three band methodology was undertaken, where the EU occupied the highest band, the USA
Graph explained in greater detail in source 8, p. 62. More information on Preference Programs through the USTR can be found at http://www.ustr.gov/trade-topics/trade-development/preference-programs. 14 The approximate position of each caucus bloc can be found in CRS RL33144 (WTO Doha Round: The Agricultural Negotiations by Charles E. Hanrahan and Randy Schnepf) pages 13-21 at http://www.nationalaglawcenter.org/assets/crs/RL33144.pdf.
13
14

and Japan the second band, and lesser subsidizing countries in the third, with tariff decreases negotiated in a later round.15,16
8 (Graph p. 63)
However, despite what critics say, the lowering or elimination of agricultural tariffs is not a charity performed unto developing nations. Multiple studies forecast an increase of global welfare if the DDA were to be successful in reducing budget cuts. A study by the University of Michigan even predicts an increase of $574 billion if all trade barriers in agriculture, services,
Developed country tariffs would be cut in a tiered formula in equal increments over five years: a 70% reduction for tariffs currently above 75%, a 64% cut for tariffs currently between 50% and75%, a 57% cut for tariffs currently between 20% and 50% and a 50% cut for tariffs between 0 and 20%. In addition, the draft stipulates a minimum tariff cutof 54% for developed countries, after application of the formula and other exceptions. Developing countries would be able to cut two-thirds of the amount of cuts agreed by developed countries from bands with higher thresholds in equal installments over 10 years. (Fergusson. World Trade Organization Negotiations: The Doha Development Agenda, p. 12-13) 16 Fergusson, Ian F. World Trade Organization Negotiations the Doha Development Agenda. US Congress, Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service (Order Code RL32060), Library of Congress, 2012. http://www.nationalaglawcenter.org/assets/crs/RL32060.pdf.
15
15

and manufactures were reduced by 33% due to the DDA,17 but more modest predictions vary from $84 billion to $287 billion by the year 2015.18 The multilateral negotiations of the WTO are especially important since they include developing countries that are sometimes left out of a regional or bilateral trade agreement.
POTENTIAL SOLUTIONS AND THE PATH FORWARD
Unfortunately, MDG 8.A presents a difficult area for the World Bank to have a direct impact on, but this does not mean that it must take a back seat in the issue. The World Banks extensive network of analysts must be able to identify, which countries would benefit most from an expansion of preferential treatment or further agricultural tariff reduction. Delegates will have to negotiate and form blocs to ensure that their countrys position is heard as delegates lobby for World Bank funds and advantageous policy advising. Convincing proposals can promise loans for infrastructure necessary to compete in a global market. Furthermore, when a country opens its markets, increased imports often cause economic dislocations (much to the ire of many developed countries) at the local or regional level, resulting in loss of jobs. The countries or regions that experience these sort of losses do not
Brown, Drusilla K., Deardorff, Alan V. and Robert M. Stern. Computational Analysis of Multilateral TradeLiberalization in the Uruguay Round and Doha Development Round. Discussion Paper No. 489. School of PublicPolicy. The University of Michigan. December 8, 2002. 18 Thomas W. Hertel and Roman Keeney, What is at Stake: The Relative Importance of Import Barriers, Export Subsidies and Domestic Support, in Anderson and Martin, eds., Agricultural Trade Reform in the Doha Agenda (Washington: World Bank, 2005); and Kym Anderson, Will Martin, and Dominique van der Mensbrugge, Doha Merchandise Trade Reform: Whats At Stake for Developing Countries, July 2005, available at http://www.worldbank.org/trade/wto. The different outcomes in these studies are due substantially to differing assumptions concerning liberalization resulting from the Doha Round as well as from differences in the econometric models themselves. For example, the World Bank studies do not attempt to quantify services liberalization.
17
16

benefit from the multilateral trade agreements called for in MDG 8.A. As a result, the World Bank has a crucial role to play in order to be able to mitigate negative externalities.19 Delegates should also look to the potential that exists for developing and least-developed countries in emerging markets. Possibly easier and more economically beneficial than entering the highly competitive space within developed nations, the emerging markets, especially that of the BRICS nations, present a huge opportunity for developing and least-developed countries.20
19
Fergusson, Ian F. World Trade Organization Negotiations the Doha Development Agenda. US Congress, Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service (Order Code RL32060), Library of Congress, 2012. http://www.nationalaglawcenter.org/assets/crs/RL32060.pdf. 20 The Millennium Development Goals Report 2012. United Nations Publications, 2012. http://www.undp.org/content/dam/undp/library/MDG/english/The_MDG_Report_2012.pdf .
17
TOPIC B-TARGET 8.D
DEAL COMPREHENSIVELY WITH THE DEBT PROBLEMS OF DEVELOPING COUNTRIES
This year the committee of the World Bank (WB) is called to face the issue of the debt in the developing countries at RomeMUN. This topic is not just a current but it is really relevant for the future of the economy on our planet. The issue is pretty vast but it can be developed starting from few points of interests. The first that we have chosen is the debt. The government of every nation has to incur expenses, in some states they are higher whereas in others are lower. In order to cover these costs, the government gets revenue from citizen through taxes that can be direct, such as the ones paid on wages and enterprises, or indirect, such as the value-added tax (VAT). When the income coming from taxes is not enough to cover the whole public expenditure a nations has a deficit to face, which is the situation in which the entries of the government are lower than the outflows. Therefore, in this case, a nation has to face further cost and in order to get the money he needs to do so the government issues state securities, such as BOT for Italy or BUND for Germany, on which it has to pay interests. These latter contributes to enlarge the expenditures for the government. The state securities create the public debt of a nation. Therefore, the government is in a situation in which it needs current assets and the best way to do so is to get them from sectors in which it is directly involved such as increase taxes on wages, on the VAT and decrease the funds for public services, which can be school, health or retirements for example. It is important to underline the fact that the western countries are the subject more afflicted by the problem of the public debt, as it is possible to notice from the graphic below.
18
The history of the past few years has taught that the public debt can be a very dangerous element and it could be the first cause of a very difficult situation for a country. In Europe the examples are many, Greece and Italy just to quote few, but the common denominator is that for different reason the public debt was not given the attention needed and as a consequence the measures carried out by the governments turned out to be unsuccessful. This situation caused very bad aftereffects on citizens first of all. Another relevant element for the topic regards the developing countries. Nowadays the countries who are considered to be developing ones are the so called BRICS, an acronym that stands for 5 different nations, such as Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa.
19

It is important to point out that South Africa has just recently joined this group of countries who are considered to be the engine of the world economy in the years to come. These nations met for the first time in June 2009 (South Africa was excluded from this reunion since it was included one year later) and agreed on the necessity to find a new global currency that should be diversified, stable and predictable. The BRICS are associated by few elements: the largest amount of population on the planet, according to the CIA World Factbook currently the first two countries with the higher population rate are respectively China and India, the factor of the population is really important since theres a great internal request which is a factor that contributes to the growth of the Gross Domestic Product(GDP), which means economic growth; vast geographic territory that gives the chance to have access to a great quantity of natural resources. The forecasts in the years to come indicate that both China and India will be the two nations leading the growth process in the economy worldwide, as the following graphic states.
20
LAST DEVELOPMENT ON THE ISSUE AT THE UNITED NATIONS
The United Nations deals with this issues many times in different summits and by different UN agencies and committees, the following is the list of some of the most important meetings and resolutions approved about the MGD8, target D: Resolutions 58/203 of 23 December 200321, 59/223 of 22 December 200422, 60/187 of 22 December 200523, 61/188 of 20 December 200624, 62/186 of 19 December 200725, 63/206 of 19 December 200826, 64/191 of 21 December 200927, 65/144 of 20 December 201028, 66/189 of 22 December 201129, United Nations Millennium Declaration, adopted on 8 September 2000, Resolution 57/270 B of 23 June 2003,
21 22
http://www.un.org/Docs/journal/asp/ws.asp?m=A/RES/58/230 http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/59/223&Lang=E 23 http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/60/187 24 http://www.un.org/Docs/journal/asp/ws.asp?m=A/RES/61/188 25 http://www.un.org/Docs/journal/asp/ws.asp?m=A/RES/62/186 26 http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/63/206&Lang=E 27 http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/64/191&Lang=E 28 http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/65/144&Lang=E 29 http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/res/66/189&Lang=E
21

resolution 60/265 of 30 June 2006 The International Conference on Financing for Development30 and its outcome document and the Doha Declaration on Financing for Development31: outcome document of the Follow-up International Conference on Financing for Development to Review the Implementation of the Monterrey Consensus32, The Conference on the World Financial and Economic Crisis and Its Impact on Development33 and its outcome document, The High-level Plenary Meeting of the General Assembly on the Millennium Development Goals34 and its outcome document, The Fourth United Nations Conference on the Least Developed Countries35 and the Istanbul Declaration and the Programme of Action for the Least Developed Countries for the Decade 2011-202036, The Conference on Sustainable Development, held in Rio de Janeiro37, Brazil, from 20 to 22 June 2012, and its outcome document, entitled The future we want38. Recalling all those principles and measures approved and discussed in the above meetings and resolutions the General Assembly (second committee-economic and financial) discussed last December 2012 the resolution A/67/435/Add.3 which gives us a general idea of the issued as deal by the UN: 1. Takes note of the report of the Secretary-General;
30 31
http://www.un.org/esa/ffd/ffdconf/ http://www.un.org/esa/ffd/doha/documents/Doha_Declaration_FFD.pdf 32 http://www.un.org/esa/ffd/ 33 http://www.un.org/ga/econcrisissummit/ 34 http://www.un-ngls.org/spip.php?page=amdg10&id_article=2233 35 http://www.un.org/wcm/content/site/ldc/home 36 http://www.wfp.org/content/istanbul-programme-action-least-developed-countries-decade-2011-2020 37 http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=42281#.UPAB4W_aWWY 38 http://www.un.org/en/sustainablefuture/pdf/rio20%20concludes_press%20release.pdf
22

2. Emphasizes the special importance of a timely, effective, comprehensive and durable solution to the debt problems of developing countries to promote their economic growth and development; 3. Stresses the importance of responsible lending and borrowing, emphasizes that creditors and debtors must share responsibility for preventing unsustainable debt situations, and encourages Member States, the Bretton Woods institutions, the regional development banks and other relevant multilateral financial institutions and stakeholders to continue the ongoing discussions on this issue, inter alia, within the framework of the initiative of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, in order to articulate and promote principles of responsible sovereign lending and borrowing; 4. Acknowledges the role played by the Debt Sustainability Framework for Low-Income Countries, jointly developed by the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, to guide borrowing and lending decisions, and encourages continued review of the Framework in an open and transparent manner, with the full engagement of borrower Governments; 5. Reiterates that no single indicator should be used to make definitive judgments about a countrys debt sustainability, and, in this regard, while acknowledging the need to use transparent and comparable indicators, invites the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, in their assessment of debt sustainability, to continue to take into account fundamental changes caused by, inter alia, natural disasters, conflicts and changes in global growth prospects or in the terms of trade, especially for commodity-dependent developing countries, as well as by the impact of developments in financial markets, and to provide information on this issue to Member States, using the appropriate frameworks; 6. Recognizes that the long-term sustainability of debt depends on, inter alia, economic growth, mobilization of domestic and international resources, export prospects of debtor countries, responsible debt management, sound macroeconomic policies, transparent and effective regulatory frameworks and success in overcoming structural
23

development problems, and hence on the creation of an enabling environment that is conducive to development; 7. Also recognizes the enormity and the multidimensional nature of the world financial and economic crisis, which caused a sharp deterioration of the debt ratios in several developing countries, stresses the need to continue to assist developing countries in avoiding a build-up of unsustainable debt so as to reduce the risk of relapsing into another debt crisis, takes note in this regard of the additional resources made available during and since the crisis through the International Monetary Fund and the multilateral development banks, and calls for the continued provision of concessional and grantbased financing to low-income countries to enable them to respond to the consequences of the crisis; 8. Further recognizes the roles of the United Nations and the international financial institutions in accordance with their respective mandates, and encourages them to continue to support global efforts towards sustained, inclusive and equitable growth, sustainable development and the external debt sustainability of developing countries, including through continued monitoring of global financial flows and their implications in this regard; 9. Emphasizes the need for coordinated policies aimed at fostering debt financing, debt relief and debt restructuring, recalls, in this regard, the improvement of the lending framework of the International Monetary Fund through, inter alia, streamlined conditions and the creation of more flexible instruments, such as a precautionary and liquidity line, while noting that new and ongoing programmes should not contain unwarranted procyclical conditionalities, and urges the multilateral development banks to continue to move forward on flexible, concessional, fast disbursing and front-loaded assistance that will substantially and quickly assist developing countries facing financing gaps in their efforts to achieve the Millennium Development Goals, taking into consideration the individual absorptive capacities and debt sustainability of those countries; international
24

10. Notes the provision by the International Monetary Fund of interest relief to low-income countries in the form of zero-interest payments on financing from concessional lending facilities until the end of 2012, and invites the Fund to consider extending its concessional loan facilities for lowincome countries for the post-2012 period; 11. Also notes that countries can seek to negotiate, as a last resort, on a case-by-case basis and through existing frameworks, agreements on temporary debt standstills between debtors and creditors in order to help mitigate the adverse impacts of the crisis and stabilize macroeconomic developments; 12. Further notes the progress made under the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries Initiative and the Multilateral Debt Relief Initiative, while expressing concern that some countries have yet to reach decision or completion points, calls for the full and timely implementation of those Initiatives and for continued support to the remaining eligible countries in completing the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries Initiative process, and encourages all parties, both creditors and debtors, to fulfil their commitments as rapidly as possible in order to complete the debt relief process; 13. Welcomes and encourages the efforts of the heavily indebted poor countries, calls upon them to continue to promote economic growth and poverty eradication, and invites the international financing institutions and the donor community to continue to provide adequate and sufficiently concessional financing; 14. Encourages the international financial institutions to review the implementation and the impact of debt relief initiatives to better understand why some countries still face persisting debt problems after completion of the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries Initiative, and calls for the design of strategies to address them; 15. Underlines the fact that heavily indebted poor countries eligible for debt relief will not be able to enjoy its full benefits unless all creditors, both public and private, contribute their fair share and become involved in the international debt resolution mechanisms to ensure the debt sustainability of those countries, and invites creditors, both private and public, that are not yet fully participating in debt relief initiatives to substantially
25

increase their participation, including through providing comparable treatment to the extent possible to debtor countries that have concluded sustainable debt relief agreements with creditors; 16. Stresses that debt relief can play a key role in liberating resources that should be directed towards activities consistent with poverty eradication, sustained economic growth, economic development and the internationally agreed development goals, including the Millennium Development Goals, and in this regard urges countries to direct the resources freed through debt relief, in particular through debt cancellation and reduction, towards achieving those objectives, including in the context of the development agenda beyond 2015, according to their national priorities and strategies; 17. Encourages donor countries to take steps to ensure that resources provided for debt relief under the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries Initiative and the Multilateral Debt Relief Initiative do not detract from official development assistance resources intended for developing countries; 18. Also encourages donor countries to uphold their international aid commitments, as official development assistance constitutes an important source of financing for
developing countries to pursue the objectives outlined under the Millennium Development Goals and other internationally agreed development goals, recognizing that official development assistance can also help countries to weather the negative effects of the global financial and economic crisis on trade, investment, debt servicing, remittances exchange rate volatility and capital flows; 19. Notes with concern that some low- and middle-income developing countries that have not been eligible to benefit from existing debt relief initiatives may have large debt burdens that may create constraints on mobilizing the resources needed to achieve the internationally agreed development goals, including the Millennium Development Goals, indicating the need to design debt relief initiatives for those countries, and encourages the consideration of medium- and long-term sustainability as well as new approaches to deal with bilateral and private non-Paris Club debt; A/6
26

20. Encourages the Paris Club, in dealing with the debt of low- and middle-income debtor countries that are not part of the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries Initiative, to take into account their medium-term debt sustainability in addition to their financing gaps, and notes with appreciation the Evian approach of the Paris Club in providing different terms of debt relief in order to respond to the specific needs of debtor countries while preserving debt cancellation for heavily indebted poor countries; 21. Stresses the need for the international community to remain vigilant in monitoring the debt situation of the least developed countries and to continue to take effective measures to address the debt problem of those countries, including through the
cancellation of the multilateral and bilateral debt owed by least developed countries to creditors, both public and private; 22. Welcomes the efforts of and calls upon the international community to continue to provide flexibility, and stresses the need to sustain those efforts in helping post-conflict developing countries, especially those that are heavily indebted and poor, to achieve initial reconstruction for economic and social development; 23. Also welcomes the efforts of and invites creditors to provide flexibility to developing countries affected by natural disasters so as to allow them to address their debt concerns, while taking into account their specific situations and needs; 24. Calls for the consideration of additional measures and initiatives aimed at ensuring longterm debt sustainability through increased grant-based and other forms of concessional financing, the cancellation of 100 per cent of the eligible official multilateral and bilateral debt of heavily indebted poor countries and, where appropriate and on a case-by-case basis, significant debt relief or restructuring for developing countries with an unsustainable debt burden that are not part of the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries Initiative; 25. Invites donor countries, taking into account country-specific debt sustainability
analyses, to continue their efforts to increase bilateral grants to developing countries, which could contribute to debt sustainability in the medium to long term, and recognizes
27

the need for countries to be able to promote employment and productive investment and to invest in, inter alia, health and education while maintaining debt sustainability; 26. Calls for the intensification of efforts to prevent and mitigate the prevalence and cost of debt crises by enhancing international financial mechanisms for crisis prevention and resolution, encourages the public and the private sectors to cooperate in this regard, and invites creditors and debtors to further explore, where appropriate and on a mutually agreed, transparent and case-by-case basis, the use of new and improved debt instruments and innovative mechanisms such as debt swaps, including debt for equity in Millennium Development Goal projects, as well as debt indexation instruments; 27. Also calls for the consideration of enhanced approaches to sovereign debt restructuring and debt resolution mechanisms, with due consideration for existing frameworks and principles, with the broad participation of creditors and debtors, the comparable treatment of all creditors and an important role for the Bretton Woods institutions and other relevant organizations within the United Nations system, and in this regard calls upon all countries to promote and contribute to the discussions, within the United Nations and other appropriate forums, on the need for and feasibility of a more structured framework for international cooperation in this area; 28. Takes note of the key issues identified at the special event of the Second Committee of the General Assembly held on the theme Sovereign debt crises and restructurings: lessons learned and proposals for debt resolution mechanisms, including: the high cost of debt restructuring for debtors and creditors, and the risks debt problems pose to global financial stability; the lack of a standing body that can preserve the institutional memory of debt distress, default and debt restructuring episodes and that, on the basis of the insights they have provided, can facilitate the smoother treatment of sovereign debt in the future by providing a venue for information discovery and negotiation; the need for arrangements for temporary standstill agreements; the need to create incentives for the early recognition of problems by debtors and the early engagement of debtors and creditors, the independent assessment of debt sustainability and the ability
28

to pay without compromising growth and access to financing; the need for a rules-based mechanism for debt restructuring and creditor coordination, burden-sharing among debtors and creditors and the establishment of creditor seniority and the prevention of litigation and holdouts; and the role of the International Monetary Fund and the private sector in interim financing with due attention to fiscal multipliers in designing policy packages for debtors; and encourages the participant institutions and experts to continue their work on these issues and to propose policy options for the future, as appropriate; 29. Calls for the establishment of a General Assembly working group, with the participation of all relevant stakeholders, including the multilateral financial institutions, to continue the study and examination of options for enhanced approaches to debt restructuring and resolution mechanisms that take into account the multiple dimensions of debt sustainability; 30. Notes the changing composition of the sovereign debt of some countries, which has shifted increasingly from official to commercial borrowing and from external to domestic public debt, although for most low income countries external finance is still largely official, also notes that the levels of domestic debt and the significantly increased number of creditors, both official and private, could create other challenges for macroeconomic management and public debt sustainability, and stresses the need to address the implications of those changes, including through improved data collection and analysis; 31. Recognizes concerns about vulture fund litigation and that some debtor countries may experience difficulties in obtaining comparable treatment from non-Paris Club creditors, as required by the standard clause included in Paris Club agreements, and encourages the continued provision by the relevant institutions of mechanisms and legal assistance to debtor countries to solve litigation issues; 32. Stresses the need to increase information-sharing, transparency and the use of objective criteria in the construction and evaluation of debt A/6 scenarios, including an
29

assessment of domestic public and private debt, in order to ensure the achievement of development goals, recognizes that credit rating agencies play a significant role in the provision of information, including the assessment of corporate and sovereign risks, and in this regard reiterates its invitation to the President of the General Assembly to convene a thematic debate on the role of credit-rating agencies in the international financial system, and requests the Secretary-General to report on new and ongoing measures to establish new, or to improve, existing credit-rating agencies and their capacity to accurately assess the creditworthiness of borrowers; 33. Invites the international community to continue efforts to increase support, including financial and technical assistance, for institutional capacity building in developing countries to enhance sustainable debt management as an integral part of national development strategies, including by promoting transparent and accountable debt management systems and negotiation and renegotiation capacities and through supporting legal advice in relation to tackling external debt litigation and debt data reconciliation between creditors and debtors so that debt sustainability may be achieved and maintained; 34. Invites the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, in cooperation with the regional commissions, regional development banks and other relevant multilateral financial institutions and stakeholders, to continue and intensify cooperation in respect of capacity-building activities in developing countries in the area of debt management and debt sustainability; 35. Encourages further improvement of the mutual exchange of information, on a voluntary basis, on borrowing and lending among all creditors and borrowers; 36. Acknowledges that timely and comprehensive data on the level and composition of debt are a condition necessary for, inter alia, building early warning systems aimed at limiting the impact of debt crises, calls for debtor and creditor countries to intensify their efforts to collect data, and calls for donors to consider increasing their support for technical
30

cooperation programmes aimed at increasing the statistical capacity of developing countries in that regard; 37. Calls upon all Member States and the United Nations system, and invites the Bretton Woods institutions and the private sector, to take appropriate measures and actions for the implementation of the commitments, agreements and decisions of the major United Nations conferences and summits, in particular those related to the question of the external debt sustainability of developing countries; 38. Requests the Secretary-General to submit to the General Assembly at its sixty-eighth session a report on the implementation of the present resolution and to include in that report a comprehensive and substantive analysis of the external debt situation of developing countries; 39
MDG 8.D AND WORLD BANK
We now have a look to what measures the World bank is putting in action forward the achievement of the MDG 8, target D. In 1996, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund launched the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) Initiative so that countries encumbered by debt could get back on their feet. In 2006, the Multilateral Debt Relief Initiative (MDRI) was launched to provide additional resources to HIPCs to meet the MDGs. By June 2010, $76.4 billion in HIPC debt relief had been committed to 36 countries, of which 30 countries have received an additional $45.8 billion under the MDRI. MDG 8 also addresses the digital divide. Studies show that a 10% increase in high-speed Internet connections result in economic growth of 1.3% in developing countries, yet many people live in rural areas without access or are too poor to afford it. The World Bank is the largest international funder of information and communication technology development, currently supporting projects in 95 countries.40
39 40
http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/67/435/Add.3&Lang=E From http://www.worldbank.org/mdgs/global_partnership.html
31

The main areas of action identify by the World bank are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. promoting debt relief developing IT infrastructure expanding trade agreements improving access to affordable drugs increasing poverty-reducing expenditures
A multilateral debt relief initiative has been discussed among the WB member states and the G8 countries, in fact at the July 2005 g8 summit in Scotland, leaders proposed to cancel the debt of the worlds most indebted countries, most of which in Africa. Debt cancellation will be provided by the IDA of the World Bank, the IMF and the African Development Fund to those countries that have graduated from the Enhanced heavily indebted poor countries initiative (HIPC)41. The HIPC Initiative was launched in 1996 by the IMF and World Bank, with the aim of ensuring that no poor country faces a debt burden it cannot manage. Since then, the international financial community, including multilateral organizations and governments have worked together to reduce to sustainable levels the external debt burdens of the most heavily indebted poor countries. In 1999, a comprehensive review of the Initiative allowed the Fund to provide faster, deeper, and broader debt relief and strengthened the links between debt relief, poverty reduction, and social policies. In 2005, to help accelerate progress toward the United Nations Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), the HIPC Initiative was supplemented by the Multilateral Debt Relief Initiative (MDRI). The MDRI allows for 100 percent relief on eligible debts by three multilateral institutionsthe IMF, the World Bank, and the African Development Fund (AfDF)for countries completing the HIPC Initiative process. In 2007, the Inter-American Development Bank (IaDB) also decided to provide additional (beyond HIPC) debt relief to the five HIPCs in the Western Hemisphere.42
http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOPICS/EXTDEBTDEPT/0,,contentMDK:20634753~menuPK:641667 39~pagePK:64166689~piPK:64166646~theSitePK:469043,00.html 42 http://www.imf.org/external/np/exr/facts/hipc.htm
41
32

TWO STEP PROCESS 43
Countries must meet certain criteria, commit to poverty reduction through policy changes and demonstrate a good track-record over time. The Fund and Bank provide interim debt relief in the initial stage, and when a country meets its commitments, full debt-relief is provided. FIRST STEP: DECISION POINT. To be considered for HIPC Initiative assistance, a country must fulfill the following four conditions: 1. be eligible to borrow from the World Banks International Development Agency, which
provides interest-free loans and grants to the worlds poorest countries, and from the IMFs Poverty Reduction and Growth Trust, which provides loans to low-income countries at subsidized rates. 2. face an unsustainable debt burden that cannot be addressed through traditional debt
relief mechanisms. 3. have established a track record of reform and sound policies through IMF-and World
Bank supported programs 4. have developed a Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (PRSP) through a broad-based
participatory process in the country. Once a country has met or made sufficient progress in meeting these four criteria, the Executive Boards of the IMF and World Bank formally decide on its eligibility for debt relief, and the international community commits to reducing debt to a level that is considered sustainable. This first stage under the HIPC Initiative is referred to as the decision point. Once a country reaches its decision point, it may immediately begin receiving interim relief on its debt service falling due. SECOND STEP: COMPLETION POINT. In order to receive full and irrevocable reduction in debt available under the HIPC Initiative, a country must: 1. establish a further track record of good performance under programs supported by loans
from the IMF and the World Bank. 2. implement satisfactorily key reforms agreed at the decision point.
43
http://www.imf.org/external/np/exr/facts/hipc.htm
33

3. adopt and implement its PRSP for at least one year.
Once a country has met these criteria, it can reach its completion point, which allows it to receive the full debt relief committed at the decision point. Countries receiving debt relief. Of the 39 countries eligible or potentially eligible for HIPC Initiative assistance, 35 are receiving full debt relief from the IMF and other creditors after reaching their completion points. One country, Chad, has reached a decision point and has benefited from interim debt relief. Three countries, which have been identified as potentially eligible for HIPC Initiative assistance, have not yet reached their decision points.
DEBT RELIEF FREES UP RESOURCES FOR SOCIAL SPENDING 44
Debt relief is one part of a much larger effort, which also includes aid flows, to address the development needs of low-income countries and make sure that debt sustainability is maintained over time. For debt reduction to have a tangible impact on poverty, the additional money needs to be spent on programs that benefit the poor. Boosting social spending. Before the HIPC Initiative, eligible countries were, on average, spending slightly more on debt service than on health and education combined. Now, they have increased markedly their expenditures on health, education, and other social services. On average, such spending is about five times the amount of debt-service payments. Reducing debt service. For the 36 countries receiving debt relief, debt service paid, on average, has declined by about two percentage points of GDP between 2001 and 2010. Their debt burden is expected to be reduced by about 90 percent after the full delivery of debt relief (including under the MDRI). Improving public debt management. Debt relief has markedly improved the debt position of post-completion point countries, bringing their debt indicators down below those of other HIPCs or non-HIPCs. However, many remain vulnerable to shocks, particularly those affecting exports as seen during the current global economic crisis. To reduce their debt vulnerabilities decisively,
44
34

countries need to pursue cautious borrowing policies and strengthen their public debt management.
IMF DEBT RELIEF COMPLEMENTED BY OTHER SOURCES 45
About 45 percent of the funding comes from the IMF and other multilateral institutions, and the remaining amount comes from bilateral creditors. The total cost of providing assistance to the 39 countries that have been found eligible or potentially eligible for debt relief under the enhanced HIPC Initiative is estimated to be about $76 billion in end-2010 net present value terms. The IMFs share of the cost is financed by bilateral contributions and resources from the Fund itself, mainly investment income on the proceeds from off-market gold sales in 1999. These funds were deposited to the IMFs PRG-HIPC Trust. Resources available in the trust are currently insufficient to finance the cost of debt relief to all countries that meet the initial conditions for debt relief and reach the decision point. The original financing plan did not include the cost of debt relief to Sudan and Somalia, as well as to other countries that entered the Initiative after 2006. Should these countries progress to the decision point, there would be an urgent need to mobilize resources.
CHALLENGES REMAIN
the four countries that have not yet completed the requirements for full debt relief face common challenges, including preserving peace and stability, and improving governance and the delivery of basic services. Addressing these challenges will require continued efforts from these countries to strengthen policies and institutions, and support from the international community. Another challenge is to ensure that eligible countries get full debt relief from all their creditors. Although the largest creditors (the World Bank, the African Development Bank, the IMF, the Inter-American Development Bank, and all Paris Club creditors) have provided their full share of debt relief under the HIPC Initiative, and even beyond, others are lagging behind. Smaller
45
35

multilateral institutions, non-Paris Club official bilateral creditors, and commercial creditors, which together account for about 25 percent of total HIPC Initiative costs, have only delivered a small share of their expected relief so far. Non-Paris Club bilateral creditors as a whole have delivered around 40 percent of their share of HIPC Initiative debt relief, but about one third of these creditors have not delivered any relief at all. While there has been some increase in the delivery over the past few years, the rate of delivery remains disappointingly low. The delivery of debt relief by commercial creditors has increased markedly in recent years through a few large operations supported by IDAs Debt Reduction Facility buyback operations. Some commercial creditors have initiated litigations against HIPCs, raising significant legal challenges to burden sharing among all creditors, including the multilateral institutions. The number of litigation cases against HIPCs has been declining in recent years but flattened over the past few years. Given the voluntary nature of creditor participation in the HIPC Initiative, the IMF and the World Bank will continue to use moral suasion to encourage creditors to participate in the Initiative and to deliver fully their share of HIPC Initiative debt relief. The IMF and World Bank will also continue to improve their ability to monitor the delivery of HIPC Initiative debt relief. The IMF will continue to address issues related to participation in the HIPC Initiative during its regular consultations and other missions to creditor countries.
List of Countries That Have Qualified for, are Eligible or Potentially Eligible and May Wish to Receive HIPC Initiative Assistance (as of January 2013)46 Post-Completion-Point Countries (34) Afghanistan Benin Bolivia Burkina Faso Ghana Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Mozambique Nicaragua Niger Rwanda
46
36

Burundi Haiti So Tom & Prncipe Senegal Sierra Leone
Cameroon Central African Republic Comoros Republic of Congo Democratic Republic of Congo Cte dIvoire Ethiopia The Gambia
Honduras Liberia
Madagascar Malawi Mali
Tanzania Togo Uganda
Mauritania
Zambia
Interim Countries (Between Decision and Completion Point) (2) Chad Pre-Decision-Point Countries (3) Eritrea Somalia Sudan
37
BIBLIOGRAPHY
"A Global Partnership for Development." Millennium Development Goals. United Nations Development Programme. http://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/mdgoverview/mdg_goals/mdg8/ "Develop a Global Partnership for Development by 2015." The World Bank. The World Bank Group. http://www.worldbank.org/mdgs/global_partnership.html Poncet, Sandra. "Classic Theories of Economic Development." Lecture. Development Economics. Sciences Po, Paris. http://ces.univparis1.fr/membre/Poncet/SciencesPo/Lecture%202%20seminar.pdf Poncet, Sandra. "Contemporary Theories of Economic Development." Development Economics. Sciences Po, Paris. http://ces.univparis1.fr/membre/Poncet/SciencesPo/Lecture%203%20seminar.pdf Willem Te Velde, Dirk. "The Global Financial Crisis and Developing Countries: Taking Stock, Taking Action." Overseas Development Institute (September, 2009). http://www.odi.org.uk/sites/odi.org.uk/files/odi-assets/publications-opinion-files/3705.pdf Fergusson, Ian F. World Trade Organization Negotiations the Doha Development Agenda. US Congress, Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service (Order Code RL32060), Library of Congress, 2012. http://www.nationalaglawcenter.org/assets/crs/RL32060.pdf The Millennium Development Goals Report 2012. United Nations Publications, 2012. http://www.undp.org/content/dam/undp/library/MDG/english/The_MDG_Report_2012.pdf For more information on GATT, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Agreement_on_Tariffs_and_Trade. Full text can be found at http://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/gatt47_01_e.htm (GATT 1947) and http://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/06-gatt_e.htm (GATT 1994, must be read with GATT 1947).
38

Grimmett, Jeanne, J. Trade Preferences for Developing Countries and the WTO. US Congress. Washington, D.C.: Congressional Research Service (RS22183), Library of Congress, 2007. http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RS22183.pdf http://www.ustr.gov/trade-topics/trade-development/preference-programs WTO Doha Round: The Agricultural Negotiations by Charles E. Hanrahan and Randy Schnepf pages 13-21 at http://www.nationalaglawcenter.org/assets/crs/RL33144.pdf Fergusson, Ian F. World Trade Organization Negotiations the Doha Development Agenda. US Congress, Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service (Order Code RL32060), Library of Congress, 2012. http://www.nationalaglawcenter.org/assets/crs/RL32060.pdf Brown, Drusilla K., Deardorff, Alan V. and Robert M. Stern. Computational Analysis of Multilateral TradeLiberalization in the Uruguay Round and Doha Development Round. Discussion Paper No. 489. School of Public Policy. The University of Michigan. December 8, 2002. Thomas W. Hertel and Roman Keeney, What is at Stake: The Relative Importance of Import Barriers, Export Subsidies and Domestic Support, in Anderson and Martin, eds., Agricultural Trade Reform in the Doha Agenda (Washington: World Bank, 2005) Kym Anderson, Will Martin, and Dominique van der Mensbrugge, Doha Merchandise Trade Reform: Whats At Stake for Developing Countries, July 2005, available at
http://www.worldbank.org/trade/wto The Millennium Development Goals Report 2012. United Nations Publications, 2012. http://www.undp.org/content/dam/undp/library/MDG/english/The_MDG_Report_2012.pdf http://www.un.org/Docs/journal/asp/ws.asp?m=A/RES/58/230 http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/59/223&Lang=E http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/60/187 http://www.un.org/Docs/journal/asp/ws.asp?m=A/RES/61/188 http://www.un.org/Docs/journal/asp/ws.asp?m=A/RES/62/186 http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/63/206&Lang=E http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/64/191&Lang=E
39

http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/65/144&Lang=E http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/res/66/189&Lang=E http://www.un.org/esa/ffd/ffdconf/ http://www.un.org/esa/ffd/doha/documents/Doha_Declaration_FFD.pdf http://www.un.org/esa/ffd/ http://www.un.org/ga/econcrisissummit/ http://www.un-ngls.org/spip.php?page=amdg10&id_article=2233 http://www.un.org/wcm/content/site/ldc/home http://www.wfp.org/content/istanbul-programme-action-least-developed-countries-decade2011-2020 http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=42281#.UPAB4W_aWWY http://www.un.org/en/sustainablefuture/pdf/rio20%20concludes_press%20release.pdf http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/67/435/Add.3&Lang=E From http://www.worldbank.org/mdgs/global_partnership.html http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/TOPICS/EXTDEBTDEPT/0,,contentMDK:20634753 ~menuPK:64166739~pagePK:64166689~piPK:64166646~theSitePK:469043,00.html http://www.imf.org/external/np/exr/facts/hipc.htm http://www.imf.org/external/np/exr/facts/hipc.htm http://www.imf.org/external/np/exr/facts/hipc.htm http://www.imf.org/external/np/exr/facts/hipc.htm http://www.imf.org/external/np/exr/facts/hipc.htm World Bank Website: http://www.worldbank.org/
40

World Bank - BACKGROUND Guide

Transféré par

Informations du document

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

World Bank - BACKGROUND Guide

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

ROME MODEL UNITED NATIONS- 2013 EDITION