Governance
Development of the Economic and Social Council System


     The Economic and Social Council has several unique strengths that qualify it to play the leading role in economic and social policy at the international level which is vested in it by the UN Charter. It represents all countries rather than being controlled by those which are rich and powerful. Its mandate covers both economic and social issues, and it has ultimate responsibility for many of the relevant intergovernmental agencies.

     To date, however, ECOSOC has largely failed to fulfil its responsibilities and potentialities. This is partly because of sustained opposition from most of the major economic powers. It is also due partly to lack of pragmatic determination by those countries which could have most to gain if ECOSOC became more effective. Despite some useful improvements in recent years, much more remains to be done in strengthening the ECOSOC system.

     First, it is essential that ECOSOC either strengthens the size, role and effectiveness of its Bureau or develops some other mechanism which enables prompt, focused and vigorous action to be taken without calling a full Council meeting of more than 50 members.

     The smaller grouping could comprise up to about 20 members, who would need to be selected from regional constituencies which are rearranged to reflect modern realities and genuine commonalities of interest. It is also important that a substantial number of major countries, both developed and developing, seek election to key ECOSOC positions and allocate high-quality representatives to them.

     Second, it is essential that effective use is made of the opportunities which have developed in recent years for greater interaction with the leaders of the Bretton Woods institutions and the World Trade Organisation. Those opportunities will be largely wasted, and eventually withdrawn, unless their intensity, specificity and frequency are further developed.

     But it is also important that ECOSOC engages closely with newer groupings which may come to be of major global significance. This applies, for example, especially to the new Group of 20, which has several desirable characteristics in its membership structure but nevertheless makes no provision for representation of medium or small countries (outside the European Union) and of social rather than narrowly economic interests.

     Third, ECOSOC needs to engage more closely with regional groupings which have developed outside the UN system. Its current regional structure does not adequately reflect modern realities, and other regional groupings such as the European Union, Southern African Development Community and Association of South East Asian Nations are usually regarded as much more significant by the highest levels of government. The development of stronger regional interaction through these groupings can help to strike appropriate balances between the benefits and imperatives of internationalisation on one hand and the need for flexibility and sensitivity to local circumstances and cultures on the other.

     But it is very important that these groupings operate within an effective global framework of the kind which ECOSOC should provide. A useful step in that direction would be for ECOSOC to establish an annual regional consultation, within the annual ECOSOC meeting, involving these groupings as well as ECOSOC’s own regional commissions.

     ICSW urges governments to propose and endorse changes of these kinds so that the structures and processes of ECOSOC enable it to fulfil its important Charter responsibilities, including development and oversight of the proposed Anti-Poverty Pact and International Standards for Social Development.