11/5/2015

Developing the World’s Less Fortunate Majority:

A Case Study of the United Nations Development Programme

Russell Whiteun and global security – dr. debra delaet – drake university

1

I. Introduction

“We have more development success stories than ever before. The transformative impact

of the MDGs is undeniable. This is an achievement we can be proud of. But … the clock is

ticking, with much more to do.” Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon’s opening remarks to the MDG

Summit in September of 2010 is rather reminiscent of the overall success and failures of the

Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) set out by the United Nations (UN). There has been,

overall, significant and positive progress in the fulfillment of the goals in the MDGs with more

progress and success to come. Given such large and complex goals to fulfill, member states, non-

governmental organizations (NGOs), international organizations (IOs) and many specialized UN

agencies took on the burden and responsibility to fulfill the promises and goals set out in the

MDGs. But within this plethora and chaotic field of actors, the larger question which comes to

mind is “How does the UNDP actually operate and create successful results amongst what seems

to be chaos and disorganization?”

Within this crowded field of important and influential actors, there is one UN

specialized agency which stands out amongst the others due to its level of involvement, influence

and authority: the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). Since the UNDP is one of

the primary actor and coordinator of the MDGs, it would make sense to study the UNDP

structure, the way it functions and its strategy in working towards achieving the MDGs.

Furthermore studying and analyzing how the UNDP coordinates its efforts globally, and in turn,

how effective the UNDP’s efforts are in achieving the MDGs.

The UNDP’s organizational structure, operations, functions, coordination efforts and its

overall effectiveness indicate that it is organized and functions in such a way which allows it

fulfillment of its ambitions in accomplishing the MDGs, for the most part. However, there are

several structural failures and evidence of poorly coordinated program implementation which

2

currently limit the level of success within the UNDP’s global operations, thus leaving the

efficiency of the UNDP to be limited and left wanting in particular areas. Though there is

evidence of structural complications and instances of poor planning on the part of national and

local offices in the UNDP, the UNDP still remains the central authority and actor towards the

completion of the UNDP and are in a position to remain that way even after the 2015 MDG

Summit.

II. Background History and Information

The UNDP was founded long before the MDGs were ever created, but in order to

understand as to “why” and “how” the MDGs became its primary focus, looking to organizations

history helps to reveal the answers.

On November 22nd, 1965 the UNDP was founded with the merger of the Expanded

Programme of Technical Assistance (EPTA) – created in 1949 – and the United Nations Special

Fund – created in 1958. By 1971, the two organizations were fully combined into the UNDP

creating one agency from the merging of two. EPTA was to help the economic and political

aspects of underdeveloped countries, whereas the purpose of the Special Fund was to enlarge the

scope of UN technical assistance to developing and underdeveloped nations (United Nations

Development Programme, iaaca.org). After the merger, the purpose of the UNDP was to help

achieve the eradication of poverty, and the reduction of inequalities and exclusion of developing

and underdeveloped nations newly welcomed into the international community (Overview,

undp.org).

The UNDP is headquartered in New York City and is funded entirely by voluntary

contributions from member nations, and multilateral/international institutions. As of 2011, the

3

UNDP is the largest UN agency, holding Country Offices in 166 countries and operations in 177

countries around the world (Canadian International Development Agency). The UNDP is

essentially the United Nations’ global development network. The UNDP advocates for and

assists in change by connecting countries to “knowledge, experience and resources to help

people build a better life.” (United Nations Development Programme, iaaca.org). Today, the

mandate and goals of the UNDP “covers poverty reduction and achieving the MDGs, democratic

governance, crisis prevention and recovery, environment and sustainable development as well as

cross cutting themes such as women’s empowerment and capacity building.” (Multilateral Aid

Review: United Nations Development Programme). However, the UNDP originally did not start

out with such a large mandate and list of goals whenever it fully emerged as a single

organization in 1971. Today the bulk of the UNDPs work and efforts go towards the completion

and fulfillment of the MDGs, which will be discussed in the following section.

III. The Millennium Development Goals and the UNDP’s Evolution

The MDGs were adopted by the UN in September of 2000 as a global initiative to

improve the quality of life globally, but more specifically for those nations that were

underdeveloped and developing. The MDGs are listed out as such: (1) eradicate extreme poverty

and hunger, (2) achieve universal primary education, (3) promote gender equality and empower

women, (4) reduce child mortality, (5) improve maternal health, (6) combat HIV/AIDS, malaria

and other diseases, (7) ensure environmental sustainability, and (8) develop a global partnership

for development (Overview, undp.org). The general direction and overall goal of the MDGs is

fairly straightforward, though arguably, more complex and difficult to complete; regardless, the

MDGs and their oversight was given to the UNDP by the UN. Though it is not all that surprising

4

consider that the UNDP “played an important supplementary role by co-chairing the inter-agency

expert group that drafted the MDGs in 2000.” (The United Nations, Independent Evaluation

Office). The UNDP was indirectly responsible for its expanded responsibilities and evolution as

an agency in the UN, while also directly evolving its involvement in the MDGs after their

adoption.

The agency didn’t always have the vast array of responsibilities, projects and operations

that they have today. Its main goal and purpose was the technical assistance to other countries

who needed the skills, knowledge and expertise to govern and manage their nations

economically and politically. However, the UNDP, as made clear today, has obviously grown in

its reach; this is due to a relationship between inside ‘mission creep’ in the UNDP, as well as

added-on tasks and responsibilities from the UN and the Secretariat. For example, in 2001, the

“Secretary-General nominated the UNDP Administrator to act as the coordinator, the ‘campaign

manager’ and the ‘scorekeeper; of the MDG and MDG support in the UN system.” (Independent

Evaluation Office). Following thereafter, the UNDP assumed a central role in coordinating

efforts to prepare national MDG reports and in campaigning the MDGs within the UN system.

The UNDP has always had a role in playing the ‘central coordinator’, but by its own efforts and

the designations of the UN and the Secretariat, the UNDP developed more and more

responsibilities.

As if taking on the MDGs was not enough expansion and evolution for the already large

agency, from the adoption of the MDGs in 2000 to the recent MDG Summit in September of this

year – 2015 – the UNDP has expanded its involvement and level of commitment in the MDGs.

Before the MDGs were widely known and supported, the agency’s efforts focused on raising

awareness and ensuring stakeholder “buy-in” through a series of advocacy initiatives managed

5

by the United Nations Millennium Campaign (UNMC) (Independent Evaluation Office.) Later,

after the World Summit in 2005 urged member states to adopt and implement MDG-aligned

development strategies, the emphasis of the UNDP focus shifted to policy advisory services, so

that countries develop such relevant and aligned strategies with the MDGs (Independent

Evaluation Office). In preparation for the MDG Summit in 2010, the UNDP developed the

UNDP MDG Breakthrough Strategy, which “encapsulated the MAF (MDG Accelerated

Framework).” (Independent Office of Evaluation). Since then, the UNDP has concentrated on

MAF support to specific countries and regions where MDG achievement was lagging. The

UNDP went from the role of monitor and campaigner for the MDGs, to being a central role in

policy advisory and strategic planning in the completion of the MDGs in just a span of 15 years.

The major evolution of the UNDP has happened within these last 15 years of existence,

which is heavily tied to the development and adoption of the MDGs; though it is important to

note that the UNDP did evolve and grow in its purpose prior to 2000, but since this study is

primarily concerned with the UNDPs role and effectiveness in the MDGs it was prudent to note

the evolution of the UNDP in relation to the MDGs. With the relation of the UNDP and MDGs

made clear, along with the evolution of the purpose and mission of the UNDP, the following

section will put this evolution of the UNDP in perspective with the observation and analysis of

the UNDPs structural organization and its role as a coordinator.

IV. UNDP Structural Organization

In understanding how the UN operates and why they are a central authority and actor in

the international development community, it is essential to first understand and analyze how the

UN is structured organizationally. For the UNDP, it is partially due to the fact of how it

6

functions under its organizational structure which allows it to develop and maintain its status as

the central player and coordinator at the heart of the UN development system. The UNDP would

not be nearly as effective or operate in the style that it does if it was not due to how the UNDP

organizes its agency to further its mission and purpose. Although, the same organization which

allows the UNDP to be an effective central actor in the development of countries around the

world, also hinders it at the same time. But before explaining how the organization of the UNDP

is faulty, an explanation of how it is organized is first needed.

As an organization, the UNDP is an executive board that exists within the United Nations

General Assembly. The UNDP Administrator has the rank of an Under-Secretary-General of the

United Nations, but while the Administrator is often referred to as the third highest-ranking

7

official in the UN it is more of informal title rather than a formally codified designation in the

UN. The Secretary-General of the UN appoints the position of the UNDP Administrator which is

later confirmed by the UN General Assembly for a term of four years. However, the

Administrator of the UNDP has an added responsibility as the Chair of the UN Development

Group, as well. The UN Development Group is a consortium of UN agencies – created in 1997

by the Secretary-General – that work to improve the effectiveness of UN development activities

at the country level; having the UNDP Administrator Chair this group further propels the UNDP

in a central position of coordinating efforts among other UN agencies in the completion of the

UNs development agenda.

If you look to Figure 1 above, you can see the complex organization of the UNDP.

However, there is a purpose to this organization, because though the UNDP has an Executive

Office with an Administrator, the UNDP is a highly decentralized organization. Central authority

in the UNDP is spread and decentralized amongst various offices, bureaus and hubs in order to

coordinate and achieve its diverse set of delegated tasks (undp.org). The Executive Office has

power and supervision over the various Regional Bureaus, Bureau for External Relations and

Advocacy, Bureau of Management, Bureau for Policy & Programme Support, Crisis Response

Unit, and all of the other various offices that aren’t part of the Executive Office which have

separate functions or self-check functions – for example, the Ethics Office, Independent

Evaluation Office, United Nations Volunteers, etc. As seen from Figure 1, the Regional Bureaus

delegate tasks and initiatives to their Regional Hubs, and the Regional Hubs delegate tasks and

initiatives to their respective Country Offices, which take those initiatives and tasks and

implement them in a way which fits with that countries culture and national policies (undp.org).

The UNDP has a built in self-filter which allows for better flexibility and autonomy that most

8

organization of its size are used to. In the end, the reader can see that each office has to report to

the Executive Office and the Administrator, but the Administrator doesn’t have direct authority

or delegation powers over the various offices and bureaus in the UNDP.

This type of structure and organization relates to the UNDPs role and authority in

international development in several ways, from what I have observed in my study. The UNDP

receives authority and legitimacy from both top-down and bottom-up interactions with the UN

and the member states in which it operates in. Due to the appointment of the Secretary-General

of the UNDP Administrator and the interactions of the UNDP Administrator in the UN

Development Group, it further places the UNDP systematically in a central position within the

UN development system. The UNDP is also systematically propelled into a central role

internationally amongst member states because of the breadth and number of offices the UNDP

has in many countries. The UNDP doesn’t have a strong central authority but rather spreads that

authority to its various offices and bureaus giving them more autonomy. With more autonomy

and freedom to adapt the UN mandates and MDGs to a particular region, or country’s needs, the

inhabitants and officials of said region/country have far more flexibility to work with the UNDP.

That interaction is heavily tied into both the structure and operation of the UNDP, but the point is

that they are inseparable.

V. UNDP Operations and Coordination Efforts

In order to get a more precise understanding of the strategy and efforts of the UNDP in

achieving their mandates and goals, it is necessary to focus on the three larger primary efforts

that the UNDP works toward: the development of leadership and democratic integrations, the

eradication of poverty, and environmental sustainability. By focusing on these areas of

9

development within the UNDP, it’ll efficiently provide a picture and explanation on how the

UNDP coordinates and executes their goals and initiatives.

In regards to tailoring their efforts for environmental sustainability, there is no better

example than the one given by the UNDP Report: Making Progress on Environmental

Sustainability. “More countries in Africa and the Arab States, which face significant water

scarcity, have tailored Target 10 (water and sanitation) compared to Target 9 (environmental

sustainability), whereas all the other regions have more countries tailoring Target 9.” (Making

Progress on Environmental Sustainability). Specific countries and regions will tailor and focus

on certain initiatives or targets that are more aligned with their immediate concerns as a society.

In regard to the sustainable target, Target 11 (slums), “Africa has significantly more countries

that tailored this target compared to other regions” around the world. (Making Progress on

Environmental Sustainability).

In the field of operations for democratic governance and local leadership, the UNDP

supports local governance in four primary focus areas: (1) enhanced democratic representation;

(2) improved service delivery and MDG acceleration; (3) sustainable development; and (4) state

and peacebuilding. (Evaluation of UNDP Contribution to Strengthening Local Governance). The

UNDP also works to address in the Latin America and the Caribbean region decentralization as a

high priority for many countries. “In Bolivia, Colombia, Panama, Peru, and Trinidad and

Tobago, UNDP supports national institutions to implement and strengthen decentralization

processes.” (Evaluation of UNDP Contributions to Strengthening Local Governance). The

UNDP also works to create programs and initiatives to further the development of governance

and local leadership in specific regions and countries. The ART GOLD is one such

program/initiative; “ART offers a joint planning methodology for local, national and

10

international actors to contribute to human development in different countries and to achieve the

MDGs in a coordinated and complementary way. The ART Initiative has 16 country-specific

programmes and one regional programme with seven participating countries in Latin America.”

(Evaluation of UNDP Contribution to Strengthening Local Governance). These programs and

initiatives towards democratic integration and local governance all have various approaches

which are specifically fitted for the regions/countries in which they are implemented; this style of

approach and strategy is common amongst the UNDP in most, if not all, of its efforts.

In working towards the eradication of poverty in underdeveloped and developing nations,

the UNDP, again, uses the same kind of strategy of implementation and program planning. For

example, African stimulation of economic growth and stability rests on the success of “ambitious

social safety nets and designed policies for boosting education and tackling HIV and other

diseases.” (Assessing the Progress in Africa toward the Millennium Development Goals). When

giving policy recommendations for the fulfillment of the MDGs in Latin America, the UNDP

advices and consults Latin American countries in the inclusion of “sustainable development in

their national programmes, closing welfare gaps, implementing productive and technological

policies to encourage job-creation and improve income, and paying urgent attention to the most

extreme situations of poverty and hunger, all essential to gaining equality in the region.”

(Achieving the Millennium Development Goals with equality in Latin America and the

Caribbean). The bottom line is that the UNDP doesn’t operate in one way, but rather in many

different ways depending on what country or region it is operating in. The UNDP has adopted

the strategy and mindsight that every particular area has its own special needs and requirements,

so though the MDGs are a general statement and direction for development, the UNDP has to

take those goals and adapt them to the given circumstances of a region or country.

11

But, the UNDP doesn’t do this work all by itself; it is, after all, more of a coordinator of

efforts than a sole programmer of development. The UNDP in order to fulfill its obligations and

objectives, works with member states, local agencies, NGOs, and other international

organizations in all aspects and tasks it addresses. There are three partnerships of particular

importance for UNDP: those of UNCDF (United Nations Capital Development Fund), UNV

(United Nations Volunteers) and UNIFEM (United Nations Development Fund for Women). The

UNDP’s partnership with these three UN agencies is expected to undertake their programming in

close association with the core UNDP program and to later report to the UNDP Administrator.

“In the case of UNCDF and UNIFEM, they also potentially constitute a substantive resource

available for the design and implementation of local governance strategies and programmes.”

(Evaluation of UNDP Contribution to Local Governance).

It’s also rather common to find the UNDP partnering with bilateral agencies from the

developed/western countries of the world, such as the United States, the U.K., Canada, Germany,

etc. The UNDP also works closely with the World Bank, the African Development Bank, the

Asian Development Bank, the Inter-American Development Bank, the European Union Aid

Agency, and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development to promote its

success and programming in various different MDGs, but primarily with the eradication of

poverty and promotion of local governance (Evaluation of UNDP Contribution to Strengthening

Local Governance). “In some countries, UNDP also partners with traditional village decision-

making bodies, faith-based NGOs and religious leaders” and other NGOs and IOs with similar

missions in mind, due to the fact the UNDP has limited financial resources and personnel

(Evaluation of UNDP Contribution to Strengthening Local Governance). The UNDP coordinates

12

and works along many different actors in the international community in order to effectively

work towards the fulfillment of the MDGs.

It is because of this level of involvement and cooperation with various different actors in

the international community which has strengthened and given the UNDP its level of authority

and centrality. The UNDP, unlike other IO’s and member states, works closely with NGOs as

important resources in furthering the progress of the MDGs. The UN as an IGO hasn’t fully

recognized the full potential and influence that NGOs have in the international community;

rather, the UN views that states are the primary actors. However, the way the UNDP operates

and functions to progress the MDGs is contrary to such views, and is what adds to its authority

and role in the development system of the UN and the international community. Though the

authority and role of the UNDP is recognized by mostly all international actors in this field, it

doesn’t ensure the UNDP will be completely effective in its efforts.

VI. The Strengths and Weaknesses of the UNDP

Amongst member states of the UN and other international organizations, there is a

general consensus that the UNDP is effective in its efforts on the MDGs; however, there are

obvious flaws and weaknesses with the current system which are limiting its possible successes.

Assessments of the development effectiveness of the UNDP has demonstrated that most of the

UNDP programs are fulfilling its objectives and predicted outcomes. There is a general

affirmation that the UNDP contributes to the development of increasing food security,

stimulating sustainable economic growth, and securing the future for children and youth. The

UNDP does this through its organizational mandate: (1) poverty reduction and the MDGs, (2)

13

environment and sustainable development, (3) democratic governance, and (4) crisis prevention

and recovery (Canadian International Development Agency).

However, the weaknesses of the UNDP lies in (1) their inability to execute a number of

its programs on the more local and national levels due to lack of funding at the time of

evaluation, (2) stretching its efforts either too fast or too large and causing the initial success to

wane, (3) the complex and overly bureaucratic system of the UNDP systems, and lastly (4)

evaluation, monitoring and results-based management systems at the decentralized level need

further improvement. Though there are more weaknesses than strengths, the actual level of

inhibition of the weaknesses is not as terrible as one may think; though these are areas of

weakness that the UNDP out to fix and improve.

Starting with the strengths of the UNDP, the UNDP’s performance on “achieving its

objectives, 66% of evaluations rated UNDP programs as “satisfactory” or better.” (Canadian

International Development Agency). The Canadian Development Agency, in their assessment

and evaluation of the UNDP, go on further to say that results were rather positive for the number

of beneficiaries reached by the UNDP programs, with “65% of evaluations reporting

“satisfactory” or “highly satisfactory” findings.” They continue to add that the UNDPs influence

to changes in national development policies and programs was reported “satisfactory” or “highly

satisfactory” by 71% of evaluations. The United Kingdom, in their own evaluation, said that the

UNDP is both a relevant and critical agency to the delivery of development and humanitarian

objectives in the international efforts towards the MDGs (Multilateral Aid Review).

But, these evaluations and assessments aren’t the only proof of the significant and

important work of the UNDP. In Arab states alone, around 85% of children in primary school

age went to school in 1999, and that percentage rose to 92% by 2011 (Facing Challenges and

14

Looking Beyond 2015). In the Gambia alone, poverty was reduced 32% between 1990 and 2010,

while Ethiopia decreased its poverty rate by 1/3, focusing on agriculture and rural livelihoods

(Assessing Progress in Africa Toward the Millennium Development Goals). In relation to the

promotion of democratic governance, the UK said that “In fragile states UNDP may be the only

multilateral with the capacity to deliver at scale and in these situations can be the main agency

representing the UN or wider multilateral development system.” (Mulilateral Aid Review). So as

one can see, the UNDP has made great strides in its efforts to eradicate poverty, promoted better

local leadership and governance and in all of the other goals with the MDG project. But with

such lofty initiatives and efforts, such as these, it is important to note and improve upon the

weakness of any effort.

For the UNDP, that mainly lies in the fact that “development objectives were sometimes

hindered by dispersion of UNDP programming across too many projects, too wide a geographic

area or too many institutions.” (Canadian International Development Agency). In this regard

though, UK, the Independent Office of Evaluation and others agreed. The UNDP stretches itself

too far in some of its programs, either hindering itself from the beginning of implementation, or

weakening a program which was successful in the beginning, but waning due to a reduced lack

of focus and resources. For example, “education outcomes in particular have declined in a

number of countries reviewed in this evaluation as a direct result of efforts to provide universal

primary education.” (Independent Evaluation Office).

Another area of weakness, was the need for better evaluation, results monitoring and

results based-management at the decentralized program level. According to the report by the

Canadian International Development Agency, evaluation systems and processes were found to be

effective at the “satisfactory” or “highly satisfactory” level in only 41% of the evaluations

15

reviewed. The U.K. further elaborated by saying that the UNDP “has a weak results chain” and

that there is evidence which “does not suggest that poor performing projects are being managed

proactively,” leaving the unsuccessfulness of these projects to go unchecked (Multilateral Aid

Review).

Lastly, the assessment and study of the UNDP also suggests that the organizational

structure of the UNDP worked against itself. “Effective partnerships were also limited by poor

coordination with bilateral donors and other UN agencies, sometimes because of an environment

of inter-agency competition.” (Canadian International Development Agency). By these, the

evaluators mean the kind of competition between different Country Offices in the same region,

or competing Regional Bureaus, etc. Sometimes it even extended as far as the UNDP versus

other UN agencies who were vying for resources and support from a particular bilateral agency

in a member state.

Despite the technicalities behind the strengths and weaknesses of the UNDP, the fact

remains that the UNDP has done incredible work with the many agencies and member states and

NGOs it coordinates with and work alongside. But with any achievement, comes the lessons to

be learned from trial-and-error; and the UNDP, as has been shown in this section, has several

weaknesses and failures to work upon.

VII. Conclusion

This paper has discussed in great detail the background of the UNDP, the Millennium

Development Goals in relation to the UNDP, how the UNDP evolved in its purpose and mission,

how the UNDP is organized in a decentralized hierarchy with central authority spread amongst

different offices, how the UNDP operates and what strategies they implement, and lastly just

16

how effective the UNDP is in its purpose, function and organization. At this point, it is of no

question whether or not the UNDP is efficient or not in its goals and objectives. If anything, this

study has simply shown the unseen weaknesses, the unseen faults and the unheard errors of the

UNDP, since it is usually either overshadowed by its accomplishments or simply unheard of due

to their triviality. The UNDP is largely successful in its coordination efforts with the partners the

agency works with both locally and internationally. But, that once again should not overshadow

the fact that the agency is far from perfect in their daily operations and overall structure of the

organization. These last 15 years have given the UNDP something to work upon, and hopefully

improve within the next 15 years, so by the time 2030 comes around the world will be in a far-

better shape than before.

The UNDP itself serves as a lesson for the entire UN system. Most, if not all, UN

organizations function as bureaucracies (much like the UNDP) which is why they operate with

such expertise, autonomy and overlapping missions. The UNDP is representative of both the

benefits and costs of increased bureaucratization; but if anything, the UNDP has shown that

bureaucracy and increased bureaucracy isn’t all that ‘sinful’. The increased bureaucracy of the

UNDP and the decentralization of its organization help it to be as effective as possible. The

UNDP, like many other UN organizations and bodies, need to be judge, evaluated and reformed

for its specific issues and organizational inefficiencies. The UN itself is the largest and most

successful intergovernmental organization human history has witnessed, and its many supporting

bodies and organizations are just as complex as the whole of the organization. The UNDP has

shortcomings but it also has successes, much like the UN. The UNDP does not just serve as a

lesson for the UN system, but it is indictment of the UN system. Which, if anything, leaves room

for hope for the idealist, or the liberalist in international politics; because if the UNDP succeeds

17

– for the most part – in its goals and ambitions and has room for feasible improvement to fix its

shortcomings, than the same is true for the UN.

The thesis of this paper and its conclusion has come to show that UNDP is organized in

such a way which allows it to function and operate fairly well in accomplishing the MDGs set

forth by the UN in 2000. At the same time, however, the UNDP must reexamine the extent at

which it stretches itself; it also ought to reinvent more effective systems for evaluation, results

monitoring and results-based management; and lastly it ought to put in place checks which

would further limit the occurrence of agency in-fighting, which hinders its efficient ability to

create partners abroad, as well as find the adequate amount of resources for a given project.

“When human development advances, people live longer and healthier lives with better

education, more income and greater dignity.” – Helen Clark, Administrator of the UNDP

18

Works Cited

"Achieving the Millennium Development Goals with Equality in Latin America and the

Caribbean: Progress and Challenges." (2010): n. pag. UNDP.org. United Nations

Development Programme, 26 Aug. 2010. Web. 13 Oct. 2015.

<http://www.undp.org/content/dam/undp/library/MDG/english/MDG%20Regional

%20Reports/LAC-Regional%20MDG%20Report%202010.pdf>.

The Arab Millennium Development Goals Report: Facing Challenges and Looking beyond 2015.

N.p.: n.p., n.d. UNDP.org. United Nations Development Programme, 23 Sept. 2013.

Web. 13 Oct. 2015. <http://www.undp.org/content/dam/rbas/doc/MDGS

%20publications/Arab_MDGR_2013_English.pdf>.

Gariba, Sulley, et al. Independent Review Of The UNDP Evaluation Policy. New York, NY,

USA: United Nations Publications, 2010. eBook Collection (EBSCOhost). Web. 14 Sept.

2015.

<http://eds.b.ebscohost.com/eds/ebookviewer/ebook/bmxlYmtfXzM0ODk3NF9fQU41?

sid=d31ec069-4efe-4c7f-94dc-

bfdfef4f6781@sessionmgr111&vid=2&hid=117&format=EB>

Evaluation Of UNDP Contribution To Disaster Prevention And Recovery. New York, NY:

United Nations Publications, 2010. eBook Collection (EBSCOhost). Web. 14 Sept. 2015.

<http://eds.b.ebscohost.com/eds/ebookviewer/ebook/bmxlYmtfXzQzNDI3MF9fQU41?

sid=d31ec069-4efe-4c7f-94dc-

bfdfef4f6781@sessionmgr111&vid=2&hid=117&format=EB>

Evaluation Of UNDP Contribution To Strengthening Local Governance. New York, NY: United

Nations Publications, 2010. eBook Collection (EBSCOhost). Web. 14 Sept. 2015.

19

<http://eds.b.ebscohost.com/eds/ebookviewer/ebook/bmxlYmtfXzQzNDI3MV9fQU41?

sid=d31ec069-4efe-4c7f-94dc-

bfdfef4f6781@sessionmgr111&vid=2&hid=117&format=EB>

Canadian International Development Agency. "Development Effectiveness Review of the United

Nations Development Programme (UNDP) 2005-2011." (2011): n. pag. Web. 14 Sept.

2015. <• http://www.oecd.org/derec/canada/UNDP-final-eng.pdf>.

Dopplick, Renee. "Sustainable Energy in the Post-2015 Development Agenda." International

Law News 44.1 (2015): n. pag. Web. 14 Sept. 2015.

<http://eds.b.ebscohost.com/eds/detail/detail?sid=7a2d5e4b-7f3e-41a8-a894-

8cb9b53009a2@sessionmgr111&vid=1&hid=117&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmU

mc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ==#db=a9h&AN=102581885>.

"Making It Happen: Technology, Finance and Statistics for Sustainable Development in Asia and

the Pacific." (2015): n. pag. UNDP.org. United Nations Development Programme, 29

May 2015. Web. 13 Oct. 2015. <http://www.undp.org/content/dam/rbap/docs/Research

%20&%20Publications/mdg/RBAP-RMDG-Report-2014-2015.pdf>.

"Making Progress on Environmental Sustainability." (2011): n. pag. United Nations

Development Programme. Web. 14 Sept. 2015.

<http://www.droughtmanagement.info/literature/UNDP_making_progress_environmenta

l_sustainability_2006.pdf>.

"Millennium Development Goals." United Nations Development Programme, n.d. Web. 14 Sept.

2015. <http://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/librarypage/mdg.html>.

Multilateral Aid Review: United Nations Development Programme (including the Bureau for

Crisis Prevention and Recovery) (n.d.): n. pag. Web. 14 Sept. 2015.

20

<https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/67626/

undp-inc-bcpr.pdf>.

"Overview." UNDP. N.p., n.d. Web. 14 Sept. 2015.

<http://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/ourwork/overview.html>.

"Statistical Products and Databases." United Nations Statistics Division. United Nations, n.d.

Web. 14 Sept. 2015. <http://unstats.un.org/unsd/Demographic/products/default.htm>.

The United Nations. United Nations Development Programme. Independent Evaluation Office.

Evaluation of the Role of UNDP In Supporting National Achievement of the Millennium

Development Goals. N.p.: n.p., 2015. Issuu.com. UNDP, May 2015. Web. 4 Nov. 2015.

<http://issuu.com/undp-evaluation/docs/mdg_thematic_evaluation_2014/1?

e=1871569/12799170>.

Union, African, African Development, and Bank Group. "Assessing Progress in Africa Toward

the Millennium Development Goals." (2015): n. pag. UNDP.org. United Nations

Development Programme, 28 Sept. 2015. Web. 13 Oct. 2015.

<http://www.undp.org/content/dam/rba/docs/Reports/MDG%20Report

%202015_ENG.pdf>.

"United Nations Development Programme（UNDP）." IAACA. International Association of

Anti-Corruption Authorities, 15 Feb. 2012. Web. 14 Sept. 2015.

<http://www.iaaca.org/AntiCorruptionAuthorities/ByInternationalOrganizations/

InterGovernmentalOrganization/201202/t20120215_805478.shtml>.

United Nations Economic Commission For Europe. "Report on Achieving the MDGs in Europe

and Central Asia." (2010): n. pag. UNDP.org. United Nations Development Programme,

23 Sept. 2010. Web. 13 Oct. 2015.

21

<http://www.undp.org/content/dam/undp/library/MDG/english/MDG%20Regional

%20Reports/Europe%20and%20CIS/UNECE_MDG_Report_2012.pdf>.

2014 UNDP Organisational Chart. 2014. UNDP.org. Web. 1 Nov. 2015.

<http://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/operations/about_us/organisational_chart/

>.