TRIBUTE TO THE VICTIMS OF THE VOLCANIC ERUPTION IN COLOMBIA
HOMMAGE AUX VICTIMES DE L'ERUPTION VOLCANIQUE EN COLOMBIE
HOMENAJE A LAS VICTIMAS DE LA ERUPCION VOLCANICA EN COLOMBIA

PART II - ACTIVITIES AND PROGRAMES OF THE ORGANIZATION (continued)
DEUXIEME PARTIE - ACTIVITES ET PROGRAMMES DE L'ORGANISATION ('suite)
PARTE II - ACTIVIDADES Y PROGRAMAS DE LA ORGANIZACION (continuación)

13. Review of the Regular Programme
13. Examen du Programme ordinaire
13. Examen del Programa Ordinario

V.J. SHAH (Director, Office of Programme, Budget and Evaluation): There are two documents before you for the' item on the Review of the Regular Programme 1984-85, C 85/8 and C 85/LIM/17, which is the extract of the report of the Eighty-eighth Session of the Council, covering the review of the Regular Programme and the Evaluation of the Technical Cooperation Programme.

With reference to the second document, may I draw to the Commission's attention some small corrections? These were purely errors in typing and printing but I would like to clarify them even at this stage.

The first paragraph of document C 85/LIM/17 which is numbered paragraph 81 as it is part of the Council Report, states in the second sentence: "The additional improvements made in the Conference and the Review formed an essential element of the wider system on monitoring and evaluation in FAO". This sentence should be corrected to read: "The additional improvements made in the document were in line with the earlier suggestions of the Council and the Conference and the Review formed an essential element of the wider system on monitoring and evaluation in FAO".

Secondly, in the last paragraph of this document, which is numbered paragraph 98, in the last line there is a reference to "paragraph 59". That should read "paragraph 95". (This refers only to the English text).

May I now introduce the substance of the item?

This is the fourth Review of the Regular Programme, covering the biennium 1984-85. In preparing the Review, we have taken full account of the comments and suggestions made by the Programme Committee, the Council and the Conference on the last Review covering the 1982-83 biennium. The Conference had expressed appreciation of the additional improvements made in the Review last time, which reflected its own wishes and suggestions. In particular, it had welcomed the revised

format and structure, which substantially expanded the in-depth reviews of selected sub-programmes and special topics, cutting across programmes while reducing the performance review section in Part I without any loss of substance. It was satisfied that the Review was comprehensive, result-oriented and well balanced, serving as an essential element in the larger system of monitoring and evaluation in FAO.

The 1984-85 Review, which is now before you, follows the same structure as that of the previous one, with the performance report in Part I accounting for 40 percent of the text, the in-depth reviews in Part II, and the special topics in Part III each accounting for 30 percent. However, in all three Parts of the Review, further effort has been made to focus more sharply on the concrete achievements and results as well as on relevant issues emerging from the analysis. The Summary section has been made more comprehensive and presented in the front of the document to enhance its usefulness.

In the performance report on the Major Programmes which are covered in Part I of the Review the tables containing data on training activities, meetings and workshops, publications, support to member countries and technical backstopping of field programmes have been improved both in coverage and presentation, as specifically suggested by the Programme Committee. In particular, the timeframe for these tables has been expanded to five years to provide a better perspective of trend.

The thrust of the improvements in Part II has been to make in-depth reviews of selected sub-programmes and activities as evaluative as possible by concentrating on concrete outputs, effects and impact as well as on the issues which emerged from the last analysis. As such, the analysis treats in an integrated manner both the core Regular Programme activities and the related field activities, without duplicating the content of the Review of the Field Programme which will be reviewed later. These in-depth reviews are intended to provide not only an analytical and result-oriented assessment of selected activities, but also a set of useful feedback for future planning and implementation. In particular, in order to provide a greater coherence to the in-depth reviews in Part II, this section covers five Regular Programme activities (four sub-programmes and one programme element), all of which are especially designed to support the priority needs of the small-scale farmers/producers and the rural poor. We have given examples of activities which have had successful results, and we have analyzed the reasons for those which have been less successful. We hope that these chapters will provide the governing bodies with an informative assessment of FAO's programmes at the grassroot level in the agriculture fisheries and forestry sectors.

Part III of the Review covers two special topics which cut across the FAO programme structure: Research activities of the FAO Regular Programme was a subject suggested by the Programme Committee and activities and support of Economic and Technical Cooperation Among Developing Countries form a basic policy tenet of the Organization. The two chapters provide a comprehensive analysis and review of our efforts in these major areas, covering both the Regular Programme and related field activities.

This Review is a result of progressive changes since 1979 when the first Review of the Regular Programme was prepared. Improvements and innovations have been made in this process with the participation and guidance of the governing bodies, and especially the Programme Committee. Over the years the in-depth reviews of selected programmes and special topics in Parts II and III respectively, have covered a substantial number of activities. Thus, the four Reviews, which have so far come before the Conference, have together covered 2 Programmes, 17 sub-programmes, 5 programme elements and 7 special topics. In terms of the number of sub-programmes, the coverage over these four reviews represents over one quarter of all the sub-programmes under the three technical Major Programmes of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries.

Finally, it should be noted that the improvements made in the Review form part of an overall progress in the evolution of a system of internal monitoring and evaluation within FAO. This system is being consolidated by the recent introduction of monitoring of work plan implementation and improvements being made in the auto-evaluation process. The evaluation of Field Programme activities has also been further streamlined. In this connection, the Conference may be interested in the view of the Joint Inspection Unit, JIU, in a recent draft report entitled "The Third Report on Evaluation in the United Nations System: Integration and Use of Internal Evaluation

in Organizations in the United Nations System". This JIU report is expected to be issued shortly and will be submitted, of course, to the Programme and Finance Committees when it is formally issued.

In the meantime, there are four conclusions in the report which it is pertinent for the Conference to be aware of. In its summary assessment, the JIU Report concludes: "The ambitious and comprehensive FAO evaluation system framework which JIU reported on in 1981 has now been filled out as FAO continues to expand evaluation coverage, refine and improve operation of the system and integrate evaluation with other programme management processes. The steady progress in improving this system is shown by the greater use being made of evaluation findings and the increasing requests for evaluation reports."

In the same report, the JIU considered that FAO, together with WHO, "has gone furtherest towards achieving the organization-wide scope in evaluation coverage and appropriate methodologies for systematic assessment of progress and results in the Organization's activities". The report highlights the consolidation of the auto-evaluation process with the monitoring of annual workplans, the implementation of the field projects management information system and the streamlining of the evaluation of field projects to ensure a more systematic and effective feedback to project design and implementation.

The report thirdly comments on the fact that FAO's assistance to member countries, in monitoring and evaluation, is appreciated, including support given to 14 countries at the project or national level, workshops in a dozen countries and pilot studies for the development of socio-economic indicators for monitoring and evaluation in some 50 countries.

The fourth and final point which I quote from the JIU report is that FAO and IFAD are credited with having taken a leading role in promoting joint inter-agency activities in monitoring and evaluation in the field of rural development.

We look forward to a candid and critical examination of the Review at this Conference and to the Conference's suggestions and guidance in making the next Review an even better document. I thank you, Sir.

EL PRESIDENTE: Como lo dijo el Sr. Shah los dos documentos para este tema 13 son el C 85/8, Examen del Programa Ordinario, y el C 85/LIM/17 que contiene un extracto del Informe de la reunión del Consejo celebrada la semana pasada. En la primera parte del C 85/LIM/17 están las referencias del Consejo a este documento y en la parte final, a partir del párrafo 53, está la decisión que, dentro de su autoridad, tomó el Consejo en relación con el examen hecho por consultas externas sobre la evaluación del PCT.

Muchos de ustedes me han transmitido su opinión, que yo comparto, en el sentido de que en materia de procedimiento no convendría que nuestra Comisión perdiera un tiempo que puede ser aprovechado para ocuparse de los asuntos de fondo. Con este espíritu quiero repetirles brevemente, en mi opinión, cuál es la situación del PCT en relación con la discusión del tema 13, y luego tan sólo aclarar la exposición hecha.

Es evidente que el PCT no es un punto específico en la Agenda de la Conferencia, pero igualmente es cierto que el PCT aparece en el Capítulo 4 del Documento 85/8 y, como ya dije, al final del C 85/LIM/17. Dentro de esos dos hechos, creo que, con la flexibilidad en que todos hemos convenido, todas las delegaciones podrán referirse al PCT sin ninguna limitación, de la manera que lo deseen pero, igualmente, creo que todos estamos de acuerdo en que no convendrá que se repitan las mismas declaraciones, ya extensas, que se hicieron sobre el PCT en la discusión del tema anterior y por lo tanto sería deseable que hicieran, si lo desean las delegaciones, observaciones breves, específicas y concretas. Esto es solamente una orientación, repito que ustedes tienen libertad para intervenir sin ninguna limitación.

Hay otra preocupación que también yo recojo por parte de algunas delegaciones y es que hubiera una explicación sobre el PCT al contenido del informe de esta Comisión. He estado en contacto y me mantengo en contacto, con el distinguido colega y amigo Sr. Jennings, de los Estados Unidos, Presidente

del Comité de Redacción para evitar que se produzca esa duplicación que, desde luego, está sometida a la manera cómo ustedes van a intervenir en esta discusión del tema 13. Si no hay ningún comentario, el próximo orador, Canadá.

D. LINDORES (Canada): This is an extremely important item and I would like to thank Mr Shah for his very interesting introduction. It sometimes tends to overwhelm us in view of the mass of material that is provided and the extent and complexity of the programme which it covers.

To keep my intervention within the perimeters of courtesy to the Commission, I would like to make only a few general comments on the broader review of the programme, and to take advantage of the flexibility that you have just allowed to discuss in somewhat summary form the enlightening and much appreciated review of the Technical Cooperation Programme.

On the general comments, my delegation recognizes the difficulties of evaluating technical cooperation activities. The transfer of knowledge and the upgrading of human skills cannot simply be measured in as concrete a manner as is possible, for example, with the output of a hydro dam or a thermal generating plant. We were very much impressed with the evaluation guidelines published by the FAO evaluation service in 1984. While properly drawing attention to the limitations of evaluation technology, that document clearly points out that at the design stage the objectives, the output, the results, the anticipated impact, the target beneficiaries and the measurement indicators that will be used should all be clearly defined in order that results can be properly assessed.

The purpose of evaluation should also be kept clearly in mind. Assuming that we all share the same broad objective of supporting good programmes, the goal of evaluation is not to criticize for failure nor to praise for success, but rather to adapt and adjust our activities in order to be engaged in a constant process of programme improvement.

Those of us engaged in running major bilateral activities therefore treat with considerable sympathy many of the difficulties which are raised in these documents, for we are struggling with many of them ourselves.

With this rather sympathetic approach in mind, I would add that we are nevertheless troubled if attempts are not made to assess properly programme impact. On this count, we perhaps find the Review somewhat lacking; on the whole, we find that the Review focuses a little too much on outputs such as the number of training courses, the number of meetings, the number of publications, etc., and perhaps does not sufficiently attempt the much more difficult task of assessing the impact on development of those outputs.

An additional element must always be added, that is the cost of the impact achieved. These two elements become the two tried and true concepts of effectiveness and efficiency, or, put a somewhat different way, has the programme achieved anything, and if so at what cost? Those who prepared the review document started with a rather basic problem, for their inevitable starting point must be the Programme of Work and Budget, and that document is, generally. speaking, not structured in such a way as to facilitate review at the end of the biennium. The major structural problem that we see in the Programme of Work and Budget is that it is by and large presented in the form of means and not in the form of ends or objectives, which is a process which greatly complicates the assessment of results. As a result, we find that in reviewing this review document it is difficult for us to see the linkage that has been made between the review of the previous Programme of Work and Budget and how the lessons learnt from it have been applied to the development of the new Programme of Work and Budget. We recognize that there are timing problems associated with such an approach but we consider it an important area for some constructive review by the Secretariat.

The second general point I would like to make is that we find it somewhat difficult to differentiate between regularly funded programme activities and those of an extra-budgetary nature.

This is of concern not only for the Review itself, but of course, also for the Programme of Work and Budget. I think the best illustration of this difficulty is to refer to the response two days ago that Mr Shah gave to the debate on the Programme of Work and Budget. In reply to questions raised by a number of delegations about the allocation of programme resources by sector, Mr Shah presented further information on extra-budgetary funding, that, as he correctly pointed out, significantly changed the real priorities of the Programme as they might have been understood from the Programme of Work and Budget document itself. This is an area also in which we believe that this Conference and its subsidiary bodies will require a clearer presentation in the future.

As a third general point let me state that we welcomed Chapter Ten of the Review which deals with the research programme of the FAO. Canada is one of the earliest supporters and currently one of the leading contributors to the CGIAR system, and has a long history of association with the FAO in the research field. FAO itself has, of course, played a fundamental role itself this system as one of its sponsoring agencies. We were, therefore, perhaps somewhat disappointed about some of the imprecision which seemed to exist in the Review of FAO's research activities and we hope that that imprecision is in fact a characteristic of the document and not of the Programme itself.

Specifically we found the FAO's long-term research objective as stated in that Chapter to be a somewhat unconvincing and weak rationale for research activities. This impression was perhaps somewhat heightened by the lack of information on the impact of research, the quantitative measures which it uses for verification and even on the target groups. Perhaps the most important question which it raised in our minds was the nature of FAO's inter-action with the CGIAR system. For us this issue has, of course, already become somewhat complicated in the field of Plant Genetic Resources. The two specific questions that we would pose are first, how does FAO see its support role for research institutions and networks, such as the CGIAR, but also for any other national and intergovernmental systems and second, what is the impact on FAO planning of the recent decisions of the CGIAR to engage to a much greater extent in work on minor crops and farming systems.

That ends my general comments and I would like now to turn for a few moments to the Technical Cooperation Programme. As you know, my Government starts from the position that in the United Nations System technical cooperation activities should be funded through the voluntary mechanisms created for that purpose rather than through the assessed budgets of the Specialized Agencies. We believe that such an approach, particularly as applied through the UNDP, ensures that limited funds are utilized in accordancė with the Government's own overall priorities as it reflects those priorities through a central document, such as the UNDP Country Programme. I would add that those concerned with the diminishing share of UNDP resources channelled through the FAO should probably pursue that question, not so much with the UNDP itself but with in fact the developing countries who benefit from those programme, since it is effectively their priorities and their preferred channels which determine the utilization of resources.

Having stated that basic position on voluntary funding it is not my intention to try to turn back the hands of time ten years by calling for the abolition of the Technical Cooperation Programme, a position which would probably not lead to a groundswell of support from our friends and colleagues of the Group of 77 in this room. I must state however that the issue is still very much alive in my own capital. Canada's level of ODA is determined in advancė as a percentage of GNP. The percentage of our assessed contributions to the Specialized Agencies that is recognized by the Development Assistance Committee of the OECD as development assistance is then deducted from the total amount of resources which are made available to our aid agency. There are two net results of this process. Of major interest to our partner developing countries, of course, is that the process of funding development assistance through assessed budgets does not lead to an overall increase in the total funds provided by Canada. The second implication, and this time it is largely a domestic one for Canada, is that we have to deal with concerns from a variety of comparable sources, that a portion of our assistance budget is effectively removed from the priority setting activities of our Government. This situation has recently attracted considerable attention from our central financial authorities. Nevertheless I think that this problem is not beyond control within our own system if a responsible attitude is taken to budget setting within the Agencies. For this reason we have expressed our concerns about the steadily increasing percentage of FAO's total budget allocated to the Technical Cooperation Programme. In our view this trend should be halted.

I would like to discuss the document itself under three headings, that is the evaluation document on the TCP, the process followed, the results and· the Director-General's response to the results. On the process, we agree with our Nordic colleagues that the document generally would have been more credible if it had been prepared by a more independent body, such as the JIU, particularly since my understanding is that this evaluation arose at least partly out of observations made originally by the External Auditors. Our concerns on the objectivity of the study were reinforced by the recommendation of the evaluators on the question of resource levels for the Programme as a whole. Such a recommendation hardly falls within the terms of reference of the evaluation. Nor is it a normal subject for evaluators to comment upon.

Still on process; we were somewhat bemused by the terms of reference as a whole and would like to know by whom they were approved and more specifically were they approved by any of the inter­governmental committees of the FAO. Most programme evaluations with which I have been associated have tended to take a somewhat more professional approach to their terms of reference by assessing the full programme cycle, the clarity of objectives, planning process, efficiency of implementation, and the control of the financial and technical parameters and the evaluation process. Such an approach would seem to my own delegation to have certain advantages to what I have read in this document where the terms of reference essentially were "to assess chiefly the recipient Government's satisfaction with the response of the Technical Cooperation Programme".

Moving on to the results of the study, let me first note that despite some of the concerns which I have just mentioned there are in fact many useful recommendations that should aid the Secretariat in the management of the Programme. We note without surprise that the Programme is well regarded by its beneficiaries. We have also noted a variety of useful suggestions on matters of planning and implementation. We would like to have seen more on the effectiveness of control on the financial and technical areas and feel that we have learned relatively little in terms of the impact of the Programme on food production.

There are several conclusions on the broader objectives and criteria of the TCP on which we would like to comment. The report commends the unprogrammed nature, practical orientation, flexibility and speed, the four basic elements of the Technical Cooperative Programme, although it does raise several concerns, particularly on the issue of speed. Flexibility, of course, is the dream of every aid administrator. It is, of course, useful in any programme to have available small amounts of project resources that can be used with flexibility to meet fast breaking situations or which may not fall easily into traditional areas of programme activity. But most governments require that such discretional spending by its public servants normally be restricted to rather modest levels. Large projects, or a large programme resulting from the accumulation of many small projects, are expected to fall within a more programmed framework. We believe that the current level of TCP requires that we either accept that the Programme has reached an adequate level or be prepared to revisit the objective that funds remain essentially unprogrammed. We share the views expressed by our Nordic colleagues that the Programme has reached an adequate level to fulfil its task when compared with other programmes of work. Should that view on level not generally prevail then a much different approach to programming would be required.

In a similar vein we have some concern that the recommendation that budget ceilings be raised from US$ 250 000 to US$ 400 000. This request , combined with our assessment that most of the projects now being financed do appear to be falling into a rather stable pattern where rapid response is not the overriding comment, would indicate that a much closer look at the full activities of the TCP on an ongoing basis through the most appropriate intergovernmental committee is now required. A possibility that has already been proposed within other Committees by my delegation would be to concentrate TCP's mandate on its catalytic and emergency operations, while ensuring a more systematic though supportive approach of the mandate on a longer term nature through the grouping of extra-budgetary resources under a broader programme with its own advisory committee or group. To underline our need for such a mechanism I regret to state that my Government as a member of the Finance Committee has pursued a series of issues to which we have not yet received satisfactory replies. Despite repeated requests we have not been able to receive a statement of the financial situation of the Programme that meets normal standards. Important current issues like the recovery of costs expended for project preparation on behalf of Trust Fund donors have not been addressed. Not only have we not received answers in that Committee, but we have been prevented on occasion from even raising those and other issues in the report of that Committee to this Conference.

We were concerned by references within the report to a lack of coordination with other potential financing bodies. We considered this problem requires urgent attention since it threatens the fundamental catalytic role of the TCP. At the same time it is perhaps this factor that explains some of the problems outlined in terms of appropriate follow-up on some of the pre-investment projects that have been done. In general we found that the evaluation was rather weak in dealing with the longer-term impact of the Programme which once again takes on particular importance given the catalytic role which TCP is expected to play. A greater attempt to quantify follow-on investment flows or other benefits would have been helpful. Similarly it is with some concern that we note in the report, and we have received additional indications that project approval for the Technical Cooperation Programme tends to be concentrated very much in the latter part of the biennium. This is a dangerous practice which if not corrected can lead to the dumping of funds in less than satisfactory circumstances.

I have just received the first draft copy of the proposed resolution submitted by the representative of Mexico as Chairman of the Group of 77 on the question of ECDC and I note that paragraph 7 of that draft resolution relates to the suggestion of the evaluation report that a new category (c) be established for projects catalyzing inter-country cooperation.

My delegation has traditionally had certain reservations on this type of activity and our ultimate position will be guided by the debate in this Commission, although for the time being we would wish to express our reservation on that paragraph.

Turning very quickly to the response of the Director-General to the Evaluation Report, we have noted the action proposed on most of the recommendations and we thank him for that action.

We were somewhat surprised by one statement in the response, however, which tends to reflect in our view a less than adequate comprehension of the evaluation process. I refer to paragraph 98, where the statement is made that the confirmation of such strong support for the TCP suggests that an external evaluation was not required. My Government rejects the contention that external evaluation is essentially a "tool to justify programme funding. Evaluation, both internal and external, is a tool to improve programme quality.

To conclude, Canada places a very high priority on technical cooperation, particularly on the development of human resources. We will continue to support these activities when they are placed into the appropriate policy and managerial context. We appreciate the Evaluation Report and recognize that its broad assessment of the TCP is positive, while making many useful proposals for change. We consider that the Programme has reached a size and is of a nature where it must be subjected to a more on-going review process by governments, a review which must be supported by an open and supportive role played by the Secretariat.

EL PRESIDENTE: Tal vez convendrá observar, como lo dije esta mañana, que el Proyecto de Resolución del Grupo de los 77 sobre Cooperación Económica y Técnica entre países en desarrollo va a ser discutido más tarde en esta Comisión después de que el Comité de Resoluciones lo revise.

El distinguido colega de Uganda ha tenido la amabilidad de enviar una nota solicitando que su país sea incluido en las actas dentro de las manifestaciones de solidaridad con Colombia. Se procederá así.

H. MALTEZ (Panamá): Señor Presidente, permítame en primer lugar agradecer al señor Shah por su elo­cuente presentación del tema.

Al efectuar nuestras observaciones relacionadas con el cuarto examen del Programa Ordinario de la FAO mediante el cual se evalúa el funcionamiento de los programas de la Organización desde el punto de vista de sus objetivos, así como de la forma en que estos se ejecutan y de sus efectos prácticos, la delegación de Panamá desea primero referirse muy brevemente a algunos aspectos de carácter general que el mismo le merece y luego analizar más detenidamente otras situaciones que, sin desmérito a ninguna actividad o programa, consideramos en los actuales momentos de primordial importancia.

Deseamos antes que nada, y tal como lo hiciésemos durante la sesión del pasado Consejo, reconocer la utilidad y necesidad de la evaluación sistemática de los programas como un instrumento eficaz para introducir adelantos, corregir errores y de esta forma obtener mejoras progresivas en la labor de la FAO.

A tal efecto coincidimos con que este tipo de examen es el mecanismo básico que permite mantener informados a la Organización y a los organismos que la asesoran sobre la ejecución de las actividades que conciernen al Programa Ordinario, incluyendo sus logros y resultados, lo mismo que sus interrela-ciones con el Programa de Campo.

Nos complace destacar a este propósito, y por ello elogiamos la labor de la Secretaría, que la presentación del documento C 85/8 responde a sugerencias y recomendaciones anteriores, tanto del Consejo como de la Conferencia. Es en este contexto que estimamos oportuno manifestar nuestra complacencia por los cambios operados en la estructura y el contenido del examen del Programa Ordinario, el cual consideramos el más informativo, analítico y orientado hacia resultados tal como fue sugerido.

Es por todo esto que expresamos en forma general nuestro apoyo al examen en cuestión.

Nuestra delegación manifiesta, además, dentro de este marco de referencias, su particular aprecio por los análisis a fondo efectuados en la parte segunda del examen, expresando en tal sentido su satisfacción porque los cuatro subprogramas y el elemento de programa considerado fuesen relacio­nados con la necesidad de los pequeños productores de la población rural pobre y de las mujeres en el medio rural.

En forma global, al respecto, deseamos no sólo reconocer y apoyar la función catalítica que desempeña la FAO en la prevención y erradicación de importantes epizootias, en el fomento de la producción y productividad pecuaria a nivel de pequeños ganaderos, lo mismo que en la adopción de medidas para asegurar el abastecimiento de piensos, sino también destacar y sostener la importancia que se está ortorgando al desarrollo de la pesca continental, y de manera especial a la acuicultura, en su afán por mejorar tanto la nutrición humana como de aumentar ios ingresos de la población rural pobre.

Una muy particular consideración nos merecen los aspectos relacionados con la promoción del papel de la mujer en el desarrollo rural, en especial en nuestros países en desarrollo. En efecto, aunque estimamos se han logrado algunos progresos en tal sentido, consideramos que ello no es suficiente por lo que es necesario dar nuevos y vigorosos impulsos a los esfuerzos que para tal fin se ejecutan. Para ello estimamos debe prestarse especial atención a aspectos tales como una creciente capacitación de la mujer, no sólo para mejorar sus condiciones productivas, sino también para lograr que las mismas alcancen a ocupar posiciones directivas hoy en muchas partes del mundo reservadas a los hombres; lograr un efectivo apoyo a las organizaciones que les prestan servicios y que son dirigidas por ellas, y muchos otros que sería largo mencionar.

Para mi país, Panamá, tiene un muy especial interés el Programa de Producción Pecuaria, sub-pro-grama 2.1.3.6, sobre todo por lo que se expresa en los párrafos 6.2 y 6.3 y que se refieren a que el aumento de la producción de los pequeños ganaderos requerirá un enfoque que incluya selección de los tipos y razas, producción de animales, prácticas de producción y gestión en el contexto del medio ambiente existente, teniendo en cuenta el uso de animales para tiro y transporte. Efectivamente, a este respecto en Panamá se ha introducido recientemente y con un cierto éxito el búfalo de agua para el desarrollo .de ciertas áreas y regiones atlánticas y tiene la intención de continuar impulsando un animal que en dicho ambiente ha revelado poseer óptimas características productivas además de representar un excelente medio de transporte y trabajo.

Con referencia a la parte tercera del examen y que trata de los temas especiales, informando sobre todo las actividades técnicas de la Organización, a saber: la investigación agrícola y la cooperación técnica entre países en desarrollo, la delegación de Panamá desea expresar su complacencia con los resultados del examen en tal sentido, reiterando su convicción que ambas cuestiones son elemento fundamental del enfoque de la cooperación técnica brindada por la FAO y que, por lo tanto, merecen nuestro total y decidido apoyo.

Al referirnos a las actividades de investigación previstas en el Programa Ordinario de la FAO creemos necesario destacar nuestro aprecio por la acción que ese organismo ha efectuado promoviendo y prestando su apoyo en los sectores de la agricultura, la pesca y los montes.

Asimismo, a tal propósito nos complace reconocer como la primera preocupación de la FAO sea la selección de los sectores prioritarios de investigación en los cuales pueda preverse beneficios en breve plazo.

Quisiéramos además recalcar el hecho de que los programas de investigación en nuestros países necesitan del empuje, de todo el apoyo que la FAO pueda brindarles.

Para mi delegación la CEPD y la CTPD representarn uno de los mecanismos de autosuficiencia colectiva más válido que poseemos los países en desarrollo y lo consideramos una de las premisas fundamentales para la instalación del nuevo orden económico internacional. Por esta razón las apoyamos de manera firme , decidida y prioritaria en todas las actividades de la FAO.

Estimamos, sin embargo, que debe quedar claro que dicha cooperación no sustituye la cooperación Norte-Sur. Es en este contexto que manifestamos nuestra identificación y apoyo, no sólo a la exhortación dirigida por la Conferencia de Buenos Aires sobre la CEPD, sino también a los conceptos del plan de acción de Caracas, del Programa de Acción de la Conferencia mantenida sobre la reforma agraria y desarrollo rural, así como la Reunión Global de Bucarest sobre la cooperación económica entre países en desarrollo en el sector de la alimentación y la agricultura que se refieren a la cooperación en la producción alimentaria y agrícola, en la seguridad alimentaria, en la pesca, en la ordenación de los recursos nacionales, en la investigación y desarrollo, en la transferencia de tecnología en los sectores alimentario y agrícola y en la reforma agraria y desarrollo rural.

Antes de pasar a analizar los aspectos relacionados con el otro tema al cual concedemos en las actuales circunstancias una importancia prioritaria, o sea el Programa de Cooperación Técnica, queremos aprovechar la ocasión para reiterar el apoyo del gobierno de Panamá a la descentralización actuada por la FAO y expresar, una vez más, nuestra complacencia por las actividades de las oficinas regionales.

Con su venia, señor Presidente, deseamos referirnos al PCT pues entendimos que lo tocaríamos a fondo en este tema, por lo que en el tema anterior nos referimos a él en forma superficial, así pues que aprovecharemos de su gentil ofrecimiento de flexibilidad.

Mi delegación estima oportuno reiterar su total apoyo al PCT, ya que el mismo representa, a juicio de nuestras propias experiencias y las de la casi totalidad de las delegaciones presentes en esta Conferencia, a pesar de los defectos y pretextos que se le quieren encontrar, un instrumento de gran beneficio para los países en desarrollo, sobre todo ahora que existe una crisis de la acción multilateral y que tal vez por sus efectos han disminuido sensiblemente otros recursos de asistencia al desarrollo, tales como por ejemplo el PNUD, el FIDA, etc. A este propósito, respecto al FIDA insistimos, y seguiremos insistiendo en todas las ocasiones que se nos presenten, sobre la necesidad de que se lleve a cabo a la mayor brevedad posible la Segunda Resposición de sus recursos.

Queremos además expresar nuestra complacencia y por ello felicitar al señor Director General por haber solicitado una evaluación externa del PCT. Nos complace que esta segunda evaluación integral del Programa en su noveno año de existencia haya dado en forma global resultado claramente favorable al PCT. Ello no nos sorprende porque no hay mejor evaluación que la opinión autorizada de los países beneficiarios, los cuales en esta y muchas otras reuniones hemos venido expresando en forma entusiasta la flexibilidad y la acción catalítica de este Programa que ha permitido a la FAO atender mejor a los países miembros movilizando rápidamente los medios técnicos operativos y administrativos en momentos en que era necesario actuar sin pérdida de tiempo para hacer frente a solicitudes urgentes e inesperadas de los gobiernos.

Asimismo es innegable que el PCT ha permitido reforzar no sólo las relaciones entre los países en desarrollo y la Organización, sino también entre los propios países en desarrollo. Con relación a este último concepto, èn nuestra región, América Latina y el Caribe, tenemos efecto palpable de la necesidad y beneficio de este tipo de asistencia, la cual es perfectamente canalizable a

través del PCT. Tal es el caso, por ejemplo de la solicitud para beneficiar a la empresa multinacional latinoamericana de comercialización de fertilizantes, MULTIFERT, integrada actualmente por ocho Estados de la región pero abierta a la participación de todos los otros.

Es por esto que mi delegación da su firme apoyo al establecimiento de una nueva categoría C para proyectos del PCT destinada a actuar como catalizadora en la cooperación técnica y económica entre países en desarrollo.

Por otra parte y por las razones que claramente se exponen en el párrafo 46 del documento CL 88/5, damos nuestro apoyo a las medidas propuestas y consistentes en aumentar el límite de costo mínimo del proyecto PCT de 250 000 a 400 000 dólares de los Estados Unidos.

Nosotros no hemos escuchado jamás a ningún país beneficiario quejarse del PCT; no hemos oído nunca que el mismo haya sido utilizado como instrumento de presión de ningún tipo, por el contrario, todos hemos expresado que las medidas emprendidas en el marco del PCT eran pertinentes y oportunas, que sus criterios y mecanismos respondían plenamente a las necesidades de los países en desarrollo, que el PCT aporta una contribución importante al desarrollo de la agricultura y la alimentación, que los mismos apoyan directamente y sin intermediarios rápidamente, en forma expedita, los esfuerzos de los países para rehabilitar su producción de alimentos. No comprendemos, entonces, porqué se trata de poner obstáculos a la mayor dinamicidad que se pretende dar al mismo.

Nuestro país, como hemos dicho en forma insistente, es un país de diálogo, toda nuestra política está basada en el diálogo. Durante el debate de este tema nos parece advertir que, cuando la mayoría de los pocos países que ponen objeciones y expresan dudas sobre las medidas propuestas, las dificultades son de tipo del enfoque del problema, de la perspectiva con que se mira el problema; por tales motivos deseamos exhortar a los países desarrollados a que traten de ubicarse en la posición de los que tenemos graves crisis alimentarias, de los que tenemos grandes problemas con la economía, y más particularmente con la enconomía agrícola, pero que estamos cada día más sobrecargados por los problemas que representa la deuda externa, con el constante deterioro de las relaciones de intercambio y de la inflación. Nosotros exhortamos a que traten de mirar las cosas no desde el punto de vista de sociedades prósperas, que se ubiquen en nuestras posiciones y entonces tal vez podamos encontrar mayores puntos de contacto. Nosotros conocemos de su generosidad y de sus sinceros deseos de ayudar, y de ello estamos agradecidos; sin embargo, y para terminar, deseamos recordar que la sabiduría, la verdadera generosidad no está en el dar, ni siquiera en el dar mucho, sino sobre todo en el saber dar.

A. BERGQUIST (Sweden): Like many other delegations my delegation has found the review of the Regular Programme ávery informative document. Over the years we have found that the review documents - that of the Regular Programme and the other on the Field Programme which we are to discuss on Monday present a well-balanced picture on the very diversified activities of this Organization. Its very condensed form makes it at times a bit difficult to read as it is really full of information. One can say that it is a bit difficult to see the forest for all the trees but we certainly appreciate all the work and effort the Secretariat has put into the preparation of these documents. We are especially appreciate of the "in depth" analysis of selected sub-programmes as they contain very useful information on lessons learned that could be of great value not only to FAO but also to bilateral donors. We have to realize that we can learn a lot from the experience gained by others. By sharing information, the development efforts can certainly be improved.

Having said this I would like to comment specifically on Chapter 7, Sub-Programme 2.1.5.4 Women in Agricultural Production and Rural Development. In general during the last 10 years, the United Nations Women's Decade it has been not too difficult to get international organizations to adopt far-reaching resolutions and guidelines on the necessity to fully integrate women in all activities and at all levels. At least verbally during the Women's Decade much has been said to this effect but it has not been as easy as launching appeals to implement all the wise and noble declarations and resolutions, most of which have been unanimously adopted. The review in Chapter 7 does not hide the fact that women are still often bypassed and not reached by development efforts, not seen by development agents and not counted by statisticians, as if half of mankind did not exist

The chapters on the WCARRD - I think a number of delegates still remember the World Conference on Rural Development and Agrarian Reform that FAO organized in 1979, this action programme contains specific chapters dealing with the integration of women and defined objectives and strategies to improve life for women in rural areas as farmers and agricultural producers. These action programmes still have the strong support of the Swedish delegation. Different strategies according to the special circumstances have to be adopted. In Chapter 7 two strategies are specially defined. My delegation is pleased to note, however, that the strategy of close integration of work between the ESHW and other technical units is more and more applied. We think that integration of activities is the way to proceed. Women in all countries are most resourceful human beings and without is life would not be as enjoyable as it is. We are also pleased to note that a roster of women consultants has been compiled. It is imperative that this roster be further developed, kep up to date and utilized.

In paragraph 7.14 we note with particular interest and satisfaction the newest components of the programme Women in Food Systems with its emphasis on the production of items such as basic grains, root crops, dairy products and horticulture. The inclusion of the population component in rural development programmes also has our strong and full support.

As to the section on output we note in paragraph 7.25 a report on the State of Statistics on Women in Agriculture that was prepared for the 1983 Expert Consultation. Information on women's role in agriculture still seems less available for certain regions. We hope that FAO will make all efforts to improve this during the coming biennium. Available information should also be used in agricultural planing, otherwise its compilation is of rather little use. Rural women have still only modestly gained from efforts by governments and international organizations during the past 10 years. The reason for this is a sad state of affairs, and the reasons are well analyzed and defined in paragraph 7.64. Increased efforts need to be made to reach women at the village level.

My delegation fully concurs with the strategy for further actions as they are contained in paragraphs 7.66 to 7.68. Progress has been made since the beginning of the United Nations Women's Decade in 1975, but much remains to be done. We must not lose momentum. I would like here to quote what was said by the Swedish Minister for Migration and Equal Opportunity Affairs, Mrs Anita Gradin, at the Nairobi Conference on the Follow-up of the Women's Decade this summer. She said and I quote: "The UN Decade on Women has played an important role in many respects. Women have become increasingly aware of their rights and opportunities. Out of this awareness grows the self-confidence which is a pre-condition for achieving equality between women and men." This equality we want to see achieved by the turn of the century and we will continue to follow very closely what strategies FAO will use to achieve this goal.

EL PRESIDENTE: Gracias. Estoy seguro de que todos los miembros de la Comisión han admirado el gran énfasis que nuestra distinguida colega y amiga de Suecia ha hecho sobre la necesidad de reivin­dicar las condiciones y función de la mujer en el desarrollo rural.

M. NIETO LARA (Cuba): Quiero felicitar sinceramente ai Sr. Shah por la ciara presentación de este tema. Señor Presidente: Al examinar con suficiente detalle el documento C 85/8, el cual nos brinda una valiosa información que obliga a reconocer el esfuerzo realizado por la Secretaría, encontramos que las recomendaciones hechas por los Estados Miembros han sido tenidas en cuenta, en la práctica, con bastante precisión. Complementariamente, se puede decir que recoge información suficiente, hasta donde sea posible, para que seamos de la opinión de que los recursos asignados y las indicaciones dadas en nuestra pasada Conferencia han sido aplicados adecuadamente, lo que reafirma la confianza que hemos depositado en la Organización, en su Director General y en todo el eficiente personal de la FAO. Con el ánimo de enriquecer la gestión de la FAO en el futuro, quisiéramos hacer algunas consideraciones y recomendaciones a fin de que sean tomadas en cuenta y puestas en práctica en la medida de lo posible.

En el programa principal, Agricultura, que está orientado fundamentalmente a dar respuesta a las dos principales prioridades de la FAO, es decir, fomento de la producción de alimentos y mejora de la seguridad alimentaria, estas han sido suficientemente consideradas. Sin embargo, sería procedente que se intensificara un tanto más lo relativo a la reducción de pérdidas posteriores a la cosecha. Conocemos que sobre este aspecto actúan múltiples factores con variada intensidad que afectan, sobre todo, a los pequeños productores, como son los precios de los intermediarios, la acción de las empresas y los grandes productores entre otros. En tal sentido y para disminuir la perdida de productos que ya han tenido un costo y un esfuerzo, la FAO pudiera aumentar su asistencia a los Estados Miembros para evitar o reducir la perdida de lo que producimos.

En lo que se refiere al Programa Montes se debiera potenciar la parte relativa al desarrollo de las prácticas agrosilvícolas de manera que podamos hacer un uso racional de los recursos forestales, aprovechemos el espacio vital y apliquemos prácticas de protección del medio natural que evite su deterioro.

La formación de cooperativas de pequeños agricultores para explotaciones agroforestales en nuestros países, es una experiencia con excelentes resultados que bien pudiera aplicarse a otros países y regiones.

Se hos ha planteado una estrategia que consideramos adecuada en cuanto a la producción pecuaria que, en esencia, trata de mejorar la producción de los pequeños ganaderos, pero se debe resaltar la nece­sidad de encontrar soluciones técnicas y prácticas al problema de la alimentación del ganado. Ciertamente, que no basta mejorar genéticamente la masa ganadera, capacitar a las personas en el manejo y explotación y garantizar la debida atención veterinaria; para alcanzar resultados satis­factorios es necesario asegurar la base alimentaria. Muchos países subdesarrollados sobre todo de la zona tropical al proponerse un programa importante en la producción pecuaria, han tenido que depender de las importaciones de cereales para la alimentación animal.

El tema de la participación de la mujer en el desarrollo rural ha sido examinado en reiteradas oportunidades y se continúan realizando esfuerzos en este sentido, aunque todavía resultan insuficientes. Creemos que dentro del desarrollo rural, además de poner de relieve la importancia de la participación de la mejer, se debe incorporar un nuevo concepto, es decir, la participación de los jóvenes. Esto es una conclusión de la tercera Mesa Redonda sobre Desarrollo Rural, celebrada en octubre de 1982 en La Habana, en la que participaron nueve países de la región de América Latina y el Caribe.

La FAO viene prestando atención a los problemas de la investigación y son cada vez más los países que toman conciencia de la necesidad de llevar adelante'programas de investigación en áreas priori­tarias. Lamentablemente, no siempre existen las condiciones y la capacidad técnica suficiente para identificar prioridades y poder ordenar los recursos humanos y materiales disponibles localmente. En tal sentido, entiendo que la FAO pudiera asistir con mayor intensidad a los países en la organización y puesta en práctica de sus programas de investigación.

En nuestra anterior intervención expresamos el criterio que tenemos sobre el Programa de Cooperación Técnica destacando una de sus bondades; me refiero al papel catalizador en la búsqueda de ayuda al subdesarrollo que juegan muchos proyectos de cooperación técnica. En consonancia con esa idea es recomendable que se refuerce la asistencia a los países en materia de identificación, preparación y evaluación de proyectos, poniendo en función la capacidad técnica local en los países.

Finalmente nos sumamos y apoyamos a quienes en sus intervenciones han formulado la demanda de fortalecer las CEPD y la CTPD, como alternativa viable para evitar duplicidad de esfuerzos y contribuir a la integración económica de los pueblos subdesarrollados que constituye una necesidad urgente y una acción inaplazable.

M. MOMBOULI (Congo): Avant de vous livrer l'avis de la délégation congolaise sur le sujet inscrit au point 13 de l'ordre du jour de notre Conférence, à savoir l'examen du programme ordinaire, 1984/85 de notre Organisation, permettez-moi de remercier tout particulièrement M. Shah pour la brillante introduction qu'il en a fait au nom du Secrétariat. Nous le félicitons et à travers lui tous ceux qui ont contribué de près ou de loin à la réalisation des documents dont nous sommes actuellement saisis: nous avons cité les auteurs du document principal, examen du programme ordi-

naire 1984/1985 et ceux qui ont élaboré le rapport de la quarante-neuvième session du Comité de programme et le rapport de la cinquante-sixième session du Comité financier, rapports dont plusieurs sections pertinentes ont été consacrées à l'analyse et à l'examen du programme ordinaire 1984/1985 de la FAO.

Nous remercions également les auteurs du document C 85/LIM/17 portant rapport extrait de la quatre-vingt- huitième session du Conseil. En raison de leur intérêt nous avons attentivement lu et analysé tous ces documents précités.

La délégation congolaise qui s'est profondément penchée sur l'examen du programme ordinaire 1984/85 de la FAO qui constitue le quatrième de sa série, apprécie hautement la structure, le contenu de ce document. Elle se félicite des nouvelles améliorations apportées à la présentation de cet examen par le Secrétariat conformément aux suggestions antérieures du Conseil et de la Conférence.

Notre délégation pour qui l'examen des programmes constitue une phase indispensable du processus de programmation, de suivi, et d'évaluation se réjouit de l'objectivité avec laquelle le Secrétariat a su analyser d'un bout à l'autre du document les succès enregistrés et les faiblesses rencontrées dans la mise en oeuvre du programme ordinaire de l'Organisation.

Nous nous réjouissons que le Secrétariat ait reconnu avec nous, comme il ressort de la première partie du document C 85/8, la nécessité urgente d'accroître la production vivrière et d'améliorer la sécurité alimentaire. Nous notons avec satisfaction l'importance croissante accordée aux activités des bureaux régionaux de la FAO dont nous recommandons le renforcement des moyens d'intervention en vue d'arriver à une efficacité plus accrue.

C'est avec un réel plaisir que nous avons relevé que les activités du programme ordinaire de la FAO ont continué d'intéresser en 1984 et 1985 les petits producteurs, les ruraux pauvres et les femmes rurales. Nous invitons le Secrétariat à poursuivre ses efforts dans cette direction tout en recherchant un plus grand impact socio-économique de ses différents programmes pour les plus pauvres.

Concernant la coopération économique et technique entre pays en développement à laquelle notre délégation attache beaucoup de prix, tout en reconnaissant qu'elle doit s'appuyer sur une identification des domaines spécifiques hautement prioritaires; nous pensons qu'elle mérite un soutien financier substantiel de la communauté internationale pour s'amorcer et la FAO qui en est l'émanation par excellence dans le domaine agricole doit lui confier une partie de ses ressources ordinaires dans le cadre de son programme de coopération technique.

A ce sujet c'est avec enthousiasme que nous appuyons l'idée visant à la création d'une nouvelle catégorie de projets PCT destinés à catalyser la CEPD et la CTPD. De même nous souscrivons à l'idée de voir notre "Conférence adopter au cours de cette session une résolution spécifique sur la CEPD et la CTPD.

Concernant l'évaluation du programme de coopération technique, nous aimerions dire combien nous apprécions l'heureuse initiative prise par le Directeur général de faire évaluer le PCT par une mission extérieure de trois experts de haut niveau.

Nous approuvons l'ensemble des recommandations formulées à ce sujet par cette mission extérieure des experts et nous nous félicitons des mesures déjà prises ou prévues par le Directeur général de sa propre autorité pour y donner suite. Nous approuvons en particulier les recommandations cidessous de la mission d'évaluation:

- l'élévation i du niveau plafond des allocations par projet qui devrait passer de 250 000 dollars E.-U. à 400 000 dollars E.-U. ainsi que la création d'une nouvelle catégorie de projets PCT destinés à catalyser la CEPD et la CTPD,

- l'invite adressée aux gouvernements bénéficiaires de réduire les délais de recrutement des experts et consultants du PCT pour des missions dont la durée ne dépasse pas trois mois,

En terminant, nous aimerions réaffirmer qu'à notre avis, le PCT doit continuer à être financé d'abord par les ressources ordinaires de l'Organisation sans que soient exclues toutes autres sources; nous pensons là aux sources fiduciaires.

Pour notre part, l'évaluation actuelle du PCT en notre possession, qui a été faite par une mission extérieure d'experts indépendants, n'a rien à envier à celle qu'aurait pu effectuer toute autre équipe; nous pensons là au CCI, par exemple. Le PCT doit'continuer à garder son caractère de non programmation, sa souplesse et sa diligence, critères qui répondent pleinement aux situations d'urgence pour lesquelles il a été créé. Nous sommes d'avance persuadés que le Secrétariat continuera à bien gérer ce programme, même si le plafond de ses projets va être élevé de 250 000 dollars E.-U. à 400 000 dollars E.-U.

R. REDL (Austria) (Original language German): First of all, I would like to thank Mr Shah for his clear and precise introduction. There are a few specific comments which I wish to make.

Document C 83/8 gives an excellent introduction to activities during the 1984/85 period. During the Council Session dealing with this period, Austria said that this document presents very good resolutions. We hope "that this kind of report will be presented in the future; we are very happy with Parts I, II and III.

Concerning C 85/LIM/17: I would like to stress once again that Austria supports the increase from $250 000 to $400 000. We also favour the setting up of a new category for projects, which we consider necessary. We have complete trust in the proposals put forward by the Director-General, Dr Saouma, and we hope that these proposals will materialize. We have listened to the views of countries where TCP projects have taken place, and those countries well know which are the measures which are to be taken. The participation of representatives of countries in the execution of projects seems to us a useful thing - but I would like to say that TCP enables FAO to give quick assistance, and we feel that particular importance should be given to Africa within these Technical Cooperation Projects.

We have been following discussions on provision of seeds. We feel that the supply of high quality seeds to farmers is something which is essential to improve agricultural production. The initiatives taken in this context - especially the FAO Training Programmes - should, in the future as in the past, be applied on a strengthened basis. I can assure you that my country will, as in the past, fully support FAO activities in this field in collaboration with developing countries.

In my capacity as a representative of a European country, I would like to make a few comments on the work carried out in European countries. We followed with interest the work of the Commission on Forestry in Europe and of the Commission on Agriculture in Europe, and in particular the work undertaken in favour of developing countries.

Therefore I would like to speak of problems concerning energy training. These activities are supported by us. We shall also speak about the Codex Alimentarius, be it on a regional or a world level. In preparing the future report, perhaps some more specific mention could be made of these activities.

In conclusion, I would like to stress that this document concerning the coming biennium, which will be presented in 1987, is something we will examine in further detail.

M. SAITO (Japan): My delegation is very grateful for the excellent introduction given by Mr. Shah and we would like to commend the Secretariat on the efforts made in preparing this comprehensive document C 85/8. The Regular Programme of FAO activities is widely extended over many fields such as training, technical support on the improvement of research capabilities, publication studies and the gathering and dissemination of various information. We believe that it is of the utmost importance continuously to evaluate the implemention of the programmes in terms of clarity, efficiency and cost effectiveness in order to achieve the maximum results within the limit of available resources. In this connection, we appreciate that FAO has been endeavouring to strengthen its internal monitoring and evaluation system and we are glad to see that steady progress has been made to that effect.

My delegation has stated on various occasions that assistance for the development of human resources, including the development of the capability of the middle rank personnel is essential in aiding the self-help effort for agriculture development in the developing countries.

From this point of view we welcome the training related activities such as training courses, the workshops and study tours which have been promoted in recent years in the Regular Programme of FAO. We also appreciate the fact that FAO has been playing an important role in providing useful information on the food crisis in Africa, this information through FAO's Global Information and Early Warning System has been playing quite an important role in mobilizing assistance from the international community towards those African countries concerned. We hope that activities in this field will be further strengthened in the future.

In this document an in-depth study of FAO's activities in support of ECDC and TCDC has been under­taken, together with some research activities of the FAO Regular Programme. We recognize that the ECDC and TCDC can play one of the most important roles in promoting the self-help effort of the developing countries which is a key factor in encouraging agricultural development in those countries

However, we would like to suggest that in order to make ECDC and TCDC more efficient it is necessary to assess the results obtained through past ECDC and and TCDC activities as indicated in paragraphs 11.09 and 11.120 in this document.

When promoting TCDC, particularly in the field of agricultural development, due attention should be given to the fact that there are many cases where the technical requirements of one country differ from those of other countries because of the difference in natural and social conditions of each country.

We would like to express our appreciation for the reports on the in-depth analysis in the special fields of the FAO Regular Programme found in the document of the Review of the Regular Programme. We would like to request the Secretariat that future documents of the Review of the Regular Programme also include an in-depth assessment similar to this one.

Finally I would like to make some brief comments regarding the "Evaluation of TCP". Since TCP is an unprogrammed budget and since the authority of approval of the TCP projects is delegated to the Director-General, my delegation has stressed on various occasions that the information on the performance of TCP projects should be provided more intensively than any other activities in the Regular Budget. In this connection, my delegation appreciates the evaluation report submitted to the last Council which contains quite a lot of information to help us grasp TCP activities.

With regard to the decisions made by the last Council for raising the ceiling of a single TCP project and the establishment of a new category, my delegation wishes to reiterate that we are not in a position to go along with this because of the following reasons: firstly, that the average cost of TCP projects approved in 1984 was around US$ 70 000 and 90 percent of the 2 450 projects approved to date were less than US$ 150 000, we cannot see any justification in raising the present ceiling.

Secondly, my delegation wishes to draw attention to one of the characteristics of TCP, namely a relatively small scale of assistance. In this connection, I would like to refer to the average cost of UNDP projects which was around US$ 420 000 in 1984. Raising the ceiling to US$ 400 000 will make this TCP's characterstic very ambiguous vis-a-vis the projects financed by other funding sources like UNDP. My delegation prefers to keep the TCP project on a relatively small scale as it is, so that the characteristics of TCP can be maintained.

Thirdly, although my delegation supports TCDC activities, we feel that such activities can be well foreseen and programmed in advance in the Regular Budget or be financed by extra-budgetary resources. Therefore, again we see no reason for incorporating these activities in TCP as long as TCP's character is an unprogrammed budget.

A.F. de SA BARBUDA (Brazil): The Brazilian delegation wishes to compliment Mr Shah on the comprehensive introduction of this item and to congratulate the Secretariat on the very impressive document C 85/8 on the Review of the Regular Programme. The evaluation of the performance of FAO's programmes is an extremely useful tool for member countries. On the other hand, we agree with previous speakers that it is a very complex task and that sometimes results are not susceptible to clear and empyric measurements. But we also agree with the previous speaker that the present Review could have given greater emphasis to the effect of the programmes, to actions taken and to the actual achievements reached. We therefore ask the Secretariat to give greater attention to the approach when preparing that evaluation.

On the other hand, we want to commend the Director-General's initiative for having introduced periodical monitoring of FAO's work and his efforts to improve and adjust the Review to the Member Nations' needs and suggestions.

We also feel that some delegates were more concerned when presenting criticisms on the form and methodology than with the actual performance of the Organization which must always be in our minds. Document C 85/8 gives us an improved format and presentation, a fairly good description of the Regular Programme's implementation, identifying its progress and constraints. It provides as well a very useful coverage of FAO's performance in regard to the key activities of some of its programmes and sub-programmes and addresses itself in an extensive way to issues of particular relevance to developing countries, agricultural research and economic and technical cooperation among developing countries.

We deeply appreciated as well the description of the Regional Office activities in each chapter of Part One of the document, taking into consideration their extremely relevant role, duly highlighted in the document. We join some other delegates who have, during the last Council session, regretted the decline of resources channelled to the Regional Office work. In this respect, we feel that decentralization is essential for the Organization and that the present trends should be reversed.

Part One of the document before us is very comprehensive and the programmes reported have been properly selected. We took note, with deep appreciation, of the impressive number of activities developed under the Agriculture Major Programme, and the main achievements in the sector. In the Latin America and Caribbean region, for instance, we especially appreciated the initiatives relating to soil conservation and irrigation under the Natural Resources Programme, as well as initiatives on crop storage and the establishment of the sub-regional networks under the Food Legumes Cooperative Programme. The Livestock Research and Technological Development Nutrition Programmes seem to have given adequate attention to our region. Deserving special mention is the seminar promoting animal health, the Report on the State of Natural Resources in the Human Environment of Food and Agriculture and the activities of the Latin American Network for Technical Cooperation on Biogas and the Study made on the Food Production Measures for Urban Consumers in Sao Paolo and other cities of the region.

In regard to the future programme we also express our concern in relation to the continued decline of the extra-budgetary resources. At this point we appeal to the international community to give special attention to the implementation of the programmes of action of the World Fisheries Conference which were approved by all Member Nations. We give special attention in this part of the document to the planning management and development of fisheries programmes mainly in relation to the assessment to fisheries resources and also to the inland fisheries and agriculture sub-programme, both of which are extremely relevant to the developing countries.

The major forestry programme has promoted increasing trading activities, seminars and consultations as well as technical support and policy advice to member countries, but we feel much more can be done in this sector and we hope these activities will expand as a follow-up to the Nineteenth World Forestry Congress. We pay special attention to the food sub-programme which has deserved a seperate evaluation in the present Review. The problem of food deficits is a threat that must be greatly addressed by the developing world, with FAO assistance on technical solutions and the afforestation programmes.

We have extensively referred to the Technical Cooperation Programme during this Conference and when we intervened in the previous item of the. agenda relating to the Programme of Work and Budget. Nevertheless we feel at this point we should reiterate some of our views. We cannot accept the views that Technical Cooperation Programme projects should be limited to voluntary contributions, that TCP has already an adequate level of resource to fulfill its tasks or that its mandate should concentrate on emergency actions. We cannot accept these views.

On the other hand the evaluation of the TCP by an independent donor of experts has been praised by most delegates to the Eighty-eighth Session of the Council. On that occasion my delegation reaffirmed its strong support to the TCP and stressed that the positive results of the Programme derived from its flexibility to meet urgent needs and short-term technical assistance.

We wish as well to reiterate our support for the Director-General's proposals which received complete and strong endorsement from most member countries present at the last Council session, which are increase of the limit for the maximum cost of a single TCP project from US$250 000 to US$400 000; and secondly, the establishment of a new category (c) for projects intended to act as a catalyst for inter-country cooperation. Other findings of the evaluation document deserve our support, such as the necessity for an adequate flow of information among the various organizations concerned and the convenience of an adequate and up-to-date followup of TCP projects. On the other hand the Brazilian Government reserves its right to pursue formal clearance in relation to the recruitment of TCP experts and consultants since our procedures have not led to delays at the beginning of projects. As already stated on the previous item we believe TCP's share of the Regular Programme is still too low to meet the needs and demands of the developing countries and should therefore be increased in the future.

With respect to Part II of Chapter 4 of the document we express our deep concern in relation to the decline of UNDP financial share in total Field Programmes which fell from 57 percent in 1981 to 41 percent in 1984. The increase of the Trust Funds should actually represent a total increase of resources and not mere compensation of the financial participation of the UNDP in the Field Programmes.

Finally we want to point out our appreciation to Part Three of this document on agricultural research in ECDC and TCDC which are key elements in technical cooperation. Both chapters give us extensive information on these activities which are present in most of FAO's programmes. A special reference must be made to the important role played in this field by the Technical Cooperation Regional networks responsible, not only by the promotion of seminars, workshops, but also by the relationships among research institutions of the same region. The TCDC chapter is a useful summary of FAO's activities in this field but we agree that we should determine priorities and create initiatives to tackle in this field. In our view the programme of activities has been too much ambitious to be faced with scarce financial resources.

EL PRESIDENTE: Distinguidos colegas y amigos: hemos sobrepasado ligeramente el tiempo a nuestra disposición para la sesión de esta mañana. Vamos ahora a terminar muestra reunión.

The meeting rose at 12.35 hours
La séance est levée à 12 h 35
Se levanta la sesión a los 12.35 horas