« ÎnapoiContinuați »
and due to time constraints, consideration of the issue was postponed until the 47th General Assembly.
Congress demonstrated concern that too few Americans were employed by the United Nations and other international organizations by passing legislation in September requiring the Department of State to make an annual report on UN agencies' "good faith” efforts to achieve equitable U.S. representation. The first report is to be issued in April 1992. Congress also urged the Department of State to conduct a review of the recruitment systems of those agencies in which Americans are under-represented to determine if there are systemic barriers or biases affecting the recruitment of Americans.
Table 1 below illustrates American representation in the United Nations and other agencies which have geographic distribution formulas; Table 2 shows the total staffing of Americans in the United Nations, specialized agencies and the IAEA.
Americans in UN Agencies
(As of 12/31/91)
767 24 3.1 303 IFAD
250 21 8.4 103 ILO 2,053 87 4.2 1,283 IMO
267 5 1.9 101 ITU
735 23 3.1 280 UNIDO 1,350 81 6.0 461 UPU 144 3 2.1
59 WHO 4,516 252
5.6 1,514 IARC 178 3 1.7 55 WIPO 402 11 2.7 126 WMO
8.4 6.3 9.7
1.1 7.5 1.6 1.2
464 147 770 166 455 889
0.0 2.2 1.9 6.0
292 14 4.8 135 IAEA 1,838 174 9.5 723
and the IAEA
Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO)
The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) was founded in 1945, and a formal agreement of relationship with the United Nations entered into force December 1946. FAO headquarters is in Rome.
One of the largest UN specialized agencies, FAO is the lead international organization in agriculture, fisheries and forestry. FAO's agriculture program seeks to bring about sustained global improvement in nutrition levels, food security and rural incomes, especially for the disadvantaged, through increasing rural productivity. Its fisheries program promotes improved management and utilization of the world's fishery resources, particularly by helping developing countries increase their capacity to manage marine and inland fisheries. The forestry program assists members to find a balance among environmental concerns, growing demands for forest goods and services, and increasing pressures of agriculture on forest land.
The highest policy-making body is the Conference, composed of all 161 members, which meets biennially to approve the broad program and policy of the FAO and adopt the program of work and budget. Reelected by the Conference in 1987, the Director General, Edouard Saouma (Lebanon), completes his third 6-year term of office in November 1993. The Conference also elects a Council, composed of 49 members, which serves as the FAO governing body between sessions of the Conference. FAO Funding
FAO's total operating funds are derived from its regular program, funded through assessed contributions of its members, and from extra-budgetary activities carried out on behalf of the UN Development Program (UNDP), other international development organizations and bilateral trust funds. Trust funds are voluntary contributions provided primarily by donor governments to carry out specific programs. Funding for these extrabudgetary activities includes both project costs as well as administrative and operational support costs.
FAO's regular program of work operates on a 2-year budget cycle and is approved during the biennial Conference session. The regular program is supported by assessed contributions of member states based on a scale derived from the UN scale of assessments. The United States is assessed at a rate of 25 percent, which amounted to $78,250,000 for calendar year 1991 (fiscal year 1992). An $8,300,000 credit for the Tax Equalization Fund reduced the calendar year 1991 assessment to $69,950,000.
In recognition of progress made on program budget reform at its November Conference, which adopted FAO's first zero real growth budget, the United States paid the FAO $69,697,000 for calendar year 1991 (fiscal year 1992). A $253,000 difference between the U.S. assessment and the U.S. payment is the result of legislative and administrative policy considerations, i.e., the estimated U.S. share of interest costs resulting from external borrowing in calendar year 1990 ($34,000) and calendar year 1991 ($166,000) and a tax equalization fund adjustment of $53,000. In October the United States made an initial arrears payment of $13,716,000, which was used to restore FAO's working capital fund.
Delayed payments of assessed contributions for calendar year 1991 from 91 member states, totaling approximately $59 million as of November, and $138 million in arrearages from 66 member states as of that same date, led the FAO to make program cuts and borrow both internally and externally to meet the requirements of its program of work. The United States and a majority of other major donors favored reduced spending, rather than external borrowing, to adapt to the continuing resource constraints. The United States opposed external borrowing, which undercuts the budgetary discipline that the United States advocates throughout the UN system. Moreover, the United States is prohibited by law from paying any share of interest expenses on loans incurred by international organizations through external borrowing.
The FAO has lagged behind other UN organizations in implementing reforms sought by the United States and other major donors, which would allow them an influence on program and budget issues commensurate with their level of contributions. The budget for the 1990–1991 biennium, for example, failed to win the support of members expected to provide over one-half of the resources required. Progress toward the goal of consensus decision-making on budgetary matters was evident in 1991, however, when the FAQ Conference unanimously approved a budget for 1992–1993 which reflected U.S. budgetary policy for UN assessed agencies, specifically, zero real growth and maximum absorption of nondiscretionary cost increases.
In addition to consensus decision-making on budgetary matters required by the Solomon-Kassebaum amendment, the United States has urged the FAO to implement organizational and management recommendations contained in reviews of the FAO by two groups of experts in 1989, the subsequent resolution 10/89 on the Review of Certain Aspects of FAO's Goals and Operations adopted by consensus at the FAO Conference in 1989, and the report of the FAO's external auditor covering the 1988–1989 financial period. These recommendations called for a realignment of the balance among FAO's roles as implementor of development activities; assembler, processor and disseminator of agricultural information; and promoter of national and international action on agricultural issues.
Dialogue among OECD, Eastern European and G-77 members on FAO reform, begun in 1990, was continued on September 30-October 1, during an informal meeting hosted by Switzerland.
Twenty-seven countries were represented at these discussions, focused on ways of regaining membership control. Governance changes were proposed to streamline meetings and improve the decision-making processes of FAO governing bodies and technical committees. Among these proposals was use of a rapporteur, rather than the customary drafting committee, to prepare the reports of FAO governing bodies and technical committees. The United States and other member states supported continuation of this change.
The 99th session of the FAO Council met in Rome June 10-21. Major issues addressed included:
Proposed Budget for 1992–1993. Discussion of the proposed Program of Work and Budget for the 1992-1993 biennium prompted calls for containment of cost increases from developed and developing countries interested in keeping assessments at the lowest possible level. After failing to garner support for stronger language on containment of cost increases, the United States reserved its position in the report of the Council.