Post-2015 Side Event on

'Rethinking Technology in the Post-2015 Development Agenda: Technology Assessment, Facilitation Mechanism and Non-Financial Means of Implementation'

Organized by UNCTAD, UN-NGLS, Women's Major Group, Global Forest Coalition, Tebtebba Foundation and ETC Group

April 22, 2015

New York

Intervention by Mr. Amit Narang, Counsellor, Permanent Mission of India to the UN as a panelist

Let me start by thanking the organizers for this opportunity and the civil society colleagues who have been so active and supportive on the issue of technology. I am also happy to follow the panelists Amb. Patriota of Brazil and Amb. Brochenin of France.

The issue of a technology facilitation mechanism (TFM) has been a subject of intense debate since Rio+20, a debate that has been characterized by much mistrust, much of it unwarranted. This is notwithstanding the fact that there is a very broad agreement among all those involved that technology is central as a solution to the common problems that we confront.

In the UN these days, when we speak of the TFM, we are invariably asked 'What is it that you want?' I even heard from someone recently that the question of a TFM is a 'BRICS demarche'!

Now, I am not a witch doctor, and I practice Yoga, not voodoo, so I have no cure for such imagined ghosts!

But clearly, TFM is not the call of any single delegation or grouping. It is not about what we want. It is all about what we all want. It is about crafting a collaborative solution to our common agenda, for problems that we are facing collectively as a global community.

This morning in the session on Post-2015 Development Agenda, while discussing this issue, my Permanent Representative felt compelled to recall the long winding background and process of discussion that has lasted well over two years. This was to underscore that this is not a discussion that we are starting from scratch. It is a process which has already seen a rich debate involving all stakeholders - member states, UN agencies, civil society and the private sector.

We expect the proposed TFM to also be such an inclusive forum - a platform that taps into the strengths and expertise of all stakeholders.

Among the issues that the mechanism could help us address meaningfully, the foremost is fragmentation of efforts on international technology cooperation. Much has been made of existing initiatives in several areas, but these tend to sector-specific and work within silos. The challenge before us is to look at issues holistically from the overall perspective of sustainable development.

As we have said before, the mechanism could inter alia undertake comprehensive needs assessment on technology in the context of sustainable development, trials with and comparisons between different technologies, help in adaptation of technology to local conditions, assist in coordinating actions of technology actors, financial sector and policy-level actors, promote cross sectoral and at-scale learning, and at-scale capacity building especially for policy design, financial engineering and business model implementation.

One of the policy orthodoxies that we encounter in this debate is the belief that when it comes to technology, we should 'leave it to the private sector'. However, it is important to realize, and as several case studies have shown, that by itself, research and development in the private sector is not sufficiently oriented towards problems that are predominantly faced by the poor. Similarly, purely market-based solutions are unlikely to be able to respond to the urgency of the sustainable development challenge that we face. Yes, by and by and in due course solutions will probably be found for many of the problems, but that does not correspond to the sense of urgency that characterizes our engagement on the sustainable development agenda.

Therefore, there remains considerable importance of public sector funding in areas not traditionally found attractive by the private sector and to de-risk investments in sustainable development projects. There is similarly the important need of leveraging the skills and resources of the private sector through supportive funding, match-making and platforms. It cannot be exclusively about the private sector. It is equally about public sector, as it about public-private, private-public, public-public and even private-private collaboration.

The discourse on IPRs has been similarly flawed.

A very useful example of collaboration that transcends both these orthodoxies is the manner in which solution was found for the development of a vaccine for meningitis in Africa. The Gates Foundation in a recent paper* has shown how the Meningitis Vaccine Project (MVP), a partnership between the World Health Organization (WHO) and the NGO PATH, with the financial support of the Foundation managed to create a solution by facilitating cooperation between different stakeholders.

In this case, the technology to produce these vaccines was available, and the required intellectual property was in the public domain. But multinational companies were not interested in making a low-cost vaccine tailored to the needs of the meningitis belt in Africa because it was not considered profitable.

The Foundation was able to partner with the Serum Institute of India (SII) and result was a low cost vaccine, which has now been administered to over 217 million people in the meningitis belt, leading to a striking reduction in meningitis epidemics in the region.

This is but one striking example of both the limitations of an approach of leaving everything to the private sector as well as the importance of facilitating cooperative solutions by bringing different actors together. The kind of facilitation provided in this case by the Gates Foundation is something we would expect the proposed Mechanism at the UN to do.

Finally, technology cooperation is not just about North-South Cooperation, it is also about South-South and potentially even South-North cooperation. There would be, for example, merit is also looking at more holistically at low-cost innovations happening in the developing countries. There is a lot of potential in the uptake of these low-cost innovations, which can be relevant across geographies and economies, but by themselves or purely through private sector action they will not attain the desired scale. The TFM could play an important role in identifying, showcasing and scaling up such innovations for global benefit.

To conclude, I found the title of this event very appropriate. We need to re-think technology in a way that when one thinks of technology the idea that should come to mind is 'collaboration'.

Thank you.

*The Role of Innovation and Diffusion of New Tools and Technologies for the Post-2015 Sustainable Development Agenda: Reflections from the Grantmaking of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation By Annabelle Burgett and Carol Welch

*****