II�1�4� UNIDO – UNDP Interagency Cooperation

that communication is not entirely efficient. The goals of the projects, according to the interviewee, are significant, and, in his opinion, there is no decent communication channel with constant reporting and information exchange. The interviewee mentioned that very often, only one side reports on progress, and which of the sides is more proactive usually depends on the project and funding (donors).

This statement highlights an example of there being room for better information and knowledge management by means of Digital Era Governance (DEG) between UNODC and WHO. According to Interviewee 2, a more structured coordination mechanism would benefit cooperation between both organisations. Similarly, additional joint programming would further increase efficiency and avoid duplications and donor fatigue.

From the interviews, it became clear that the current achievements are not directly a result of the SDGs. However, the SDGs have provided an additional mechanism for cooperation and, as such, have made joint programming more likely. Some of the best practices include joint studies and comprehensive programming, including ministries of health and law enforcement.

II�1�4� UNIDO – UNDP Interagency Cooperation

All the interviewees mentioned the importance of constant cooperation in order to achieve beneficial communication and successful ongoing work on joint projects. According to Interviewee 2, sufficient communication and cooperation among the system are vital to identifying common goals and learning from each other, which, in turn, result in creating good practices. At the same time, what became clear from the interviews is that cooperation is instead based on joint projects and not directly on SDGs. It is because the projects include SDGs and are not created per se because of one particular SDG. However, the SDGs are cross-cutting issues in all agencies and have made cooperation stronger.

In this sense, interviewees 4 and 6 state that the works of UNIDO and UNDP tagged to similar targets related to poverty reduction, creating shared prosperity, advancing economic competitiveness, environment, and energy in which

objectives embodied with the SDG 9, which calls to “Build resilient infrastructure, promote inclusive and sustainable industrialisation and foster innovation.” • To this end, in 2018, UNDP and UNIDO strengthened their cooperation

¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯

through an inter-agency agreement that combines the core competencies and specialised expertise of UNIDO with the broad country-level representation and delivery capacity of UNDP. The operational focus of the agreement lies in two components: cost-effectively expanding UNIDO field coverage through the establishment of UNIDO Desks in UNDP Country Offices, and developing joint activities in private sector development. As a result, UNIDO Desks have been set up in 16 countries, and UNDP and UNIDO have developed several joint programmes aimed at strengthening private sector enterprises and institutions in support of national development goals.

However, the positive expectation from the interagency cooperation agreement framework established between UNIDO and UNDP is just one side of the coin, because the cooperation between UNIDO and UNDP turned out to be very difficult due to some reasons that were uncovered in this analysis. Interviewees 4 and 6 mentioned that after the cooperation interagency agreement was signed, a few UNIDO staff members were positioned in the offices at UNDP, which was supposed to increase the level of communication and networking of DEG between the

Agencies. Instead, according to the interviewees, it has caused a lot of internal conflicts and confrontations since both agencies have a different organizational culture in addition to being accountable to different organs: UNDP to the General Assembly (which is financed through voluntary rather than assessed contributions), UNIDO to the ECOSOC (which is funded by both voluntary and assessed contributions). For example, while UNIDO applies more to the use of the tools of Government 2.0, UNDP would follow more traditional methods of knowledge sharing.

Moreover, with regard to coherence, information, and knowledge sharing, Interviewee 5 said that it is only in a few projects that the organizations are working together and that the cooperation observed is rather weak. No constant communication or reporting is taking place, but instead, there is a task that has to be done. According to Interviewee 4, much of the work that the UN does is, in general, very interconnected and complementary:

when the work is coordinated or, better still, if it is jointly carried out, this ensures effectiveness, prevents duplications, and is cost-effective. Consequently, the interviewee believes that the organisations should work on a better communication strategy.

Interviewee 6 mentioned that the variety of organisational structures is one of the main differences, meaning that the communication channels are different in both horizontal as well as vertical organization structures, and, therefore, it is difficult to unify the communication flow. Interviewee 4 said that even though they work with UNDP, he never meets with them, not just because the communication is weak, but also because the locations are different, the headquarters of UNIDO is in Vienna and headquarters of UNDP is in New York. Finally, although the research paper focuses on the cooperation of the agencies within the framework of the SDGs, interviewee 4 pointed out that it is difficult to measure the cooperation in terms of the SDGs because the projects have had a longer lifespan than simply since the time the SDGs were adopted until now.

II�1�5� Conclusion

After the semi-structured interviews with UN experts, the study has revealed that there is significant coherence in the UNODC and WHO joint Programme on Drug Dependence Treatment as well as in the activities of UNIDO and UNDP.

However, it also discovered that there is no decent communication

channel based on constant reporting and information exchange in the observed partnerships; or if there is reporting, very often only one side reports on progress. It appears that knowledge management and mainstreaming is performed well by UNDP through monitoring and reporting by providing support to governments to integrate SDGs. The participation of non-members is secured in UNDP by the executive board and by the participation of other organisations in UNODC (UN Women) and by an access of UNODC to the ministries. The performance of the UN is also ensured through programme harmonisation (MoU of UNODC and WHO from 2017). The mainstreaming of the development activities and paradigm is also seen in the efficient reorganisation of offices (UNDP).

However, mainstreaming could still be improved so as to achieve an efficient, more structured coordination mechanism between the agencies.

On the other hand, the study has discovered that the SDGs have made the projects more relevant and measurable, and have given both organisations another instrument for cooperation to strengthen existing efforts and thereby foster information and knowledge management and

improve coherence as a whole.

SDGs were also found to be a motive to strengthen development cooperation across the whole UN System and UN Agencies. However, the projects in question have a longer lifespan than the SDGs, and some preconditions were secured shortly before the adoption of the Agenda 2030, mainly thanks to the resolutions of the UN General Assembly on UN reform and global governance. In other words, some projects started before the adoption of SDGs and will end after the SDG period. Consequently, the author strongly recommends further research should be done after the ongoing projects have ended. Then the real impact of the SDGs may be understood more precisely.

The research also introduces DEG into the UN system. It seems that the solutions of DEG play an essential role in the newly formed social and technological environment. Even though some features of DEG (restructuring, sustainability, joined-up governance, networking, and information and knowledge management) have already been applied in observed partnerships of UN Agencies, as revealed by interviews, there are still some other

affordances of DEG which could usefully increase the efficiency and effectiveness of service delivery.

The author strongly recommends rethinking the interagency cooperation and horizontal governance based on the

“best mixture”, in the meantime adopting a new way of networking that includes all the relevant local institutions and individuals on a single electronic platform (so that all of the actors - local, regional and global - could share their knowledge quickly and easily).

This would create more durable and more professional knowledge management system, one which would cross the boundaries of interagency cooperation (so as to ensure broader participation of epistemic communities and synchronised access to information from more extensively created data sets). The author recommends firstly prioritising horizontal governance based on shared responsibility and coordination, and secondly encouraging MoUs and interagency agreements, since MoUs have played an essential role in improving coordination and decreasing duplicated work among agencies.

II�1�6� References

alonso, j. a. – glennie, j. 2015: What is development cooperation? 2016 Development Cooperation Forum Policy Briefs. ECOSOC, 2015, (1).

BaRKin, j. 2015: International organization: theories and institutions.

Springer.

BaRZelay, m. 2001: The new public management: Improving research and policy dialogue (Vol. 3). Univ of California Press.

B^aueR, s. – B^ieRmann, F. 2004: Partners or Competitors? Policy Integration for Sustainable Development between United Nations Agencies.

Change.

BieRmann, F. – pattBeRg, p. – asselt van, h. 2009: The Fragmentation of Global Governance Architectures: A Framework for Analysis.

Global Environmental Politics, 9(4).

chRistensen, t. – lægReid, p. – Roness, p. g. – RøviK, K. a. 2007:

Organization theory and the public sector: Instrument, culture and myth. Routledge.

c^laRKe, p. 2004: Building a global partnership for development? – In:

B^lacK, R. – W^hite, h. (eds.): Targeting development: critical perspectives on the Millennium Development Goals. – Basingstoke:

Routledge.

dunleavy, p. – maRgetts, h. – tinKleR, j. – BastoW, s. 2006: Digital era governance: IT corporations, the state, and e-government. Oxford University Press.

FlicK, u. 2018: Designing qualitative research. London: Sage.

g^Reig, a. – h^ulme, d. – t^uRneR, m. 2007: Challenging Global Inequality:

Development Theory and Practice in the 21st Century. Basingstoke:

Palgrave Macmillan.

h^ill, c. j. – l^ynn, l. e. 2004: Is hierarchical governance in decline?

Evidence from empirical research. – Journal of public administration research and theory 15. (2.)

hudson, d. 2015: Global finance and development. Abingdon: Routledge.

h^untington, s. p. 1973: Transnational organizations in world politics.

World Politics, 25(3).

ingRaham, p. W. – joyce, ph. g. – donahue, a. K. 2003: Government performance: Why management matters. Taylor & Francis

joRdan, R. s. 2001: International Organizations: A Comparative Approach

to the Management of Cooperation. Westport, Preager Publishers.

K^aRvalics, l. Z. 2008: Towards Governing in the Digital Age.

K^aul, i. 2013a: Financing progress in the post-2015 era : why we need a Monterrey plus conference.

K^aul, i. 2013b: Global public goods: a concept for framing the post-2015 agenda?, Bonn: DIE (Discussion Paper 2/2013)

Keohane, R. 2011: Neoliberal institutionalism. Security Studies: A Reader.

K^lingeBiel, s. 1998: United Nations Development Cooperation: Challenges and reforms at the end of the 1990s. German development institute.

Deutsches institut für entwicklungspolitik, 1998, (2), 4. ISSN 1434-8934.

K^RasneR, s. d. 1982: Structural causes and regime consequences:

regimes as intervening variables. International Organization.

Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1982, 36(2), 21. ISSN 0020-8183/82/020/185-21.

KRippendoRFF, K. 2019: Content Analysis. London: Sage.

l^e B^lanc, d. 2014: Issue 4: Towards integration at last? The Sustainable Development Goals as a network of targets. Division for Sustainable Development, UNDESA: Rio+20 working papers. New York City:

United Nations, 2014.

maRtin, l. l. – simmons, B. a. 1998: Theories and Empirical Studies of International Institutions, International Organization, Autumn.

(Martin, L. L. 1998).

mitchell, R. B. – KeilBach, p. m. 2001: Situation structure and institutional design: reciprocity, coercion, and exchange. International Organisation, 55(4).

m^oRan, t. h. 2009: The United Nations and transnational corporations: a review and a perspective. Transnational Corporations, 18(2).

najam, a. – papa, m. – taiyaB, n. 2007: International Institute for Sustainable Development; c^leveland, c. j. (Topic Editor). 2007.

„Global Environmental Governance: Elements of a Reform Agenda.”

In: Encyclopedia of Earth. Eds. c^leveland, c. j. (Washington, D.C.:

Environmental Information Coalition, National Council for Science and the Environment).

p^eaRson, l. B. 1969: Partners in development: report of the Commission on International Development. London: Pall Mall Press.

p^ease, K.-K. s. 2008: International Organizations: Perspectives on Governance in the Twenty-First Century, Pearson Prentice Hall.

pollitt, c. – BoucKaeRt, g. 2004: Public management reform: A comparative analysis. Oxford University Press, USA.

s^ilva, m. l. 2003: The Human Rights Based Approach to Development Cooperation towards a Common Understanding among UN Agencies.

tight, m. 2017: Understanding case study research: small-scale research with meaning. Sage.

W^alKeR, R. s. 2006: The Super Solution to Government Dysfunction The Ripon Forum, August/Sept.

y^oung, c. – g^hoshal, s. 2016: Organization theory and the multinational corporation. Springer

Z^üRn, m. – F^aude, B. 2013: On fragmentation, differentiation, and coordination. Global Environmental Politics, 13(3).

UN documents:

MOU : agreements & memorandum of understanding mutually entered into between UNODC and WHO, (2017).

Strengthened Cooperation between United Nations, Regional Organizations Vital to International Peace, Security, Speakers Stress at General Assembly Debate. Sixty-ninth General Assembly, Thematic Debate, AM & PM Meetings. United Nations General Assembly, 2015.

United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). (2003) Human Development Report 2003: Millennium Development Goals: A Compact among Nations to End Poverty. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

United Nations, 2014, Prototype Global Sustainable Development Report, Division for Sustainable Development, New York.

UNODC, Guidance Note – The SDGs, Human Rights, Gender, and Sustainable Development in the 2030 Agenda, 2018.

Resolutions of the United Nations:

Delivering as one. Report of the High-level Panel on United Nations System-wide Coherence in the areas of development, humanitarian assistance and the environment: A/61/583. General Assembly.

United Nations, 2006.

Mainstreaming of the three dimensions of sustainable development

throughout the United Nations: A/70/75–E/2015/55. United Nations:

General Assembly Economic and Social Council. 2015.

Review of environmental governance within the United Nations system:

A/69/763. General Assembly. United Nations, 2015.

Review of environmental governance within the United Nations system:

A/69/763. General Assembly. United Nations, 2015.

Review of environmental governance within the United Nations system:

A/69/763. General Assembly. United Nations, 2015.

Triennial policy review of operational activities for development of the United Nations system: A/RES/50/120. General Assembly. United Nations, 1996.

Other sources from the internet:

Funds, Programmes, Specialized Agencies and Others. United Nations [online]. [cit. 2018-10-28]. Accessed from: http://www.un.org/en/

sections/about-un/funds-programmes-specialized-agencies-and-others/

The United Nations System. United Nations [online]. [cit. 2018-10-28].

Accessed from: http://www.un.org/en/aboutun/structure/pdfs/UN_

System_Chart_30June2015.pdf

United Nations Development Programme, Goal 17 Targets, http://www.

undp.org/content/undp/en/home/sustainable-development-goals/

goal-17-partnerships-for-the-goals/t argets/ ,10.07.2018.

HLP (High-Level Panel of Eminent Persons on the Post-2015 Development Agenda) (2013): A new global partnership: eradicate poverty and transform economies through sustainable development (2013) : the report of the high-level panel of eminent persons on the post-2015 development agenda, New York: United Nations; online: http://

www.post2015hlp.org/the-report/

Development Progress Blog; online: http://www.developmentprogress.

org/blog/2013/11/26/financingprogress-post-2015-era-why-we-need-monterrey-plus-conference

UN News, Countries back ‘ambitious and comprehensive’ reform of UN development system, accessed from: https://news.un.org/en/

story/2018/05/1011111, 10.07.2018.

The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC). UNOV [online]. [cit. 2018-10-30]. Acceessed from: https://www.unov.org/

unov/en/unodc.html

About WHO. World Health Organization [online]. [cit. 2018-10-30].

Accessed from: http://www.who.int/about/structure/en/

Structure of UNIDO. UNIDO [online]. [cit. 2018-10-30]. Accessed from:

https://www.unido.org/who-we-are/structure

UNDP cuts HQ staff, creates new lower-level jobs. DEVEX [online]. [cit.

2018-10-30]. Accessed from: https://www.devex.com/news/undp-cuts-hq-staff-creates-new-lower-level-jobs-83612

Historic New Sustainable Development Agenda Unanimously Adopted by 193 UN Members. Sustainable Development Platform [online].

United Nations [cit. 2018-08-21]: https://sustainabledevelopment.

un.org/content/documents/8371Sustainable%20Development%20 Summit_final.pdf

The role of the Secretary-General [online]. United Nations [cit. 2018-08-21]. Accessed from: https://www.un.org/sg/en/content/role-secretary-general

United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO). UNDP [online]. [cit. 2018-12-16]. Accessed from: http://www.undp.org/

content/unct/mongolia/en/home/agencies/united-nations-industrial-development-organization--unido-.html

Rules of procedures of the general conference. UNIDO [online]. 1985 [cit.

2018-12-16]. Accessed from: https://www.unido.org/sites/default/

files/2009-11/Rules%20GC-E_0.pdf

Sustainable development goals. UNDP [online]. 2018 [cit. 2018-12-16].

Accessed from: http://www.jposc.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/

sustainable-development-goals.html

Rules of Procedure of the Executive Board of the United Nations Development Programme, of the United Nations Population Fund and of the United Nations. UNDP [online]. 2011 [cit. 2018-12-16].

Accessed from: http://web.undp.org/execbrd/pdf/9719131e.pdf Partnerships with international development organizations. UNIDO

[online]. 2018 [cit. 2018-12-16]. Accessed from: https://www.

unido.org/our-focus/cross-cutting-services/partnerships-prosperity/

partnerships-international-development-organizations

UNODC-WHO Joint Programme on drug dependence treatment and care. UNODC [online]. 2009 [cit. 2018-10-01]. Accessed from:

https://www.unodc.org/documents/drug-treatment/UNODC-WHO-brochure.pdf

II.2. on the effectiveness of the „greening”

component of the Eu’s Common

In document Contemporary global challenges in geopolitics, security policy and world economy (Pldal 63-72)