Philanthropic foundations such as the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and the United Nations Foundation have seconded their staffers to top management positions at the World Health Organization.

A UN Foundation staffer was placed in the office of the Director-General Dr. Margaret Chan as senior strategist (D1 level) for a 24-month contract this year.

One Gates Foundation staffer is seconded at P5 level as manager of program operations and cluster management at the Polio and Emergencies Cluster.

Next year marks the beginning of a second major period of expenditure contraction globally. Not only in Europe, but mostly in developing countries, according to IMF fiscal projections.

Details and results or our review are in a policy brief “The Forthcoming Adjustment Shock” and a full working paper “The Decade of Adjustment: A Review of Austerity Trends 2010-2020 in 187 Countries.”

New study, released today by Global Policy Forum, examines the role and impact of philanthropic foundations in development. It addresses the impacts and side effects of philanthropic engagement by taking a closer look at the priorities and operations of two of the most prominent foundations, the Rockefeller Foundation and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, in two crucial sectors, health and agriculture. So far, there has been a fairly willing belief among governments and international organizations in the positive role of philanthropy in global development. But in light of experiences in the areas of health, food, nutrition and agriculture, which are discussed in this working paper, a thorough assessment of the impacts and side effects of philanthropic engagement is necessary. The important role being allocated to the philanthropic sector in the 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda makes the discussion of its role a matter of urgency.

As part of its mandate to develop an indicator framework by which to monitor the goals and targets of the post-2015 development agenda, the Inter-agency and Expert Group on SDGs (IAEG-SDGs) held its second meeting in Bangkok, 26-28 October 2015. The objective was to seek agreement on the proposed indicators for each target—keeping in mind that indicators alone can never be sufficient to fully measure progress on the goals. More specifically, it was to move provisional indicators marked yellow—needing further agreement—to either green—agreed by all parties—or grey—no agreement possible. As a result, there are now 159 green indicators (including 52 moved from yellow and 9 new ones), and 62 greys (including 28 moved from yellow plus 5 new ones).

The investor-state dispute settlement mechanisms are incompatible with the Charter of the United Nations and Human Rights, concluded the prominent Cuban-American lawyer Alfred-Maurice de Zayas, in his report to the General Assembly of the UN as Independent Expert on the Promotion of a Democratic and Equitable International Order, appointed by the Human Rights Council.

This system, argues the expert, “should be abolished” because it is a “fundamentally flawed system having adverse human rights impacts and because its operation has upset the international order by debilitating States, encroaching on their regulatory space and aggravating inequality and inequity in the world.”