United Nations Development Programme and System (UNDP)

Browne, Stephen

doi:10.4324/9780203806852

Cited by 13 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, the largest ever bilateral contribution to the UN development system was the $700 million ‘MDG Achievement Fund’ provided by the Spanish government in 2006. But it could only be spent in the 59 countries of specific interest to the donor (Browne , Browne and Weiss ). These supply distortions are typical of many multilateral organizations.…”

Section: Programme Orientationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Vertical Funds: New Forms of Multilateralism

Browne

2017

Global Policy

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The United Nations and other multilateral organizations have always been prominent in the health field. UN agencies like the World Health Organization (WHO), however, have come increasingly under the influence of major individual donors which provide earmarked funding. Since 2000, two major vertical funds in the health field -the Global Fund and the GAVI Allianceprovide new models of multilateralism and their funding patterns, together with those of WHO, are examined in some detail. We review the extent to which the two new funds and WHO conform to traditional definitions of multilateralism by reference to several test areas: degrees of concentration of funding sources; the influence of individual funders; sustainability; and transparency. We also draw lessons from the analysis for the UN development organizations. Policy Implications• Patterns of funding in international organizations are a principal determinant of multilateralism.• The earmarking of donor funding in international organizations undermines multilateral principles.• New funding mechanisms in the health field compete with the operational roles of UN organisations, but can provide lessons for the UN's operational role.

show abstract

Section: Programme Orientationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Vertical Funds: New Forms of Multilateralism

Browne

2017

Global Policy

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…That said, while all heads have administrative duties, some officeholders make it a higher priority than others. Indeed, a head's management skills are a central concern in an IO such as UNDP where Browne () observes that management experience is critical to the officeholder's selection.…”

Section: The Executive Head: Institutional Autonomy and Authoritymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As Burns (:153) puts it, a vision can “supply powerful motivation for transforming leadership and followership, fusing them into a dynamic force in pursuit of change.” Conversely, the absence of a vision may prevent potential supporters from mobilizing because the organization seems “readily influenced by short‐run opportunistic trends” and not committed to the proposed reforms (Selznick :25). Finally, the vision mobilizes internal support by differentiating the organization from competitors and fostering corporate cohesion in decentralized organizations with distant field offices (Browne :84).…”

Section: Io Executive Leadership and Organizational Adaptationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Executive Leadership in the Study of International Organization: A Framework for Analysis

Schroeder¹

2014

Int Stud Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

What can the scholarship on global international organizations (IOs) tell us about the contributions of the executive head (EH) to organizational change? The empirics of IO studies frequently credit EHs with important changes, but these studies seldom consider EHs separate from the rest of the bureaucracy and thus make few theoretical claims about them. Consequently, it is difficult to assess whether this credit is warranted and why some heads are given more credit than others. This article argues that heads, such as World Bank President Robert McNamara and United Nations Secretary‐General Dag Hammarskjold, were influential because they did not just channel state and bureaucratic demands but made political choices that contributed to organizational adaptation. To make this argument, it draws on sociological institutionalist and constructivist scholarship on IO and leadership to develop an analytical framework where IO adaptation is linked to the EH's performance of two tasks commonly associated with executive leadership: defining a strategic plan and mobilizing support to implement that plan. However, it adds that when environmental constraints are severe, the conventional “follower‐oriented” mobilization strategies found in leadership studies are less viable. Instead, EHs can adopt an “opposition‐oriented” one intended to prevent the opposition from mobilizing while incrementally implementing key reforms.

show abstract

“…A recent independent survey conducted by the Funds Project has received over 3,000 responses from every part of the globe and from the private sector, NGOs, academia and governments (Browne, 2011;The Funds Project, 2010). A recent independent survey conducted by the Funds Project has received over 3,000 responses from every part of the globe and from the private sector, NGOs, academia and governments (Browne, 2011;The Funds Project, 2010).…”

Section: Turf Battles and Decentralizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Opinion among development specialists reflects the desperate need for change although typically leaving the system alone is supposedly the only option because support is lacking for any real shake-up. A recent independent survey conducted by the Funds Project has received over 3,000 responses from every part of the globe and from the private sector, NGOs, academia and governments (Browne, 2011;The Funds Project, 2010). Respondents, 90 per cent located in the global South, agreed that the UN's neutrality and objectivity were strong suits but decentralization was the defining weakness.…”

Section: Turf Battles and Decentralizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fundamental UN Reform: A Non-starter or Not?

Weiss

2011

Global Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The major issues confronting world politics in the 21st century – climate change, proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, pandemics, terrorism and economic meltdowns, among others – require that the United Nations reinvent itself as the multilateral forum for tackling the pressing challenges of today. The possibilities for significant reform are remote but not impossible. This article addresses four major roadblocks: sacrosanct state sovereignty; the emphasis on process over results in organizational culture; perennial and theatrical North–South confrontations; and the twin problems of turf battles and decentralization. At the same time, individuals and states can be as strong as the institutions they create. There are plenty of things wrong with the United Nations, but many can be fixed.

show abstract

United Nations Development Programme and System (UNDP)

Cited by 13 publications

References 0 publications

Vertical Funds: New Forms of Multilateralism

Vertical Funds: New Forms of Multilateralism

Executive Leadership in the Study of International Organization: A Framework for Analysis

Fundamental UN Reform: A Non-starter or Not?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About