Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T16:47:51.075Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The UN Regional Economic Commissions and Integration in the Underdeveloped Regions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 May 2009

Robert W. Gregg
Robert W. Gregg
Affiliation:
Robert W. Gregg, is Associate Professor of Political Science at the Maxwell School, Syracuse University, and Associate Director of the Maxwell International Relations Program. This article is based in part on material gathered during 1964 and 1965 in the course of visits to the UN regional economic commission offices as well as to UN Headquarters. The research was supported by a grant from the Maxwell International Relations Program.
Get access

Extract

It is the purpose of this article to examine the role which the three regional economic commissions of the United Nations serving the developing world play, whether consciously or unconsciously, in promoting integration within the regions which they serve. The emphasis is upon economic integration, not because it is more important than political union or federation or because it is a necessary antecedent to political integration. No attempt is made here to establish the thesis that the relationship between economic and political integration is that of a continuum. Any contribution which the UN regional economic commissions make to regional or sub-regional integration will almost certainly be in the economic area, given their terms of reference, the nature of their work programs, and the environmental conditions in which they operate. Economic integration resulting from ideas and initiatives originating in the regional commissions may contribute to the evolution of political union.

Type
Articles
Information
International Organization , Volume 20 , Issue 2 , Spring 1966 , pp. 208 - 232
Copyright
Copyright © The IO Foundation 1966

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 The Economic Commission for Latin America (ECLA), the Economic Commission for Asia and the Far East (ECAFE), and the Economic Commission for Africa (ECA).

2 For a recent discussion of this relationship see Haas, Ernst B. and Schmitter, Philippe C., “Economics and Differential Patterns of Political Integration: Projections About Unity in Latin America,” International Organization, Autumn 1964 (Vol. 18, No. 4), pp. 705–737CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

3 This definition is adapted from that employed by Haas, which focuses on political integration. See, for example, Haas, Ernst B., “International Integration: The European and the Universal Process,” International Organization, Summer 1961 (Vol. 15, No. 3), pp. 366–367CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See also the related definition, also derived from Haas, employed by Jean Siotis: “Integration occurs when consensus formation tends to become the dominant characteristic of relations among actors in a system”. (Siotis, Jean, “The Secretariat of the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe and European Economic Integration: The First Ten Years,” International Organization, Spring 1965 [Vol. 19, No. 2], p. 178CrossRefGoogle Scholar.)

4 The question is probed in a recent book by Macdonald, Robert W., The League of Arab States (Princeton, N.J: Princeton University Press, 1965), Chapter 1CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

5 For a description of debates and bargaining which led to the creation of ECE, ECAFE, and ECLA, see Wightman, David, Toward Economic Cooperation in Asia: The United Nations Economic Commission for Asia and the Far East (New Haven, Conn: Yale University Press, 1963), Chapter 2Google Scholar.

6 ECE was established under ECOSOC Resolution 36 (IV) of March 28, 1947; ECAFE under ECOSOC Resolution 37 (IV) of March 28, 1947; and ECLA under ECOSOC Resolution 106 (VI) of February 25, 1948.

7 The Economic Commission for Africa was established under ECOSOC Resolution 671 A and B (XXV) of April 29, 1958. Establishment of a commission for the Middle East has been considered and would almost certainly have been accomplished were it not for the enduring schism between the Arab states and Israel.

8 For a discussion of these historic phases see Haas, Ernst B., “Dynamic Environment and Static System: Revolutionary Regimes in the United Nations,” in Morton, Kaplan (ed.)., The Revolution in World Politics (New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1962), pp. 267–309Google Scholar.

9 Their terms of reference may be found in annexes to the annual reports of the commissions to ECOSOC. For recently amended versions, see Economic and Social Council Official Records (37th session), Supplement No. 2, Annex III (ECAFE); Supplement No. 4, Annex III (ECLA); Supplement No. 7, Annex III (ECE); and Supplement No.10, Annex III (ECA).

10 UN Document E/CN.12/572, March 5, 1961, pp. 1–2.

11 One UN official, a long-time observer of the commissions, attributes it to the inclusive character of their membership within their respective regions; their tendency to act by agreement rather than by voting; a self-imposed discipline which induces them to behave in accordance with Charter principles and Assembly and ECOSOC resolutions; and a marked degree of regional consciousness and solidarity. See Malinowski, W. R., “Centralization and Decentralization in the United Nations Economic and Social Activities,” International Organization, Summer 1962 (Vol. 16, No.3), pp. 523–524CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

12 The term is Etzioni's, Amitai. See his article “On Self-Encapsulating Conflicts,” Journal of Conflict Resolution, September 1964 (Vol. 8, No. 3), pp. 242–255CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

13 For a more detailed discussion of decentralization, see the author's chapter “Program Decentralization and the Regional Economic Commissions” in a forthcoming book under the general editorship of General J. Mangone to be published in 1966 by Columbia University Press.

14 Conditions conductive to integration are discussed, inter alia, in Haas and Schmitter, International Organization, Vol. 18, No. 4, pp. 705–737; Haas, International Organization, Vol. 15, No. 3, pp. 366–392; and the recent book by Haas, , Beyond the Nation-State: Functionalism and International Organization (Stanford, Calif: Stanford University Press, 1964Google Scholar).

15 Siotis, International Organization, Vol. 19, No. 2, pp. 177–202.

16 For statistical data on these and other indicators, see Russett, Bruce and others, World Handbook of Political and Social Indicators (New Haven, Conn: Yale University Press, 1964Google Scholar). For useful classification schemes, see Almond, Gabriel and Coleman, James S., The Politics of the Developing Areas (Princeton, N.J: Princeton University Press, 1960Google Scholar). For data on trade, see, inter alia, Stern, Robert M., “Policies for Trade and Development”, International Conciliation, May 1964 (No. 548), and the sources cited thereinGoogle Scholar.

17 Many of the judgements made in the following sections are based upon interviews with UN Secretariat personnel at Headquarters and in the regional offices of ECLA in Santiago and Mexico City, ECAFE in Bengkok, and ECA in Addis Ababa.

18 See Russett, especially Table 44, pp. 155–157, and Table B.2, pp. 294–298.

19 Note that the Cuban application for membership in the Latin Americian Free Trade Association (LAFTA) was rejected. See Dell, Sidney, Trade Blocs and Common Markets (New York: Alfred A. Knof, 1963), p. 265Google Scholar.

20 See the September 1960 statement of the Bank of Venezuela:

Any common market or free trade area will leave us producing nothing but petroleum and iron ore, and importing everything else. Our textiles cannot compete with Brazilian textiles, our coffee cannot compete with Colombian coffee and our meat cannot compete with Uruguayan meat. For us a free trade area is Utopian at the present time.

(Quoted in Dell, p. 274.)

21 Hirschman, Albert O., “Ideologies of Economic Development in Latin America”, in Hirschman, Albert O. (ed.), Latin American Issues: Essays and Comments (New York: Twentieth Century Fund, 1961), p. 13Google Scholar.

22 Haas and Schmitter, International Organization, Vol. 18, No. 4. p. 730. For a recent, definitive statement of the ECLA-Prebisch theses see Towards a Dynamic Development Policy for Latin America (UN Document E/CN.12/680/Rev.1), December 1963.

23 The Central American Agreements embrace Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, and Nicaragua. LAFTA includes Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Mexico, Paraguay, Peru, and Uruguay. For a recent study of LAFTA, including the role of ECLA in its creation, see Wionezek, Miguel S., “Latin American Free Trade Association”, International Conciliation, January 1965Google Scholar (No. 551).

24 Haas and Schmitter, International Organization, Vol. 18, No. 4. pp. 732 ff.

25 Hirschman, p. 20.

26 Dell, p. 264.

27 Roberto de Oliveira Campos, quoted in Hirschman, p. 27.

28 Among the more prominent have been Victor L. Urquidi and Carlos Quintana in Mexico, Celso Furtado in Brazil, Jose´ A. Mayobre (now Executive Secretary of ECLA) in Venezuela, Hugo Trivelli in Chile, and Regino Boti in Cuba. Similarly, upon Juan Pero´n's overthrow, the government of Argentina requested Prebisch to make an economic survey of that country, his own.

29 Shonfield, Andrew, The Attack on World Poverty (New York: Random House, 1962), p. 49Google Scholar.

30 Haas and Schmitter, International Organization, Vol. 18, No. 4, p. 731.

31 See Claude, Inis L. Jr., “The OAS, the UN, and the United States,” International Conciliation, March 1964Google Scholar (No. 547).

32 An Ad Hoc Committee on Cooperation was established to guarantee coordination between the OAS, ECLA, and the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB). ECLA is also linked to the Inter-American Committee on the Alliance for Progress (CIAP), a committee of LA-ECOSOC, in an advisory capacity.

33 Classification and data are from Russett, Table B-2, pp. 294–298.

34 This typology is developed by Rosenau, James N., “Internal War as an International Event,” in Rosenau, James N. (ed.), International Aspects of Civil Strife (Princeton, N.J: Princeton University Press, 1964), pp. 45–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

35 Figures supplied to the writer on a visit to ECAFE in 1964 revealed that as of that time India had as many professional staff serving on the Commission's Secretariat as Pakistan, Burma, Ceylon, Indonesia, and Iran combined.

36 See Wightman, pp. 50–52. A memorandum presented by the Executive Secretary, P. S. Lokanathan, at the 1951 session of the Commission catalyzed support for the following declaration by the Commission:

Member governments feel, however, that the time has come when clearer recognition should be given to the principle that member countries belonging to the region should take their own decisions in the Commission on their own economic problems. … In pursuance of this principle the member countries of the Commission not in the region would be willing, as a general rule, to refrain from using their votes in opposition to economic proposals predominantly concerning the region which had the support of a majority of the countries of the region.

(See Economic and Social Council Official Records [13th session], Supplement No. 7, paragraph 341.)

37 Wightman, p. 52.

38 Ibid., p. 286.

39 UN Document E/CN.11/641, p. 69.

40 Ibid., pp. 53–54.

41 See Fifteen Years of Activity of the Economic Commission for Europe 1947–1962 (UN Document E/ECE/473/Rev.I), pp. 16, 81.

42 Wightman, p. 221.

43 See Ibid., pp. 183–202; and Schaaf, C. Hart and Fifield, Russell H., The Lower Mekong: Challenge to Cooperation in Southeast Asia (Princeton, N.J: D. Van Nostrand Co., 1963), especially Part IIGoogle Scholar.

44 The figure is Wightman's.

45 Wightman, p. 197.

46 UN Document E/CN.11/641, p. 57.

47 See the discussion in Wightman, pp. 104–105, 292–294.

48 Ibid., p. 297.

49 Consultative Group of Experts on Regional Economic Cooperation in Asia (1961) and Working Group of Experts (1963). See UN Documents E/CN.II/615, February 13, 1963, and E/CN.II/641, Appendix V. Annex 2.

50 The Ministerial Conference's resolution on Asian economic cooperation appears in UN Document E/CN.II/641, pp. 2–3.

51 Professional staff as of April I in each of several recent years:

(Figures supplied by the Administrative Management Service of the UN Secretariat and by the individual commission secretariats.)

52 In 1965 the UN was executing agency for regional projects in Africa under the Expanded Program of Technical Assistance (EPTA) and its own regular program totaling approximately $1,520,000; most of the projects were decentralized to ECA. This is to be compared with the figures for Asia ($1,010,000) and Latin America ($1,000,000). (UN Document E/4075, June 14, 1965, p. 24.)

53 Dell, p. 286.

54 ECOSOC Resolution 974 D III (XXXVI), July 24, 1963.

55 ECOSOC Resolution 974 D IV (XXXVI), July 30, 1963.

56 See UN Document E/CN.14/261 and Corr. I.

57 UN Document E/CN.14/262.

58 Economic and Social Council Official Records (37th session), Supplement No. 10, paragraph 234 (c).

59 Ibid., paragraph 109.

60 For the most recent official statements on the status of decentralization see UN Documents A/6114, November 23, 1965, and E/4075, June 14, 1965.