Linking global policies to country-level priorities

mechanisms which have relied more on traditional donors, including the Response and Recovery MPTF, the Joint SDG Fund and appeals supporting ACT-A initiatives have been chronically under-resourced.

Pooled resource mobilisation mechanisms can support joint programming, but insufficient fund-

ing prevents joint operations in support of collective goals from being scaled. The Response and Recovery MPTF, SRF and Joint SDG Fund all supported inter-agency co-ordination either by providing support to multiple agencies under a single policy framework or by prioritising joint programming and whole-of-government approaches. However, as noted above, the overall scale of these funds has been limited, reducing their ability to incentivise and scale joint programming as intended. The undercapitalisation of multiple resource mobilisation mechanisms that support either single agency and joint-agency programming threatens the achievement of collective outcomes these initiatives seek to support.

Lesson 4: Beyond policy coherence at the global level, effective MOco-ordination involves building national ownership and striking a balance between global goals and national needs and priorities in decisionmaking.

In addition to promoting a more coherent UN response, the SPRP, UN Socioeconomic Framework and GHRP benefitted from clear mechanisms to contextualise global frameworks in light of national

needs and priorities. The UN System promoted inter-agency co-ordination at country level under the RCs to contextualise global frameworks at country level. Tools such as Socioeconomic Impact Assessments, SERPs, Humanitarian Response Plans provided a mechanism to take stock of country-level needs and inform a more coherent inter-agency response in line with global policy frameworks. Furthermore, new tools such as the COVID-19 Partners Platform helped coordinate a broader scope of partners, including MDBs and bilateral partners in real time around a changing landscape of national needs.80

Similarly, the response of MDBs was driven by national needs and priorities while promoting coher-

ence around global policy frameworks. The World Bank’s COVID-19 MPA provided a range of flexible options for support aligned to the WHO’s SPRP, with early co-ordination between the two organisations contributing to its development.81 This financing was subsequently extended to support vaccine purchasing and deployment readiness. Emergency budget support provided by the World Bank and other MDBs identified very limited conditionalities that were designed to support key features of the SPRP, including the requirement for a national response plan and functional country-level multi-partner co-ordination mechanisms.

By comparison, ACT-A emphasised the upstream aspects its mandate with too little emphasis on downstream delivery and readiness. Despite clear collective results targets and ongoing engagement to promote operational coherence, ACT-A initially lacked systematic channels for including the needs of beneficiary governments in decision-making. The participation of LICs on the Facilitation Council was

80 Shen, A.K., Yu, M.A. & Linstrand, a (2021) “COVID-19 Partners Platform—Accelerating Response by Coordinating

Plans, Needs, and Contributions During Public Health Emergencies: COVID-19 Vaccines Use Case” Global Health:

Science and Practice https://www.ghspjournal.org/content/ghsp/9/4/725.full.pdf 81 World Bank Group (2020) “COVID-19 STRATEGIC PREPAREDNESS AND RESPONSE PROGRAM AND PROPOSED 25

PROJECTS UNDER PHASE 1 USING THE MULTIPHASE PROGRAMMATIC APPROACH” https://documents1.worldbank. org/curated/en/993371585947965984/pdf/World-COVID-19-Strategic-Preparedness-and-Response-Project.pdf