GSO SUN Global Conference on Conflict of Interests (CoI) – the start of a process (Geneva, Switzerla

Highlights from some Civil Society representative participants

This blog just provides highlights from some civil society (CS) representatives of the GSO SUN global conference on CoI.

Over 70 participants from 16 SUN countries and all stakeholder groups along with representatives from the SUN movement secretariat, the 4 networks at the global level, the GSO team and ethics experts.

More documents and details can be found at http://gsogeneva.ch/?page_id=2740 and in three languages. The report of the meeting will soon be available too!

Conference Participants Group Photo

© Ralph Dogget for GSO

Highlights

• Great energy and enthusiasm in continuing the discussions – this is the start of a process

• Next steps will be about refining and going into more into details from lessons learnt to next steps – capacity building, technical tools for putting into practice at the country level

• Overall agreement that there is a need to serve communities and populations and that prevention and management of CoI will contribute to reach this goal

• Civil society representation statistics– according to participant list 15 of the total 73 participants were from civil society - ~ 20%

• Global level – WVI, SUN CSN, SG members (Sultana and Prakash)

• Country level - from Uganda (1 man – Kato – chair of the platform), Indonesia (2 women – WVI and Santra Lantasi – breastfeeding CSO), Laos PDR (1 woman – national nutrition civil society alliance (CSA) coordinator), Tanzania (1 woman – CSO member rep of PANITA), Ghana (1 woman – CSO member rep of GHACCSSUN, Zambia (1 woman –chair of the CSO SUN Alliance at platform for social protection), Costa Rica (1 man – consumer forum), Sri Lanka (1 female) – 8 countries, 9 reps, 2 men (28%) and 7 women (72%)

• Non-SUN CSO groups (CSM, ICN 2, EU CSO group)

• Academia and the Ethics experts - 1 man from Ghana Academic Platform; 1 woman from El Salvador

• In his opening remarks - Tom Arnold highlighted the importance of CoI in post-2015 agenda, climate and financing for sustainable development and the need for all stakeholders to work together. Addressing CoI needs to be integral part to post-2015, climate and financing for sustainable development efforts.

• First part of the event basically provided an overview of all docs provided and resulting from the process

• Panels were very informative – overall points made were in line with below key messages and recommendations

• Breakout sessions were great at generating concrete suggestions for moving forward in the strategy of SUN 2.0 and CoP4

• Throughout the conference, the following did come up several times:

• Just having written policies are not enough. Policies required to be enforced, monitored, linked and reinforced;

• Principles of engagement in CoI need to be reflected in SUN annual progress report

• Capacity building and ownership need to be embedded in all planning process;

• Partnership be on right based approach with TRUST, mutual respect and acceptance of joint credits

• Trusted Leadership is important

• Creating Evidence-based successful case studies is key

• Key messages and recommendations – cf below

• Next steps – GSO and SMS to work on recommendations to lead group for guiding future SUN efforts

• Closing remarks by Tom Arnold - The conference has led to new thinking on how best to guide the SUN. A strong emphasis on practicality has been raised. My main lessons: Discussions show strong re-affirmation of the principles of engagement; trust has kept coming out and the need for better written policies has been highlighted. The SUN map 2 is being developed; as we begin to envision the future of the SUN it will be important that effective mechanisms are inbuilt to solve any possible COI that may arise.

Key messages from the process to date & recommendations

• Leading from where you are – leaders don’t create followers, they create more leaders – Tom Peters

• Transparent and inclusive, building consensus, willing to address and have the courage to address CoI

• Written policies – enforced and monitored – linked and reinforcing trust. Developed in advance as CoI processes is a means to an end and should be there from day 1

• The need to identify an independent neutral body within countries, preferably government to monitor implementation of the developed policy, support capacity building, and be part of management of COI should it arise.

• One size does not fit all – international legal standards, and others

• Community focus – we can establish abstract institutional framework and a we must ensure the communities have the capacity

• Decentralisation – consistent application of CoI processes (capacity, resources, to implement)

• Role of the private sector– determining how to engage with PS remains a challenge in many countries – a lot around trust, perception,… Building credibility and trust. It doesn’t help beginning discussion with them with mutual mistrust

• All stakeholder groups have a potential for CoI

• Expertise, capacity and resources – gaps do exist and CS can strongly support government in these issues

• Academic institutions – contribute to capacity building and developing case studies and curricula

• International Code of Marketing of Breast Milk Substitutes – Some of the messages within Enhanced Learning Exercises (ELE) – still challenges around application of code and differences exist in national contexts and not necessarily consistent from international community to support countries

• Conflict vs conflict of interest (CoI) where conflicts of interest are damaging to the joint endeavour by putting their own interests above common interest.

• Principles of engagement to be revised to have a stronger CoI dimension but agreement that additional 3 should become part of the SUN principles of engagement

• More linkages with rights-based efforts required – this needs to be carefully revised in SUN 2.0

• Suggested clear language suggestion for the SUN 2.0 strategy on CoI:

• The movement recognises that CoI could exist

• Generalised definition of CoI

• SUN should have a clear and definite action in strategy to ensure countries need to put in place a framework for conflict of interests (as compulsory)

• Caution with sanctions - Balance between sanctions and protecting vulnerable groups and need to be in a confidential environment for CoI disclosure to ensure no discrimination. Recognize setting specificity and nuances. The best guide/regulation in setting A, could be socially useless in setting B. That’s why we need both legally-binding and morally-binding guidelines

• Ownership is dependent on capacities of local CSOs and this is key to strengthen national organisations – learning to have voice is key

• Capacity building is key – we need more on the governance of nutrition at all levels and we will not be able to address nutrition if we cannot govern nutrition efforts. Today we still have a top down approach and especially at the community level.

Main recommendations from SUN CSN during panel

• Capacity issue needs to be addressed as a priority & Support to countries as we enter the next stage of this CoI process

• Fostering cross-learning between countries – sharing case studies, more cross-learning opportunities, a depot of resources, twining, learning routes, regional discussions, …)

• A network of mentors (ELE, CoI and ethics experts starting locally) to support countries through the next stages

• Through SUN Community of Practice 4 discussions

• Academics and CS to support this process for sensitization and capacity strengthening at national and sub-national levels – multiplying effect through sensitization of media

• Fostering Champions – ensuring issue addressed and sustainability in leadership

• Red lines need to be clear and part of signing up to SUN

• All countries to have written policies and mechanisms for addressing CoI in place – recommending this be a commitment from any government signing up to SUN like that of establishing a multi-stakeholder platform (MSP), having a multi-sectoral national plan for nutrition and a budget line for nutrition

• SUN to be better and clearer at communicating red lines – re-BMS code violators, Right to Food violators, …. Whilst carefully defining engagement as engagement may be necessary to improve enforcement of codes and legislations.

Topline messages from the preparatory call with CSO representatives

• Need all countries to have strong CoI policies in place and ensure they are implemented and acted upon – effort lead by government with support from various stakeholders - CoI policies are essential for accountability around a common results framework and alignment to such a framework

• Role of CS in country platforms with regards to CoI

• Need for stronger and active engagement of CS in the CoI discussions and process

• Flagging CoI issues

• What should their role be?

• Ensuring that the policies are being seen through

• There is a need for identification of clear roles and responsibilities of several actors and their distinctive roles – unpack that further to help identify areas of CoI

• Red lines need to be clear and part of signing up to SUN

• Maybe setting up CoI policies and mechanisms for identification, acknowledgement, prevention and management should be a commitment from any government signing up to SUN (even if tool kit and reference note not compulsory)

• SUN to be better and clearer at communicating red lines – no engagement with BMS code violators, no engagement with Right to Food violators, ….

• Success of CoI relies on availability of capacity and resources BUT ALSO THE POLITICAL WILL TO ADDRESS CONFLICT and having transparent enabling environment

• Open communication is key

• Acknowledgement of CoI is not adequately addressed in the tool kit and reference note – Remains a big issue in countries

• CoI can lead to failure of action – important to ensure this does not happen

• Academics and academic platforms can:

• Support capacity building and sensitization

• Support independent review process if that is desirable

• Play the role of a watchdog

• Support to countries as they progress through this process in countries:

• Capacity Building and sensitization around CoI key

• Academic network can support this

• Capacity building through training, sensitization and cross-learning key and needs to be a multi-stakeholder effort

• Media capacity building will be key around this and CSAs will have a role to play in this

• Importance of sub-national level and ensuring the capacity and awareness at that level, Importance of lessons sharing and regional coherence and harmonisation

• What are plans for supporting countries through challenges as they start going through the process? Network of supporters (from countries and other CoI experts)

• Looking forward

• This is just the start of a process towards longer term system wide approach

• This will be helpful for some government but not all (some complex contexts to be taken into consideration)

• Invest more in citizens being part of social accountability mechanisms to take this role of citizens monitoring themselves (e.g. Guatemala, Peru, Cameroon…)