Shifting away from the donor-driven UN: an assessment of the pooled funding mechanism

This world needs stronger international institutions, and most notably, a more authoritative United Nations. Starting from this belief, which is backed by a recent survey study and shared by many advocates of supranational and cosmopolitan proposals of UN reform, the proposed research aims to address what is arguably the most problematic aspect of the current UN funding mechanism affecting the UN authority vis-à-vis its member states: the voluntary earmarked contributions. Following a review of relevant scholarly literature, pooled funding is identified as a possible solution to reconcile voluntary earmarked contributions with a more authoritative UN. However, it is unclear why pooled funding remains largely underused compared to the more restrictive and detrimental project- and programme-specific earmarked funding.
This research therefore aims to answer the following two research questions: firstly, why is pooled funding so underused as a UN funding mechanism to acquire donor voluntary earmarked contributions compared to the programme- and project-specific funding modality?; and secondly, what are the conditions to be met in order to increase its use?
The methodology envisaged to conduct this research project will have a strong empirical component but will also be rooted in theoretical approaches.
It is believed that answering the research questions will not only allow to fill an important gap in literature, but also contribute to finding solutions to decrease donors' influence on UN programming and operations and ultimately achieve a less donor-driven, more authoritative UN.