Can We Argue that Rising States Change Traditional Executive Leadership

of International Organizations?
An Impression Based on the UN Regional Commissions

Paper for IPSA’s 24th World Congress of Political Science,

23-28 June in Poznan, Poland
Panel: Rising States and Established Powers in International Organizations

Bob Reinalda
Radboud University Nijmegen, Netherlands, b.reinalda@fm.ru.nl
IO BIO Editor, www.ru.nl/fm/iobio

Introduction
Leadership of inter-governmental organizations (IGOs) is being researched more intensely,
including the tendency to look beyond studies of the United Nations (UN) Secretary-General
(see Kille 2013). One way of discussing leadership of IGOs is the biographical
approach, which allows analysing the career development of executive heads. The IO
BIO Project, the Biographical Dictionary of Secretaries-General of International
Organizations (available at www.ru.nl/fm/iobio), has so far published some sixty
entries, which are informative about sixty careers and their more or less successful
leadership. These entries show that in order to be successful as an executive head,
leadership matters both internally (performing as leader of the IGO’s bureaucracy and actor in
IGO decision making) and externally (performing as actor in international relations, including
inter-organizational relations). Regional differences have to be taken into account, as the
prestige of executive heads may differ per continent. For instance, prestige is lower in
Africa, where heads of state matter most in multilateralism, than in Europe or North
America.
This paper will discuss the question of rising states and IGO leadership by
having a look at the five Regional Commissions of the UN.1 These are ECA for Africa,
ECE for Europe, ECLAC for Central and Latin America, ESCAP for Asia and the Pacific and
ESCWA for Western Asia, which have a small joint Office in New York. It is assumed that, if
it is correct that rising states from various continents change traditional executive leadership
of IGOs, this should be recognisable in these Regional Commissions, or at least indications
for such a change, or non-change, should be found here. Rising or emerging states (see e.g.
Farer 2011) are often indicated as BRIC or BRICS: Brazil, Russia, India, China and South
Africa, with Turkey being mentioned as potential member of this group. Following the
membership of the UN Regional Commissions, China and India are to be discussed under
ESCAP, Russia and Turkey under ECE, Brazil under ECLAC and South Africa under ECA.
The assumption is that rising states are eager to enhance their position by both regional and
UN influence and support. Becoming executive leader of a Regional Commission then
matters, with specific qualities referring to changes in leadership.
The paper focuses on a specific organ of these Regional Commissions, namely their
Secretariats. We know relatively little about the Secretariats of IGOs, mainly due to the fact

1
I have used these data also for a panel at the June 2016 ACUNS Annual Meeting in New
York, be it with a different purpose.
 2

that the general focus of research is on the entire organization and its actions, rather than on
this and other specific organs. The Secretariat however is an entity that follows the mandate
of the organization and the decisions of the assembly of member states, but it also is the place
where IGO actorness originates. The hierarchically organized group of international civil
servants who make up an IGO’s Secretariat may also be referred to as a bureaucracy, led by
the Executive Head (Secretary, Secretary-General or similar title) who is responsible for
directing the Secretariat and who acts as representative of both the Secretariat (vis-à-vis other
bodies of the IGO) and the entire institution (in international relations between states and
other international actors). Each of the UN Regional Commissions has a self-designed
organizational structure, which includes a ministerial-level governing board that reports to the
Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) of the UN, a Secretariat and specialized committees
to carry out Commission projects. The paper presents a first assessment of the Secretariats
and Executive Secretaries of the UN Regional Commissions and discusses the question of
rising states and leadership.
The paper first presents some general characteristics of the Regional Commissions and
then informs about the development of each of the five Secretariats. Discussing Secretariats is
more difficult than discussing entire institutions, as Secretariats are inner parts of institutions,
which implies that information about what is going on internally is required, which is more
difficult to obtain than information about external activities, while Secretariats are researched
to a lesser extent than organizations. The paper observes the Secretariats by researching some
qualities of their executive heads over a certain time period, assuming that elements such as
education, national careers, diplomatic experience and regional connections before they take
office matter for both these individuals and the Secretariats they are going to lead. The
executive heads and their qualities can be related to rising or old states on their continent and
provide indications about the effect of rising states on IGO leadership.
The paper discusses the five most recent Executive Secretaries2 of each Regional
Commission and explores their education, national careers, diplomatic and international
experience and regional connections before they became office-holders. How well educated
are they? Did they have responsible positions, such as being a member of government or
president of the central bank, in their countries of origins? Did they have any international
(diplomatic or other) experience and did they play regional roles before they became
Executive Secretaries of a Regional Commission? I use the personal information that is
available through the Commissions’ websites (the section on the Executive Secretary and
his/her predecessors). It must be noted that, generally speaking, such information with regard
to CVs is restricted or not always precise, which is a more general problem with regard to
information about executive heads of IGOs. However, the information I have available allows
answering the four questions.

Regional Economic and Social Commissions of the UN ECOSOC

In 1947 the rationale for establishing Regional Commissions for Asia and the Far East and for
Europe was postwar reconstruction. This could have resulted in temporary institutions for the
two continents, but that is not what happened. While Article 68 of the UN Charter provides
for the creation of commissions under the aegis of ECOSOC, the process of creating Regional
Commissions had its own dynamics. Robert Gregg (1966: 209) speaks about an early instance
of UN coalition politics, when Asian and Latin American states engaged in some ‘effective
logrolling which led to the creation of commissions for each of those regions over the

2
Database 2 of the IO BIO Project, The Biographical Dictionary of Secretaries-General of
International Organizations, helps to provide an overview of all Executive Secretaries of the
UN Regional Commissions, available at www.ru.nl/fm/iobio (IOBIO).
 3

opposition of Western European and North American Members’. The creation of two
Regional Commissions in Asia and Europe laid the foundations for honouring the claims of
other regions (Latin America in 1948, Africa in 1958 and Western Asia in 1974) and for
broadening the mission of the Regional Commissions from reconstruction to economic
development.
While starting as mechanisms in postwar reconstruction, the aim of the Regional
Commissions became to assist in raising the level of economic activity in the respective
regions and to maintain and strengthen economic relations between the countries in each
region, both among themselves and with other countries of the world. The Commissions are
empowered to make recommendations directly to member governments and to specialized
agencies of the UN. However, they cannot take action in respect of any country without the
agreement of that country’s government. All action is intended to fit into the framework of
over-all UN economic and social policies, given the fact that they are subsidiary organs of
ECOSOC, to which the Regional Commissions report annually.
All of the Commissions are funded by the regular UN budget. They adopt their own
rules of procedure, including the methods of selecting their chairperson, who, however, is
appointed by the UN Secretary-General. The Secretariats of the Commissions are integral
parts of the UN Secretariat as a whole, but have their headquarters in the region. Each
Commission is headed by an Executive Secretary, who holds the rank of Under-Secretary-
General of the UN. The decrease in the number of posts in the Regional Commissions’
Secretariats since the 1980s is in line with the rest of the UN Secretariat, given the overall
reduction between 1985 and 2015 (see Table 1). The largest Commission is the one for Africa
(over 750 posts), followed by the Commissions for Central and Latin America and Asia and
the Pacific (slightly over 500), and two smaller ones for Europe and Western Asia (between
220 and 250). Cooperation among the Regional Commissions is a topical issue, given the
2015 report on this aspect by the UN Joint Inspection Unit (Tarasov and Achamkulangare
2015).

Table 1: Numbers of Secretariat Posts in the UN Regional Commissions

Regional Commission 1985 2015

ECA 780 767

ECE 235 222
ECLAC 741 515
ESCAP 861 519
ESCWA 344 251
New York Office 6 6
Source: (Tarasov and Achamkulangare 2015: 9, Table 3).

With regard to the Executive Secretaries, two persons have clearly left their marks on
the image of the UN Regional Commissions. One is Gunnar Myrdal, who was the first
Executive Secretary of the Economic Commission for Europe (ECE) between 1947 and 1957.
He believed that the ECE should be used as a bridge of functional cooperation between East
and West and that the Commission should resist all efforts to institutionalize within ECE the
rift between the two blocs (Gregg 1966: 212).3 The second person is Raúl Prebisch, who
headed the Economic Commission for Latin America (ECLA) between 1950 and 1963. With
his original economic theory he infused the ECLA Secretariat ‘with a sense of purpose and
gave the Commission its sense of direction’ (Gregg 1966: 216). Prebisch’s analysis of the

3
See also Myrdal’s entry by Chloé Maurel in IO BIO at www.ru.nl/fm/iobio.
 4

difficulties of developing countries and his remedy to overcome the dependence of the
‘periphery’ upon the ‘centre’ (the developed states) had an impact on Central and Latin
America and also beyond that region.4 According to Albert Hirschman, the ECLA Secretariat
attracted most attention, as it possessed attributes ‘not frequently encountered in large
international organisations’:5 ‘a cohesive personality which evokes loyalty from the staff, and
a set of distinct beliefs, principles, and attitudes, in brief an ideology, which is highly
influential among Latin American intellectuals and policymakers’ (quoted in Gregg 1966:
216). However, the preoccupation of the ECLA Secretariat with economic theory has also
been seen as an impediment, as it weakened the actual impact of ECLA’s policies.
I will discuss the Secretariats of the Regional Commissions in chronological order.

ESCAP, Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific
On 28 March 1947 the UN Economic Commission for Asia and the Far East (ECAFE) was
established to initiate and participate in measures for facilitating concerted action for the
economic reconstruction of the region. In 1974 it became the Economic and Social
Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP), which reflected better the economic and
social aspects of development and the geographical location of its members. Its membership
rose from 10 states (of them only 4 Asian ones at the time) to 53 member states (including
France, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and the United States) and 9 associate
members. In 1947 and 1948 headquarters was located in Shanghai, China, but political
developments in China led to the Secretariat’s departure and since 1949 headquarters has
been in Bangkok, Thailand. ESCAP has a Sub-Regional Office (ESCAP Pacific Operations
Centre) in Port Vila, Vanuatu since 1984.
We are relatively well informed about the early development of this Secretariat (Hart
Schaaf 1953: 465; Wightman 1963: 75-81). In 1950 the Secretariat had 75 posts, in 1953 180,
of whom one third are professional UN officers. From 1956 to 1957 the number of posts
jumped from 154 to 201 and the professional staff grew from 57 to 79. In 1960 there were
208 established posts in the Secretariat, about 40 per cent being in professional grades. In
1968 there was a total staff of about 370 professional and general service personnel. The
general service personnel were mostly local recruits, who worked as administrative and
statistical assistants, secretaries, typists and building and ground officers. In 1953 there were
nationals of 18 countries, including 10 Asian countries. In 1962 23 nationalities were
represented, about half being Asian. However, Asians held over 80 per cent of all professional
posts and an even larger proportion of the more senior posts. On the staff side ECAFE
became a ‘thoroughly Asian organization’, according to David Wightman (1963: 76): ‘This is
just as its Asian member countries wished’. In the early 1960s Indians formed the largest
single group, followed by Chinese, Japanese and Thais. Pakistan felt underrepresented in the
senior positions, especially by comparison with India, which had provided the first two
Executive Secretaries. Japan did not become a UN member until 1956, while most Japanese
did not have a sufficient command of the English language, but this began to change. Like
elsewhere in the UN, the choice of nationality for the posts were heavily circumscribed by
political considerations and smaller Asian countries remained behind because they could not
afford to send able nationals to ECAFE and even paid them better at home in an effort to

4
See also Prebisch’s entry by Edgar Dorsman in IO BIO at www.ru.nl/fm/iobio.
5
One wonders whether Hirschman’s remark about IGO Executive Heads is correct, because
more cohesive personalities than just Prebisch can be found in several IGOs. To mention just
one example: Jim Grant of UNICEF (see IO BIO) would qualify here as well. Hence, how
often is ‘not frequently’?
 5

prevent the brain drain. Problems were solved by temporary secondment of staff from the UN
Secretariat or ECE and short-term employment of consultants on specific assignments.
The Secretariat was organized into the Office of the Executive Secretary, the Research
and Planning Division, Technical Divisions and the Division of Administration. The
Secretariat was characterized by horizontal strength, but at many points weak in depth. ‘For
instance, its sections on electric power, metals and engineering, mineral development,
housing and building materials, railways, highways, and highway transport each contained
only two professional posts at the beginning of 1961’ (Wightman 1963: 81). Maybe the most
significant part was the ECAFE Library. From the very beginning the Commission had
requested its member governments to supply the Secretariat regularly with all their statistical,
economic and monetary publications. The Library grew and by 1961 housed 22,000 volumes,
receiving more than 800 periodicals and serials. In 1955 it received a grant from the Ford
Foundation and became an economic research library for the region, with library services
extended to many outside the Secretariat, such as government officials, experts and scholars
(Wightman 1963: 80-81). Eventually ESCAP became the largest UN body serving the Asia-
Pacific region (since I focus on the Secretariat I do not discuss the further activities and
characteristics of the Commission).
ESCAP has had 10 Executive Secretaries since 1947, of whom 8 are men and 2
women. Their countries of origin are: India (2), Indonesia (2), Pakistan (2), Bangladesh (1),
Burma (1), Singapore (1) and South Korea (1). What can be said about the five most recent
Executive Secretaries, whose characteristics are summarized in Appendix 1 and who cover
the period since 1992? In this case there are three men (Rafeeudin Ahmed, Adrianus Mooy,
Kim Hak-Su) and two women (Noeleen Heyzer and Shamshad Akhtar).
With regard to education, all five have academic degrees, with at least four PhDs
(Ahmed took graduate studies at Fletcher, but I don’t know whether this resulted in a PhD).
They all started studies in their home countries but continued studies abroad, i.e. in the US (4)
and the UK (1). Among the foreign universities are Harvard, Cambridge and the Fletcher
School. Conclusion: all are highly educated, including international experience.
With regard to national careers, I did not find a national career for Heyzer. Three of
the other four had high-level experience in their Central Banks (Mooy, Kim, Akhtar) as well
as other economic governmental service and one (Ahmed) in Foreign Service. Conclusion:
these four are nationally experienced in the economic field.
With regard to diplomatic and international experience, all have extensive
international economic experience, with one as ambassador for international economic affairs
(Kim) and four (Ahmed, Mooy, Heyzer and Akhtar) in a number of specialized agencies of
the UN system and some other IGOs (Commonwealth, EU), including positions such as
Assistant Administrator of UNDP (Ahmed), IMF Governor (Mooy, Akhtar) and Executive
Director of UNIFEM (Heyzer). Conclusion: they know the UN system well from inside.
With regard to regional connections, all have connections in the region, including
Colombo Plan Secretary-Generalship (Kim), the ADB (Mooy, Akhtar) and UN activities in
the region (Ahmed, Heyzer). Akhtar, ESCAP’s present Executive Secretary, is seen as one of
the top ten professional women in Asia, according to Wall Street Journal Asia. Conclusion:
all five had strong regional connections before they became Executive Secretary.
General conclusion for the group of five ESCAP Executive Secretaries: highly
educated, four out of five nationally experienced, well experienced within the UN system and
regionally well connected.
What can be said about rising states China and India with regard to ESCAP’s
leadership? Although ECAFE’s headquarters was located in China in 1947 and 1948, China is
not among the ten office-holders of ECAFE/ESCAP at all. India provided the first two
Executive Secretaries of ECAFE (between 1947 and 1959), but is not present among the five
 6

most recent office-holders of ESCAP, who come from two large Asian states: Pakistan
(twice) and Indonesia, and from two former ‘Asian Tigers’: South Korea and Singapore. I
would argue: absence of rising powers and change of leadership. What should be kept in mind
are the high scores on the four qualities of the executive heads as well as the proud feeling
that Asians hold the senior positions of this Regional Commission.

ECE, Economic Commission for Europe

On 28 March 1947 the UN Economic Commission for Europe (ECE) was established ‘to
initiate and participate in measures for facilitating concerted action for the economic
reconstruction of Europe, for raising the level of European economic activity, and for
maintaining and strengthening the economic relations of the European countries both among
themselves and with other countries of the world’. Its present aim is to promote pan-European
economic integration. Membership rose from 18 in 1947 (several European countries plus the
US) to 56 states (including Canada and the US). The Soviet Union (succeeded by the Russian
Federation) and Turkey were members from the beginning. Switzerland gained full admission
in 1972 (before it had consultative status), Canada joined in 1973 and Israel in 1991. After the
dissolution of the Soviet Union, Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia membership rose from 34 to
53 between 1991 and 1993. The Holy See has consultative status. Headquarters is in Geneva,
Switzerland in the Palais des Nations.
In 1956 the Secretariat had 155 established posts, which number remained remarkably
stable since 1951, with 16 European and 6 non-European nationalities (Wightman 1956: 66).
Although relatively small (also today), the Secretariat has been a strong one, which is
generally related to Gunnar Myrdal, ECE’s first Executive Secretary.6 He firmly established
with governments the convention that the Secretariat should take positive initiatives in
seeking agreement on points of substance (Rostow 1949: 257). Myrdal also refused that any
government discussed his choice of staff. This rugged independence made the ECE a
desirable place for able men seeking an outlet for their ideas and Myrdal succeeded in
recruiting a staff of high quality, including ‘in many individual cases (notably that of Mr.
Myrdal himself) private votes of confidence in the concept of unified European economic
recovery and future development, and in its ultimate acceptability to the governments’.
Although no major power formally advocated that the ECE machinery be used for the
elaboration of Marshall’s European recovery plan, the ECE Secretariat was largely mobilized
for it (Rostow 1949: 258).
The Secretariat was organized into three principal divisions: the Office of the
Executive Secretary (known as the Central Office), the Technical Divisions and the Research
and Planning Division, which in the mid-1950s comprised 62 established posts, of which 35
in professional grades. The Division gained a high reputation, resting on the production of the
annual Economic Surveys of Europe and the quarterly Economic Bulletins. The production of
these publications demanded teamwork of a high order and begun on the sole initiative of the
Secretariat, hence were not produced in response to any directive from the Commission. The
ECE tradition of independent publication contrasted with the Organization for European
Economic Cooperation (OEEC), where government officials wielded their blue pencils over
OEEC drafts (Wightman 1956: 68-69). Compared to the other Regional Commissions, the
ECE Secretariat remained relatively small, with 235 posts in 1985 and 222 in 2015, but it
should be taken into account that Europe has a large number of regional IOs, which also
played their roles after the end of the Cold War. For a description of the ECE development
see (Berthelot and Rayment 2007).

6
See also Myrdal’s entry by Chloé Maurel in IO BIO at www.ru.nl/fm/iobio.
 7

The number of ECE Executive Secretaries since 1947 is 13, of whom 11 are men and
2 women. Their countries of origin are: Czechoslovakia / Slovakia (2), Finland (2), Poland (2)
and Yugoslavia (2), as well as Austria (1), Bosnia and Herzegovina (1), Denmark (1), France
(1) and Sweden (1). What can be said about the five most recent Executive Secretaries, whose
characteristics are summarized in Appendix 2 and who cover the period since 2002? In this
case there are four men (Marek Belka, Ján Kubiš, Sven Alkalaj and Christian Friis Bach) and
one woman (Brigita Schmögnerová).
With regard to education, three out of five have a PhD and three continued their
national studies in the US (Schmögnerová, Belka, Alkalaj), while two had national higher
education (Friis Bach and Kubiš, who graduated from Moscow State Institute for IR).
Conclusion: highly educated (but somewhat less than their counterparts in ESCAP).
With regard to national careers, all have national experience as ministers, two in the
field of finance (Schmögnerová, Belka), two in the field of foreign affairs (Kubiš and Alkalaj)
and one in development cooperation (Friis Bach). Conclusion: all have national political
experience, though not always in the field of economics.
With regard to diplomatic and international experience, one Executive Secretary had
no obvious international experience before but got this after her ECE period (Schmögnerová),
one had relations with the Organization of American States and NATO but not within the UN
system (Alkalaj) and two had restricted experience with the IBRD (Friis Bach, who had more
experience with NGOs, and Belka). Only one was more involved in the UN system (Kubiš).
Conclusion: rather diversified international experience and not strongly experienced within
the UN system.
With regard to regional connections, one developed these after her ECE period
(Schmögnerová), one had restricted private experience (Belka) and one had restricted public
experience (Friis Bach). One had extensive regional contacts, a.o. as Secretary-General of the
Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (Kubiš) and one in relation to the
postwar reconstruction of his country (Alkalaj). Conclusion: even if we take into
consideration that four belonged to EU member states, regional connections were relatively
weak.
General conclusion for the group of five ECE Executive Secretaries: rather highly
educated, all with national political experience, but diversified international experience and
relatively weak in the UN system as well as relatively weak regional connections.
What can be said about rising states Russia and Turkey with regard to ECE’s
leadership? Both countries are absent among the office-holders, also among the five most
recent ones. Instead the position is taken by Central and Eastern Europe: (Czecho-)Slovakia
(twice), Poland, Bosnia and Herzegovina and Denmark. I would argue: absence of rising
powers and change of leadership.

ECLAC, Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean

On 28 February 1948 the UN Economic Commission for Latin America (ECLA) was
established with the aim of helping Latin American governments promote the economic
development of their countries and improve the standard of living of their people as well as to
strengthen economic relations among countries in the region and with other nations in the
world. In 1984 the reference to the Caribbean was added and ECLA became the UN
Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC). Membership rose
from 25 states in 1948 (20 Latin American ones and 5 others) to 33 member states from Latin
America and the Caribbean as well as 12 Asian, European and North American member states
with historical, economic and cultural ties with the region plus 13 associate members (non-
independent territories in the Caribbean). ECLAC headquarters is in Santiago, Chile and there
are Sub-Regional Offices for Central America and the Spanish-Speaking Caribbean (in
 8

Mexico City since June 1951) and for the Caribbean (in Port of Spain, Trinidad and Tobago
since December 1966) as well as a liaison office in the US (in Washington DC) and country
offices in Argentina (Buenos Aires), Brazil (Brasilia), Colombia (Bogotá) and Uruguay
(Montevideo).
In 1968 the Secretariat had about 350 staff members. The number of professional staff
in 1960 was 87 and in 1964 103 (Gregg 1966: 225). The Secretariat was organized into
divisions for economic development and research, trade policy, social affairs, statistics and
administration, plus a joint agriculture division with the Food and Agriculture Organization.
As mentioned before, it was Raúl Prebisch who, as Executive Secretary, made the most
conspicuous contribution to integration in Latin America by developing his economic theory
about import substitution industrialization in combination with regional free trade
arrangements, which resulted in Latin American and Central American Free Trade
Agreements as vehicles for integration. ECLA played the catalytic role in these experiments
through the force of ideas and through ‘ECLA-trained personnel, with which to meet
challenges requiring adaptation’ (Gregg 1966: 217). The Secretariat also met its restrictions in
influencing governments. While it spent a number of years urging upon Latin American
governments the detailed programming of economic development, the Secretariat’s shift to
common market studies reflected some frustration with the limited impact of its programming
activity, according to Gregg (1966: 218).
The number of ECLAC Executive Secretaries since 1948 has been 10, of whom 9 men
and 1 woman. Their countries of origin are: Argentina (3), Mexico (3), Colombia (1),
Guatemala (1), Uruguay (1) and Venezuela (1). What can be said about the five most recent
Executive Secretaries, whose characteristics are summarized in Appendix 3 and who cover
the period since 1985? In this case there are four men (Norberto González, Gert Rosenthal,
José Antonio Ocampo, José Luis Machinea) and one woman (Alicia Bárcena).
With regard to education, four out of five have a PhD (Rosenthal received a honorary
one later). Four also studied in the US (a.o. at Harvard, Yale and Berkeley) and one in the UK
(LSE). Conclusion: all of them are highly educated, including international experience.
With regard to national careers, four have experience as minister (Ocampo economy,
Machinea finance, Rosenthal planning and Bárcena as Vice Minister of Ecology), while
Machinea was also central bank president. The fifth had an academic career, including
government service in planning (González). Conclusion: four have governmental experience,
but only two in the economic field.
With regard to diplomatic and international experience, one had no obvious
international experience but got this after his ECLAC period (Ocampo, later in the UN
Secretariat in New York). Three had their career development within ECLAC (González,
Rosenthal and Bárcena) and one had experience as IBRD (and IDB) consultant (Machinea).
Only two had further experience within the UN system (Rosenthal with an UNCTAD project
and Bárcena as UN Secretary-General Annan’s Chef de Cabinet). Conclusion: the
international experience is strongly related to ECLAC itself, which in three cases formed their
careers, and is not diversified within the UN system.
With regard to regional connections, one developed these after his ECLAC period
(Ocampo, in a UNDP/OAS project). Two had regional connections related to ECLAC
(Gonzalez through ILPES, the planning body of ECLAC, and Rosenthal through the Central
American Common Market), one had experience through the Inter-American Development
Bank (Machinea) and one through UNDP and UNEP (Bárcena). Conclusion: regional
connections are strongly related to ECLAC and not very extensive.
General conclusion for the group of five ECLAC Executive Secretaries: highly
educated, restricted economic governmental experience, international experience and regional
connections strongly related to ECLAC and not diversified within the UN system.
 9

What can be said about rising state Brazil with regard to ECLAC’s leadership? Brazil
is absent among the office-holders. Instead, the five most recent ones come from Argentina
(twice), Guatemala, Colombia and Mexico. I would argue: absence of the rising power and
change of leadership.

ECA, Economic Commission for Africa

The UN Economic Commission for Africa (ECA) was established on 29 April 1958 to initiate
and take part in measures for facilitating Africa’s economic development. Its membership
rose from 10 independent African plus 6 European member states to 54 African member
states, with South Africa suspended between 1965 and 1994. ECA’s headquarters is in Addis
Ababa, Ethiopia, with five sub regions and five sub-regional offices for Central Africa (in
Yaoundé, Cameroon), Eastern Africa (in Kigali, Rwanda), North Africa (in Tangier,
Morocco), Southern Africa (in Lusaka, Zambia) and West Africa (in Niamey, Niger). First
they were ‘sub regions’, then in 1979 ‘Multinational Programming and Operational Offices’
(so-called MULPOCs), then in 1997 ‘Sub-Regional Development Centres’ (SRDCs) and then
since 2002 ‘ECA Offices’.
In the beginning African regionalism struggled with young states (or those still in
pursuit of independence), differences between English and French colonial history, Arab and
non-Arab cultures and differing foreign orientations, as well as the South African Apartheid
issue. According to Isebill Gruhn (1984: 28), the terms of reference of the UN Regional
Commissions include a dual mandate, i.e. to act as part of the UN’s international structure,
but also serve the special needs of the specific region. She believes that ECA has developed
its institutional structure and programmatic personality without resolving the conflict arising
from the competing and overlapping demands of the dual mandate. More than other Regional
Commissions ECA has ‘both mirrored and generated international and African trends of
thought and action regarding regional cooperation and integration’. Gregg (1966: 225)
mentions that in the mid-1960s ECA in its relative brief life had overtaken the other Regional
Commissions in size of staff, in the volume of UN regional technical assistance projects and
in the number of sub-regional offices and that its real meaning was ‘every cent for Africa’.
In 1968 the number of staff in the Secretariat was about 340, with 34 professional staff
in 1960, 70 in 1962 and 102 in 1964 (Gregg 1966: 225). In 1968 60 per cent of the
professional staff was African, by 1976 close to 80 per cent and in 1984 over 80 per cent
(Gruhn 1984: 34). Oxford-trained Robert Gardiner,7 who became Executive Secretary in
1962, was confronted with the scarcity of highly qualified African economists and civil
servants. This called ECA’s status as an ‘African’ organization into question and forced him
to ‘Africanize’ the organization and its knowledge base, particularly when the newly
established Organization of African Unity (OAU, 1963) claimed to be a ‘genuine’ African
organization. This contributed to weakening ECA and fostered a rivalry between the two
executive heads. Another OAU element that impacted ECA was that the OAU’s founders
favoured a weak and a-political OAU Secretariat, a body which implemented decisions but
did not make them, according to Senegal’s President Leopold Senghor. Leadership has been a
matter of African heads of state. Since 1969 the ordinary biennial sessions of ECA have been
held at ministerial level and are known as meetings of the Conference of Ministers.
During Gardiner’s tenure ECA’s staff was made up of generalists, ‘better prepared to
handle administrative work than the technical aspects of development planning’, and in this
respect resembled the Secretariat of UN headquarters rather than that of a technical division
of one of the specialized agencies of the UN, according to Gruhn (1984: 34). But under

7
See the entry on Gardiner by Samuel Mistli in IO BIO at www.ru.nl/fm/iobio.
 10

Gardiner’s successor, Adebayo Adedeji (Executive Secretary between 1975 and 1991), ECA
moved in the direction of a think-tank with the sort of reputation that ECLA enjoyed under
Prebisch. It concentrated somewhat more on generating a continental strategy for
development, rather than seeking to play the role of executing agency for the UN system
(Gruhn 1984: 39-40). Gruhn (1984: 43) was rather critical of ECA’s capacity to carry out its
own annual work plan, as it was ‘seriously undermined and restricted by the inadequate
staffing at headquarters’. ECA was spreading itself ‘too thin, taking on too many subjects and
problems’.
Since 1959 ECA has had 8 Executive Secretaries, all of them men. Their countries of
origin are Ghana (2), Algeria (1), Gambia (1), Guinea (1), Guinea-Bissau (1), Nigeria (1) and
Sudan (1). What can be said about the five most recent Executive Secretaries, whose
characteristics are summarized in Appendix 4 and who cover the period since 1991? In this
case there are five men (Issa Ben Yassin Diallo, Layashi Yakar, Kingsley Amoako, Abdoulie
Janneh and Carlos Lopes) and no women.
With regard to education, three out of five have a PhD (from Paris 1, Berkeley and the
Graduate Institute in Geneva), while one undertook graduate studies in Bradford, UK.
Yaker’s university details are not provided. Three of them are economists, one is specialized
in planning and one in international development studies and history. Conclusion: highly
educated abroad.
With regard to national careers, two do not mention national careers (Amoako and
Janneh), one was minister of trade and ambassador (Yaker), one worked in the ministry of
foreign affairs as director-general (Diallo) and one had an international academic career, with
service in the public sector (Lopes). Conclusion: only two have governmental experience.
With regard to diplomatic and international experience, all five have extensive
experience within the UN system, in both the UN Secretariat (Diallo and Lopes) and
specialized agencies such as UNESCO, UNDP, IBRD as well as UNITAR. No mentioning of
experience outside the UN system. Conclusion: international experience is mainly within the
UN system.
With regard to regional connections, three of them develop regional connections when
working for ECA (Diallo, Yaker and Amoako). One is an editor of African scientific journals
(Lopes) and only one had connections through his function as UNDP regional director for
Africa (Janneh). Conclusion: even if some have had connections through their work in the UN
system, explicit regional connections beforehand are relatively weak.
General conclusion for the group of five ECA Executive Secretaries: highly educated
abroad, relatively little governmental experience, international experience through the UN
system and weak regional connections.
What can be said about rising state South Africa with regard to ECA’s leadership?
South Africa is absent among the office-holders. Instead, the five last ones come from five
different African countries (Guinea, Algeria, Ghana, Gambia and Guinea-Bissau). I would
argue: absence of the rising power and change of leadership.

ESCWA, Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia

In 1963 a UN Economic and Social Office (UNESOB) was set up in Beirut, Lebanon to bring
UN staff closer to the countries in the Middle East for intensifying UN economic and social
activities in the region. The Office had its own staff in two sections, plus a group of regional
advisers serving upon request as consultants to governments. On 9 August 1973 the UN
Economic Commission for Western Asia (ECWA) was established to raise the level of
economic activity in member countries and strengthen cooperation among them. In July 1985
ECWA became the UN Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia (ESCWA),
which included new responsibilities in the social field. Membership rose from 13 to 18
 11

member states, including Palestine (before: PLO). Israel and Turkey are ECE members and
Iran is an ESCAP member. ESCWA headquarters was in Beirut, Lebanon between 1963 and
1982, in Baghdad, Iraq between 1982 and 1991, in Amman, Jordan between 1991 and 1997
and returned to Beirut, Lebanon in 1997.
The ESCWA Secretariat belongs to the smaller ones of the UN Regional
Commissions, with a staff of 344 in 1985 and 251 in 2015 (I did not find data about earlier
times, but it was comparatively small then as well). The relatively late emergence and weak
character are related to difficulties of a political rather than economic nature. However,
ESCWA meets with marked imbalances in economic structures and large income disparities
existing between and within the member states. It therefore fosters inter-sectoral coordination
and cooperation at the regional level (Schiavone 2001: 91).
Since 1974 the number of Executive Secretaries has been 8, of whom 6 men and 2
women. Their countries of origin are: Jordan (3), Egypt (2), Qatar (1), Syria (1) and Yemen
(1). What can be said about the five most recent Executive Secretaries, whose characteristics
are summarized in Appendix 5 and who cover the period since 1993? In this case there are
three men (Sabah Bakjaji, Hazem El-Beblawi, Bader Al-Dafa) and two women (Mervat
Tallaway, Rima Khalaf).
With regard to education, all also studied abroad, with three having a PhD (from
Portland State, Paris and Louvain, Belgium: i.e. Bakjaji, El-Beblawi and Khalaf) and two
having a Master degree (Johns Hopkins and Graduate Institute Geneva: i.e. Tallaway and El-
Dafa). Conclusion: highly educated, with international experience.
With regard to national careers, three out of five have governmental experience as
minister (Bakjaji in planning, Tallaway in foreign as well as social affairs and Khalaf in trade)
and one as ambassador (Al-Dafa). One served as chair of an export development bank.
Conclusion: three have governmental experience, one diplomatic experience and one
international banking experience.
With regard to diplomatic and international experience, two have no international or
diplomatic experience mentioned (Bakjaji and El-Beblawi), two have experience in the UN
system with several specialized agencies (Tallaway and Khalaf, the two women) and the
ambassador has experience as representative to the OAS and international NGOs (Al-Dafa).
Conclusion: international experience rested with the two women (within the UN system) and
the ambassador.
With regard to regional connections, one was a chief negotiator at the Middle East
Peace Conference in the early 1990s (Tallaway) and one was director of the UNDP regional
bureau for Arab states (Khalaf), while one was engaged in a study for the Arab Fund for
Economic and Social Development (Bakjaji) and one in relations between NGOs (Al-Dafa).
One became regionally active after his ESCWA period (El-Beblawi). Conclusion: regional
connections are rather poor, with exception of those of the two women.
General conclusion for the group of five ESCWA Executive Secretaries: highly
educated, governmental experience, relatively weak international experience and regional
connections (with the exception of the two women).
What can be said about a rising state? Since Turkey, which belongs to the ECE, is not
a member, there is no rising state. But Egypt has provided the office-holder twice among the
five most recent Executive Secretaries, together with Syria, Qatar and Jordan.

Conclusion
The emergence and evolution of the UN Regional Commissions are remarkable. Although in
line with the UN Charter, the process of their creation had a dynamic of its own (which was
not foreseen) and resulted in more institutions, a permanent character and a broadening of
their mission (from reconstruction to economic development and to economic and social
 12

development). It is furthermore remarkable that individual heads, such as Myrdal, Prebisch

and Gardiner, could leave their marks on the institution, while these marks were rather
different from each other. Information about Secretariats was difficult to find (and not much
was found for ESCWA). It remained restricted to numbers of staff, an indication of the
percentage of professional staff, the number of nationalities, some staff policy by the
Executive Secretary and the structure (divisions) of the organ as well as its stronger and
weaker sides. Yet some basic characteristic were revealed, such as the relevance of the
ECAFE library and the ECE Economic Surveys, both based on well-chosen Secretariat’s
policies, the satisfaction of the Asian countries that ECAFE was an Asian organization with
regard to staff and the struggle over the ‘African’ character of ECA. I also found relevant
information about some available qualities of the Executive Secretaries, which inform us
about the people who became the executive heads of these Secretariats.
With regard to education, it can be concluded that the Executive Secretaries of the
Regional Commissions are highly educated, with at least 17 of the 25 Executive Secretaries
having earned a PhD before nomination (Honorary PhDs were left aside and no information is
available in two cases). Almost all, i.e. 22, also studied abroad, 14 of them in the US at good
or excellent universities; hence in this respect international academic experience is available
at leadership level.
With regard to national careers there are differences, with ESCAP having 4
Secretaries with governmental experience in the economic field (as may be expected given
the character of the Commissions), ECE 5, but only two in the economic field, ECLAC 4, but
only two in the economic field, ECA only 2, with one in the economic field and ESCWA 3,
with one in the economic field. Hence, 18 out of 25 had governmental experience, but only 10
in the economic field as such. ESCAP seems strongest in this respect and ECA weakest.
With regard to diplomatic and international experience, there are differences with
regard to the UN system. In ESCAP and ECA all 5 Secretaries had careers within the UN
system before, in ESCWA only 2 and in ECE only 1. In ECLAC 3 careers developed in
ECLAC itself, while experience in other UN entities was restricted. The Secretaries in ECA
had no experience outside the UN system. The results for ECA and ECLAC can be related to
some general aspects discussed before. Gruhn discussed ECA’s dual mandate (between UN
and Africa), but here it is revealed that ECA Secretaries depend strongly on the UN system
with regard to international experience. ECLAC under Prebisch had a strong influence, also
beyond its own region (e.g. in ECA under Adedeji), but being strong in economic theory did
not necessarily mean actual impact. Here it is revealed that ECLAC remained a comparatively
isolated institution, with international (and regional) connections strongly related to itself and
not diverse within the UN system.
With regard to regional connections, there are also differences. In ESCAP all five had
strong regional connections; in ECE only one had strong connections and some had weak
ones; in ECLAC regional connections were related to ECLAC itself and not diverse; in ECA
regional connections were weak and in fact developed when working for ECA; and in
ESCWA the two female Secretaries had strong regional connections. Six Secretaries
developed regional connections during and after their work for the Regional Commission (3
in ECA and one each in ECE, ECLAC and ESCWA).

While the legal setup of the various Regional Commissions is rather similar (not discussed in
this text, but taken for granted), it strikes that the five Commissions and their Secretariats
have developed different ly. This is true for the general characteristics mentioned above in the
various sections on the Commissions and for the differences found with regard to the national
careers, international experience and regional connections of the Executive Secretaries.
Hence, similar institutions do not need to develop similarly in a number of regions.
 13

Among the 25 Executive Secretaries discussed here are six women. Before mostly
men were office-holders (the ECE had another female Executive Secretary: Danuta Hübner
2000-2001) and one Commission (ECA) has only men. One female Secretary (Brigita
Schmögnerová in ECE: 2002-2005) reached the position without experience in the UN system
and without regional connections, hence mainly based on her national career as minister of
finance. The five other women (Noeleen Heyzer in ESCAP 2007-2013; Shamsad Akhtar in
ESCAP since 2013; Alicia Bárcena in ECLAC since 2008; Mervat Tallaway in ECSWA
2000-2007 and Rima Khalaf in ECSWA since 2010) all had broad experience in the UN
system as well as regionally, which raises the questions of how and to what extent the UN
system has facilitated their Secretaryship of the Regional Commissions. This research does
not answer these questions, but it does show that international experience in the UN system
and regional connections are strong in these cases, in addition to education and national
experience (the latter aspect with the exception of Heyzer).

With regard to rising or emerging states, in this case defined as the BRICS and Turkey, it can
be concluded that the UN Regional Commissions do not seem interesting for them, given
their absence at the level of Executive Secretary.
China and India did play a role during the early years of ESCAP (then ECAFE), but
are absent after that initial period. Instead, two large South Asian states (Pakistan and
Indonesia) and two former Asian Tigers are among the five most recent Executive Secretaries.
The ECE shows the absence of both Russia and Turkey (which does not belong to ECSWA
and may have played a role there), while countries from Central Europe provide the office-
holders. South Africa is absent in ECA and Brazil in ECLAC, while in ECSWA Egypt has
provided two out of five most recent Executive Secretaries. This picture provides the
impression that groups of ‘less-rising’ states, rather than the ‘rising’ ones, hold these
positions, which may provide a counterweight to the rising states, which at least is the case in
ESCAP and ECE, but to a certain extent also in the other three.
I hope this paper has contributed to our understanding of the evolution of the UN
system by paying attention to the relatively unknown UN Regional Commissions, their
Secretariats, the qualities of their executive heads as well as some change with regard to
regional development and gender. Regional Commissions may have been the wrong choice
for the question of rising states and their impact on the change of leadership, but then this
exercise has shown that the rising states are absent in the leadership of these Regional
Commissions, where they also meet with positions taken by ‘less-rising’ states in the region.
This at least nuances the answer to the original question.
Another possibility to discuss leadership of IGO executive heads from rising states is
discussing the policies and leadership style of those executive heads who have recently left
their IGO or are still in function. If I am correct there are 22 office-holders from rising states
since 2010. These 22 (17 men and 5 women) are mentioned in Table 2. Brazil covers 2 UN
agencies (FAO, WTO) and 1 regional IGO (Mercosur); China covers 4 UN agencies (ICAO,
ITU, UNIDO, WHO) and 1 regional IGO (AIIB); India covers 1 UN agency (IPCC) and 1
regional IGO (Commonwealth); Russia covers one UN agency (UNODC) and 5 regional
IGOs (EAEU, Intersputnik, SCO, CSTO, CIS); South Africa covers 2 UN Agencies
(OHCHR, UN Women) and 1 regional IGO (AU); and Turkey holds 1 UN agency (OPCW)
and 2 regional IGOs (ECO, OIC). Most remarkable are three South-African women in this
group, vis-à-vis only men in ECA. Also remarkable is Russia’s strong regional presence (5
IGOs), but weak presence within the UN system, for instance in comparison to China and
Brazil. A further analysis of this group, however, requires another paper.
 14

Table 2: Executive Heads of IGOs from Rising States in Function After 2010
Rising State Executive Head, IGO, Time in Office

Brazil José Graziano da Silva, Director-General Food and Agriculture

Organization FAO since 2012 (m)
Jeferson Miola, Director of the Executive Secretariat, Southern
Common Market MERCOSUR 2012-2014 (m)
Roberto Carvalho de Azevêdo, Director-General World Trade
Organization WTO since 2013 (m)
China Jin Liqun, President Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank AIIB since
2016 (m)
Fang Liu, Secretary-General International Civil Aviation Organization
ICAO since 2015 (f)
Houlin Zhao, Secretary-General International Telecommunication
Union ITU since 2015 (m)
Yong Li, Director-General United Nations Industrial Development
Organization UNIDO since 2013 (m)
Margaret Chan, Director-General World Health Organization WHO
since 2007 (f)
India Kamalesh Sharma, Secretary-General The Commonwealth 2008-2016
(m)
Rajendra Kumar Pachauri, Chair Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change IPCC 2002-2015 (m)
Russian Viktor Borisovich Khristenko, Chairman of the Eurasian Economic
Federation Commission, Eurasian Economic Union EAEU since 2015 (m)
Vadim Yevgenyevich Belov, Director General International
Organization of Space Communications Intersputnik since 2005 (m)
Dmitry Fyodorovich Mezentsev, Secretary-General Shanghai
Cooperation Organization SCO 2013-2015 (m)
Yuri Viktorovich Fedotov, Executive Director United Nations Office
on Drugs and Crime UNODC since 2010 (m)
Nikolay Nikolayevich Bordyuzha, Secretary-General Collective
Security Treaty Organization CSTO since 2003 (m)
Sergey Lebedev, Executive Secretary Commonwealth of Independent
States CIS since 2007 (m)
South Africa Nkosazana Clarence Dlamini-Zuma, Chairwoman of the Commission
of the African Union AU since 2012 (f)
Navanethem Pillay, High Commissioner for Human Rights, Office of
the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights OHCHR
2008-2014 (f)
Phumzile Mlambo-Ngcuka, Executive Director UN Women, the United
Nations Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women
since 2013 (f)
Turkey Halil Ibrahim Akça, Secretary-General Economic Cooperation
Organization ECO since 2015 (m)
Ahmet Üzümcü, Director-General Organisation for the Prohibition of
Chemical Weapons OPCW since 2010 (m)
Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, Secretary-General Organization of Islamic
Cooperation OIC 2011-2013 (m)
 15

Appendix 1: The Five Most Recent Executive Secretaries of ESCAP

Name, Time in Education National Diplomatic & Regional
nationality office career international connections
& gender experience
Shamshad 2013 - MSc Econ. Memb. Pak. IMF Governor 15 yrs ADB,
Akhtar, Islamabad; Econ. Advis. + Vice Pres DG of SE
Pakistan (f) MA Dev. Comm + ME&NA Asia Region
Econ. Sussex; Gov. Cl. Region IBRD
PhD Econ. Pak. one of ‘top
Paisly Statistics ten
CollofTechn; Bureau; professional
Fulbright Governor women in
Fellow at Central Bank Asia’ Wall
Harvard of Pak. Str Jrn Asia
Noeleen 2007-2013 BA & MSc 94-07 Exec Dir Dir. gender
Heyzer, UofSingapore; UNIFEM; role progr. As &
Singapore (f) PhD Social in SC Res Pac Devel.
Scs 1325(2000); Center; Spec.
Cambridge worked for Adv. UNSG
UNDP, ILO, Timor-Leste
Commonwealth
Kim Hak- 2000-2007 BA YonseiU; Central bank Ambass. for 1980s UN
Su, Republic MA econ. economist; Int. Econ. Dep. Techn.
of Korea (m) EdinburghU; Secr. to Min. Affairs Coop &
PhD of Comm; Dev.;
UofSCarolina London off. SG Colombo
BoKorea; Plan 95-99
private sector
management
Adrianus 1995-2000 BA Econ Longtime Memb. Indon. Ec. Aff. Off
Mooy, UYogyakarta; service for deleg. to ECAFE;
Indonesia Msc + PhD ministries. UNCTAD and Indon. deleg.
(m) econ. (statist, econ IGG; to ASEAN;
UofWisconsin & mon aff); 1993 Amb to Alt. Govern.
parlem. & Eur Commun.; ADB
prof.; 1988 Gov.
governor of IMF; Alt.
Central Bank Govern. MIGA
Rafeeudin 1992-1994 BA + MA For. Service 1970 UN 1983 SR
Ahmed, PolSci Pak; dipl. Secret., 1978 UNSG Hum.
Pakistan (m) UofPunjab; posts in Chef de Cab.; Aff. SE Asia
Grad. Studies China, 1983 Under SG
Int Econ + Int Egypt, Pol Aff; 1992
Law Fletcher Canada + Dir Ass. Adminis.
SchLaw+Dipl UN affairs in UNDP
For Miny
 16

Appendix 2: The Five Most Recent Executive Secretaries of the ECE

Name, Time in Education National Diplomatic Regional
nationality & office career & connections
gender international
experience
Christian Friis 2014 - Msc Parliamentarian; Int. NGOs 2010-11
Bach, Denmark agronomy + 2011-14 (WWF et Spec. Adv.
(m) PhD int econ. Minister for al.); 1995 EU
UCopenhagen Devel. Coop spec. deleg. Comm.er for
to IBRD Int UN Glob
Trade Div. Sustainab.
Panel
Sven Alkalaj, 2012- MA in IR Director int. 1993 Amb to Postwar
Bosnia and 2014 UofSarajevo; company and the US, 2000 reconstr
Herzegovina program at 2007-12 to OAS, 2004 B&H via
(m) Harvard Minister of For to Belgium & EU and
Grad. School Aff. NATO other IOs
of Bus Adm.
Ján Kubiš, 2009- Graduate 1976-92 worked 1993-98 1994 Pact
Czechoslovakia 2012 Moscow State at Miny of FA Amb to for Stab. In
/ Slovakia, (m) Inst. of IR CZ, 93 Slov.; UNOG; 98- Eur.; 1999-
For. Minister of 99 SR UNSG 2005 SG
Slov. 2006-09 Tajikistan OSCE; 2005
EU Spec.
Envoi to
Central
Asia; 2007-
08 Chair
Mins of CoE
Marek Belka, 2005- MA + Consultant for 1990s cons. 2002-03
Poland (m) 2008 PhD/Hab in Miny Fin; 97+ to IBRD; advisor JP
economics 2001-02 Min of 2003 resp. Morgan for
UofLódz; Fin; 2004-05 for econ. CE Europe
scholarships Prime Minister policy
Columbia, interim coal.
Chicago & administrator
LSE Iraq
Brigita 2002- PhD econ. 1994 Dep.
Schmögnerová, 2005 Bratislava; Prime Min;
Slovakia (f) courses in parliamentarian; After ECE After ECE
Athens & 1998-2002 Min. Gov. IMF, Gov. EBRD
GeorgetownU of Fin. IBRD
 17

Appendix 3: The Five Most Recent Executive Secretaries of ECLAC

Name, Time in Education National Diplomatic Regional
nationality office career & connections
& gender international
experience
Alicia 2008 - BA biology Univ. career; Division Coordinator
Bárcena, UofMexico; vice Min of chief reg. program
Mexico (f) MA Public ecology ECLAC; at UNDP &
Administr. UN Secretar.: project
Harvard Chef de UNEP
Cabinet
Annan
José Luis 2003 - 2008 MA econ. in 1980s Pres 1990s IDB consult.
Machinea, Argentina; Central Bank consult.
Argentina PhD Uof & Under- IBRD (&
(m) Minnesota Secr.; 1999- IDB)
2001 Min of
Economy
José 1998 - 2003 BAs in Academic;
Antonio sociol. & Min of Agric
Ocampo, econ. 1993-94; Dir
Colombia UofNotre Nat Plann. Later: Later:
(m) Dame; PhD 1994-96; UN Under UNDP/OAS
econ. Yale Min of Fin SG DESA Project 2003-
1996-98 NY 2003-07 07
Gert 1988 - 1997 BA econ. Nat. Project Dir. Repres. G. in
Rosenthal, Guatemala; Planning UNCTAD Ex. Cl.
Guatemala MBA Secr. 1965; 1972-73; Dir SIECA 1964;
(m) Berkeley, Min of Mexico Off Ass to SG
CA Planning ECLAC; SIECA
1969-71, 1987 Dep.
1973-74 Ex. Secr.
ECLAC
Norberto 1985-1987 Econ. Uof Academic 1979 Dep Ex Dir of ILPES
González, Buenos career; Nat. Secr of 10 years; Dir
Argentina Aires; MA Reinsurance ECLAC of ECLAC’s
(m) LSE; Institute; Div of Int
doctorate Pres prov. Trade 7 yrs
UofBuenos Planning
Aires Board
 18

Appendix 4: The Five Most Recent Executive Secretaries of ECA

Name, Time in Education National Diplomatic Regional
nationality office career & connections
& gender international
experience
Carlos 2012 - MA int. devel. Int. academ. 1988 UNDP Editor of
Lopes, Studies Geneva career; nat. economist; some African
Guinea- Graduate Inst.; planning & 2005 UN Dir scientific
Bissau (m) PhD in history diplomacy Pol Aff; 2007 journals
Univ. de Paris 1 UNITAR &
College in
Turin
Abdoulie 2005-2012 MA Planning 1979 UNDP; UNDP 2000
Janneh, UofNottingham; 1990s UNDP Reg Dir for
Gambia (m) postgrad studies funds Africa
in Bradford
Kingsley 1995-2005 BA econ. 1974 IBRD
Amoako, UofGhana; MA various pos.
Ghana (m) & PhD Role in
Berkeley, CA NEPAD
Layashi 1992-1995 Economist Min of Spec.
Yaker, Univ. unknown Trade 1969- Advisor to
Algeria (m) 77; ambass. DG
in SU 1979- UNESCO Afr.
82 & US 1983-92 sustainable
1983 developm.
Issa Ben 1991 - 1992 Univ. de Paris In Miny of UNITAR
Yassin IR PolSci; PhD ForAff; Ass. Dir;
Diallo, in poli. 1963-68 DG 1982, Dir
Guinea (m) economy Econ. & Exec Office
Geneva Techn. UNSG 1985- Helped
Graduate Coop. 86; 1986 establish Afr.
Institute Spec. Ass Econ.
UNSG Community
 19

Appendix 5: The Five Most Recent Executive Secretaries of ESCWA

Name, Time in Education National Diplomatic Regional
nationality office career & connections
& gender international
experience
Rima 2010 - BA econ Min Industry 2000-06 UNDP Reg.
Khalaf, AmUofBeirut; & Trade UNDP; Bureau for
Jordan (f) PhD Portland 1993-95, Comm. Arab States
StateU Min for World Bank
Planning Group 2008-
1995-98; 09
Dep Prime
Min 1999-
2000
Bader Al- 2007 - 2010 BA Western In Miny of Ambassador Arts,
Dafa, Qatar Michigan; ForAff; to US; perm. education,
(m) MA econ ambassador Observer in religious
Johns Hopkins to Russia & OAS; freedom
other states INGOs between
Arab world
& int comm.
Mervat 2000 - 2007 BA PolSci & Ass Min 1982-85 UN Chief negot.
Tallaway, BusAdm Am. ForAff 1991- INSTRAW; Eg. deleg
Egypt (f) UnCairo; 93; ambass. 1988-91 repr. ME Peace
Geneva to Japan to IAEA, Conf 1991-
Graduate 1993-97; UNIDO, 93
Institute Min of Insur Human.Aff,
& Soc. Aff. Vienna; 1994
Popul. Conf
Cairo
Hazem El- 1995 - 2000 Econ. AmU Academic
Beblawi, Cairo; PhD career; 1983-
Egypt (m) Univ. de 95 Chairm
Paris; UCLA Exp
LA Developm Later:
Bank of 2001 Arab
Egypt Monet Fund
Sabah 1993 - 1995 Mathematics Teacher & 1983 Study
Bakjaji, UofDamascus; prof.; 1983- for Arab
Syria (m) PhD actuarial 92 Min of Fund for
sc. Louvain State for Ec&Soc
(B) Planning Aff Dev.
 20

References
Berthelot, Y. and Rayment, P. (2007) Looking Back and Peering Forward. A Short History of
the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe, 1947-2007, New York and
Geneva: United Nations.
Farer, T. (ed.) (2011) Emerging Powers and Multilaterism in the Twenty-First Century:
Global Governance, 17/3, July-September, 281-397.
Gregg, R.W. (1966) 'The UN Regional Economic Commissions and Integration in the
Underdeveloped Regions', International Organization, 20(2): 208-232.
Gruhn, I.V. (1984) 'The Economic Commission for Africa' in: D. Mazzeo (ed.) African
Regional Organizations, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 27-48.
Hart Schaaf, C. (1953) 'The United Nations Economic Commission for Asia and the Far East',
International Organization, 7(4): 463-481.
IOBIO Biographical Dictionary of Secretaries-General of International Organizations.
www.ru.nl/fm/iobio IO BIO entries can be found in alphabetical order by Executive
Head.
Kille, K.J. (2013) 'Secretaries-General of International Organizations: Leadership Capacity
and Qualities' in: B. Reinalda (ed.) Routledge Handbook of International
Organization, Abingdon: Routledge, 218-230.
Rostow, W.W. (1949) 'Machinery for Rebuilding the European Economy: I. The Economic
Commission for Europe', International Organization, 3(2): 254-268.
Schiavone, G. (2001) International Organizations: A Dictionary and Directory. Fifth Edition,
Houndsmill: Palgrave.
Tarasov, G. and Achamkulangare, G. (2015) Cooperation among the United Nations
Regional Commissions, Geneva: United Nations Joint Inspection Unit.
Wightman, D. (1956) Economic Co-Operation in Europe: A Study of the United Nations
Economic Commission for Europe, London: Stevens & Sons and William Heinemann.
Wightman, D. (1963) Toward Economic Cooperation in Asia: The United Nations Economic
Commission for Asia and the Far East, New Haven and London: Yale University
Press.