The Access to COVID-19 Tools (ACT) Accelerator, is global collaboration to accelerate development, production, and equitable access to COVID-19 tests, treatments, and vaccines.

To speed up an end to the pandemic by supporting the development and equitable distribution of the tests, treatments and vaccines the world needs to reduce mortality and severe disease, restoring full societal and economic activity globally in the near term, and facilitating high-level control of COVID-19 disease in the medium term.

Launched at the end of April 2020, at an event co-hosted by the Director-General of the World Health Organization, the President of France, the President of the European Commission, and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the Access to COVID-19 Tools (ACT) Accelerator brings together governments, scientists, businesses, civil society, and philanthropists and global health organizations (the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, CEPI, FIND, Gavi, The Global Fund, Unitaid, Wellcome, the WHO, and the World Bank).

The ACT-Accelerator is co-convened by leading global health organizations through adherence to a single framework for collaboration. The framework, consisting of three pillars supported by a Health Systems Connector and a country Allocation & Access workstream, facilitates joint problem-solving and knowledge sharing. Each ACT-Accelerator Pillar is managed by 2-3 partner agencies working together. 1. The Vaccines Pillar – also known as COVAX – is co-convened by the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI), Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, and the World Health Organization (WHO), with UNICEF as a key delivery partner. 2. The Diagnostics Pillar is co-convened by the Foundation for Innovative New Diagnostics (FIND) and the Global Fund, with WHO leading on regulatory policy, product procurement and allocation, and country access and support, while supporting R&D efforts. 3. The Therapeutics Pillar is co-convened by Unitaid and the Wellcome Trust, with WHO leading the policy and regulatory work, and the Global Fund leading work on procurement and deployment. 4. The Health Systems Connector (HSC) is co-convened by the Global Fund, the World Bank and WHO, with support from The Global Financing Facility for Women, Children and Adolescents (GFF). 5. The Access & Allocation workstream is led by WHO and directs ACT-Accelerator's work on global equitable access and allocation. Civil Society and community engagement is integrated across all the pillars.

Bill and Milinda Gates Foundation (Philanthropies (Corporate)); WHO (UN Bodies); World Bank (International Financial Institutions/DFIs); GAVI (Others); CEPI, (Academic/Research Institutions); FIND (International NGOs); The Global Fund (International Financial Institutions/DFIs); Unitaid (International Financial Institutions/DFIs); Wellcome (Philanthropies (Corporate))

Initiator/Convenor; Host; Leadership; Member; Funder; Strategic Partner; Implementer

Initiator/Convenor; Host; Leadership; Member; Funder; Strategic Partner;

Global Health

COVID

Policy

Project

Financing Facility

Paradigmatic/ Campaign

Financing

Paradigm

Campaign

Academic/Research Institutions

Business/Industry

Governments

Implementation partners

Industry

institutions

International NGOs

National NGOs

Northern donor governments

Philanthropies

Regional Bodies

UN Bodies

Academic/Research Institutions

Business/Industry

Government

International Financial Institutions/DFIs

Northern donor govts

Philanthropies

UN bodies

Yes

The Alliance for Affordable Internet (A4AI) is hosted by the World Wide Web Foundation is an initiative to make the Internet more affordable to people around the world. It was created with the goal of obtaining global broadband internet access priced at less than 5% of average per capita income globally; the target of the UN Broadband Commission. It cites the lack of investment in infrastructure, competition in the market, and inefficient taxation, amongst other policy and regulatory obstacles, as being major constraints to reducing prices.

to reduce broadband prices and enable the billions still offline around the world to afford Internet access.

The initiative was officially launched on October 7, 2013, at the "Commonwealth Telecommunications Organisation Forum" in Abuja, Nigeria.

Advisory Council; Secretariat The Advisory Council is the non-fiduciary governing body of A4AI. Led by the A4AI Honorary Chair, the 12 voting members of the Advisory Council come equally from the private, public, and civil society sectors, and provide oversight, strategic direction, and high-level decision making for the Alliance.

SIDA (Northern donor govts); USAID (Northern donor govts); World Wide Web Foundation (International NGOs); Internet Society (International NGOs); Google (Business/Industry); Microsoft (Business/Industry); Facebook (Business/Industry); Cisco (Business/Industry); Ericsson; World Bank (International Financial Institutions/DFIs); UN Technology (UN Bodies)

Initiator/Convenor; Host; Leadership; Member; Funder; Strategic Partner

Member

Internet and Data Governance

Access

Policy

Project

High-impact Standard

Paradigmatic/ Campaign

Paradigm

Campaign

Academic/Research Institutions

Business/Industry

Governments

Implementation partners

Industry

institutions

International NGOs

Investors/Banks

National NGOs

Northern donor governments

Philanthropies

Regional Bodies

UN Bodies

Business/Industry

Companies

IFI/DFI

Investment Funds/Banks

Northern donor govts

Self-generated revenue

https://webfoundation.org/about/annual-reports/

SDGs, Universal, affordable internet access by 2020

Michael Gurstein says that the organisation was more about encouraging Less Developed Countries (LDCs) to adopt neoliberal policies than actually getting "affordable access". Quoting their documentation, he says that they advocate a set of "guiding principles" for adoption as policy and regulatory practice by the LDCs. These, he argues, all rest on neoliberal assumptions, rather than allowing them to be tested alongside other ways of looking at things. Whilst these guidelines include an evidence based approach, Gurstein argues that if all the research is carried out on neoliberal assumptions the results will be highly pre-determined by the input principles. He raises concern that this approach will allow for private companies to exploit making developments in the more readily reliable markets of the urban environment, while extending such services to less viable rural markets will be left to inadequately funded public initiatives. He further points to the championing of the use of Universal Service Fund facilities, a structure promoted by the World Bank which often attract million or even billion dollar budgets but where control is retained by private service providers and which often do not match local needs. This leads to his claim that a major priority for A4AI is that LDC governments adopt neoliberal policies as outlined in their guiding principles.

Neloliberal policies are the base of this initiative and that the markets and competitiveness are the only way to push the access and affordability of the internet.

https://gurstein.wordpress.com/2016/03/20/a4ai-who-could-oppose-a-more-affordable-internet-the-alliance-for-an-affordable-internet-a4ai-and-the-neo-liberal-stealth-campaign-to-control-the-internet-throughout-the-developing-world-and-make/

The Alliance for Responsible Mining is a global leading expert on responsible artisanal and small-scale mining (ASM). It continues to expand our network and have both projects and important new agreements in Africa and Asia to assist miners in benefitting from better conditions and access to fair markets. It works collaboratively with the whole supply chain: miners, legislators, industry bodies and buyers. Its stakeholder alliance is the largest in the field and represents the diverse perspectives of different groups, with a shared agenda.

It works to transform the sector through a holistic strategy and a wide range of services for miners, the gold industry, public entities and other actors working in the sector. Its vision is for artisanal and small-scale mining (ASM) to become a formalized, organized and profitable activity that uses efficient technologies, and is socially and environmentally responsible.

Started in 2004, in Quito, Ecuador, at the headquarters of Rainforest Rescue International (FURARE) by an international group of community-based mining organizations, environmentalists, business representatives and certification specialists from Colombia, Ecuador, the United States, the Philippines, Holland, Mongolia, Peru, Sri Lanka, and the United Kingdom. Shortly after the office was set up in Envigado, Colombia; where we continue to have our headquarters. The Alliance for Responsible Mining (ARM) was launched by a network of independent organizations with the aim of promoting responsible standards and criteria for artisanal and small-scale mining. We began our work with various organizations from different countries, drawing inspiration from the promising results achieved by the Oro Verde initiative in Colombia, a local strategy for conservation of the biodiversity of the Chocó Department of Colombia.

The maximum authority is the Board of Director’s, which guides and manages the organization and is responsible for defining the direction of the Foundation, in line with the interests of its various allies and actors in the supply chain. Its chair is headed by a scientist/mining engineer and the Board comprises of academic, business, trainers, and NGOs

Felix Hruschka (Others-expert/consultant); Harbi Guerrero Morillo (Others-cooperative); Marcin Piersiak Executive Director ARM (Others-director)

Leadership; Strategic Partners

Funder; Strategic Partner (UNIDO)

Climate, Environment, Energy, Extractives

Extractives

Policy

Project

Environmental and Social Standard

Civil Society

Industry

Companies

https://www.responsiblemines.org/en/2018-annual-report-alliance-for-responsible-mining/

Minamata Convention

1) MSI as a voluntary governance; and 2) changes to the communities of ASM (artisinal and small-scale miners)

https://www.responsiblemines.org/en/contact/; MSI integrity database

The Better Biomass certificate (NEN 8080) is used by organizations to demonstrate that the biomass they produce, process, trade or use meets well established international sustainability criteria.

A voluntary scheme to demonstrate compliance with the mandatory sustainability criteria for biofuels and bioliquids as laid down in the Renewable Energy Directive since 2012 and recognized by the Dutch Commission.

Established in 2011 and has developed two standards NTA 8080-1 and NTA 8080-2 designed by a working group under the responsibility of the NEN policy committee “Energy resources, distribution and fuels

Follows governing structure of the NEN Foundation

NEN Foundation; the Netherlands Standardization Institute

Members; Clientele; Strategic Partners

No information

Climate, Environment, Energy, Extractives

Renewable Energy

Environmental and Social Standard

No Link

2012 Renewable Energy Directive (EU Energy Efficiency Directive)

1) voluntary nature of governance/ self-regulation; 2) involvement of big corporations such as Engie, RWE; 3) involvement of IUCN, Greenpeace, and WWF as "experts" in the working group

MSI Integrity database

A global not-for-profit organisation and the largest cotton sustainability programme in the world covering 21 countries. BCI exists to make global cotton production better for the people who produce it, better for the environment it grows in and better for the sector’s future.

To transform cotton production from the ground up; To support farmers' resilience to unpredictable climate conditions and be able to make a decent living from farming by producing Better Cotton; To achieve meaningful impact, this means reaching the farmers who need the most support, helping them to access vital training, inputs, services and finance, and building their capacity to adopt sustainable agricultural practices

Born out of a roundtable led by WWF in 2005, the BCI was established as an independent organization in 2009 initially supported by a collective of major organisations including adidas, Gap Inc., H&M, ICCO, IFAP, IFC, IKEA, Organic Exchange, Oxfam, PAN UK and WWF. https://bettercotton.org/about-bci/bci-history/

General Assembly: consisting of all BCI Members as the ultimate authority of BCI and elects a Council to represent it; Council (Board of Directors): elected board whose role it is to ensure that BCI has a clear strategic direction and adequate policy to successfully fulfil its mission; Each membership category has three seats, for a total of 12 seats; Secretariat: led by management and staff from around the world to carry out day-to-day operations

Alan McClay (Others-CEO); Others- big growers; Marks and Spencer (Business/Industry)

Leadership

Implementing partner/agency (UNIDO); Strategic Partner (UN Global Compact; UN Climate Change Commission)

Agri-agra, food, nutrition

Sustainable agriculture

Environmental and Social Standard

Business/Industry

Industry

International NGOs

Investors/Banks

National NGOs

Northern donor govts

Philanthropies

https://2017.bciannualreport.org/

2030 Sustainable Development Goals

1)greenwashing solutions to firms or intermediate producers that are systematically resorting to child labour, forced labour, intensive irrigation or massive pesticide spraying; 2)providing a marketable 'one-size-fits-all' consumer label to clothing firms that does not offer any information or guarantee in terms of social and environmental responsibility

1) Key funders are SECO, DANIDA, Swedish Gaming Authority, Laudes Foundation, & GIZ

BCI Website; UNIDO; UN Global Compact; Wagenegian university (critical study)

A global multi-stakeholder, non-profit organisation that exists to promote sustainable sugarcane production, processing and trade around the world. Bonsucro supports a community of over 250 members in over 50 countries, from all elements of the sugarcane supply chain, including, farmers, millers, traders, buyers and support organisations.

Bonsucro's mission is to ensure that responsible sugarcane production creates lasting value for the people, communities, businesses, economies and eco-systems in all cane-growing origins.

Launched in 2008, the BSI initiative was built initially to focus on creating a global, objective performance standard for everything that mattered about producing sugarcane and its primary derived products. In 2011, it launched certification under a new brand name of Bonsucro and for the next four years demonstrated the ability to manage and maintain both the framework behind the Standard as well as a credible third party certification. From 2016 onwarrds, the initiative has been repositioning itself into a global sugarcane platform as a response to stakeholders and significant shifts in industry and development thinking (role of certification and standards organisations).

Bonsucro is formally governed by a Board of Directors comprised of 7 members. The Board is ultimately responsible for all actions and activity of Bonsucro, although for practical purposes it delegates day-to-day responsibility of managing the organisation to the CEO and Secretariat team. It also has the power to convene committees to support it in its work and to which it can delegate responsibility for certain activities. Currently it delegates responsibility (through clearly defined terms of reference): to the Finance & Risk Committee (FRC), for financial oversight, to the Governance & Nominations Committee (GNC), for governance oversight, to the Technical Advisory Board (TAB), for the technical aspects of the Standard and verification processes.

Peter Allsop (Research/ Academic Institutions); Jean Claude Autrey (Academic/Research Institution); Melanie Rutten-Sülz (Others- consulting firms); Ruben Faust (Other-consulting firm); Elizabeth Farina (Other-consulting form); Meredith Smith/ED&F Man (Business/Industry); Anthony Edmonds (Others- big growers)

Members Leadership

Strategic partner (UN Global Compact)

Agri-agra, food, nutrition

Sustainable agriculture

Environmental and Social Standard

Business/Industry

Industry

International NGOs

National NGOs

Others

http://www.bonsucro.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Bonsucro-Outcome-Report-2019.pdf

UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights

1. WWF USA and Solidaridad are part of the Membership council; 2) PepsiCola, CocaCola, Olam (traders) are the prominent companies with leadership role in the MSI; 3) works on the whole supply chain of sugarcane production, processing, and retail; 4)

MSI Integrity Database, Bonsucro website

The Commission was established with the aim of boosting the importance of broadband on the international policy agenda, and expanding broadband access in every country as key to accelerating progress towards national and international development targets. It defines practical ways in which countries — at all stages of development — can achieve this, in cooperation with the private sector. Following adoption of the UN's Sustainable Development Goals in September 2015, the Commission works to showcase and document the power of ICT and broadband-based technologies for sustainable development. It brings together a high-powered community, including top CEO and industry leaders, senior policy-makers and government representatives, international agencies, academia and organizations concerned with development. The Commission embraces a range of different perspectives in a multi-stakeholder approach to promoting the roll-out of broadband, as well as providing a fresh approach to UN and business engagement.

To engage in high-level advocacy to promote broadband in developing countries and underserved communities. To advocate for higher priority to be given to the development of broadband infrastructure and services. To ensure that the benefits of this technology is realized in all countries. That governments and industry need to work together, hand-in-hand, to devise strategies for driving the roll-out of these networks much more proactively.

Broadband Commission for Digital Development was established in 2010 by ITU and UNESCO in response to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon's call to step-up UN efforts to meet the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). In September 2015 the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) replaced the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) as the international policy framework for socio-economic development and poverty reduction. While the MDGs included just 8 goals, and very little reference to technology, broadband or ICT, proposed SDGs are considerably more detailed, and cover 17 goals, with more than 150 targets. Overall, ICT specific targets are included in 4 of the 17 goals, however, there are no fewer than 38 other targets whose achievement will depend upon universal and affordable access to ICT and Broadband. Amongst the related science and technology targets are references to the internet, infrastructure, innovation, information access, increased efficiency, early warning, disaster risk management, knowledge sharing and data

Co-chairs; Commsioners/Members

ITU (UN Bodies); UNESCO (UN Bodies); Carlos Slim Foundation (Philapthropy (Corporate)); America Movil (Business/Industry); Paul Kagame (Governments)

Leadership; Member; Strategic Partner

Initiator/Convenor; Host; Leadership; Member; Funder; Strategic Partner

Internet and Data Governance

Access, Development

Policy

High-impact Standard

Paradigmatic/ Campaign

Paradigm

Campaign

Academic/Research Institutions

Business/Industry

Governments

Industry

institutions

International NGOs

Investors/Banks

National NGOs

Northern donor governments

Philanthropies

Regional Bodies

UN Bodies

Business/Industry

Companies

Philanthropies

UN bodies

https://broadbandcommission.org/publications/Pages/publications-category1.aspx

SDGs

Its the policy making body led by two UN agencies which emphasises upon the MSIs and brings together a select group of top CEOs and industry leaders, senior policy-makers and government representatives, international agencies, academia and organizations concerned with development. It boasts of its key strengths as in forging consensus between its business partners and policy members in developing a joint approach promoting broadband for public benefit, whilst satisfying minimum commercial incentives. However, its believed that most of the industry partners who are its members often push their interests through the influential policy recommendations.

The Capitals Coalition (the Coalition) is a global collaboration transforming the way decisions are made by including the value provided by nature, people and society. The Coalition unites the Natural Capital Coalition and the Social & Human Capital Coalition to accelerate momentum, leverage success, connect powerful and engaged communities, and identify the areas, projects and partnerships where it can collectively deliver benefits for nature, people and the economy.

To promote a systemic approach and integrated system: 'capitals approach'-- natural, social & economic that will measure the progress progress against the Sustainable Development Goals, climate and biodiversity targets; To provide decision makers with a lens to identify these connections between natural, economic & social, to contextualise non-financial information for organizations; To understand where there are synergies, trade-offs and opportunities to generate value for multiple stakeholders.; To bring to scale, package the harmonized existing approaches to capitals thinking and practice for use by businesses and governments; To provide a pre-competitive space for multi-stakeholder collaboration

Launched on January 2020 in Davos during the WEF week, the Capitals Coalition is a collaboration of over 350 of the world’s leading organizations from business, accountancy, science and academia, membership organizations, standard setting, finance, policy and civil society, who have united in a pre-competitive space because they believe that the Coalition is a vehicle that can drive the global conversation and deliver desperately needed systemic change by bringing nature and people into the heart of decision making.

The Capitals Coalition has a two-tier governance system with the Management Board responsible for the governance and running of the day to day activities, and the Supervisory Board responsible for oversight and strategic direction.

Mark Rough, CEO (Others-director); ERM Foundation; WWF International; Business for Nature (Business/Industry); Novartis (Busines/Industry); Trucost (Business/Industry); UNEP (UN Bodies); ABN-AMRO (Investors/Banks); Shift (International NGO); Antithesis (Others-consulants); WBCSD (Business/Industry); ILO (UN Bodies)

Initiator/Convenor; Leadership

Strategic Partner (UNEP); Leadership (ILO)

Climate, Environment, Energy, Extractives

Natural Capital

Paradigmatic/ Campaign

Paradigm

Campaign

Academic/Research Institutions

institutions

No Link

Launched on January 23, 2020 in Davos and combined two capitals coalition- the Natural Capital Coalition & the Social and Economic Capital Coalition

Capitals Coalition website

CEPI is a global partnership between public, private, philanthropic, and civil society organisations, which is working together to accelerate the development of vaccines against emerging infectious diseases and enable equitable access to these vaccines for people during outbreaks.

to accelerate the development of vaccines against emerging infectious diseases and enable equitable access to these vaccines for people during outbreaks.

CEPI was founded in 2017 at World Economic Forum annual meeting in Davos by the governments of Norway and India, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Wellcome, and the World Economic Forum.

The primary governing body is the Board, which has 12 voting members (four investors and eight independent members representing competencies including industry, global health, science, resource mobilisation, finance) and five observers. All investors are invited to join our Investors Council, which nominates Investor representatives to the Board and has some rights including approval any single investments over $100 m. Two additional bodies support and guide CEPI’s work: the Scientific Advisory Committee is the principal scientific advisory group to the Board and Secretariat and the Joint Coordination Group works with critical external stakeholders to advance CEPI’s portfolio of vaccines.

Bill and Milinda Gates Foundation (Philanthropies (Corporate)); Wellcome Trust (Philanthropies (Corporate)); Northern Donor Governments; Governments

Initiator/Convenor; Leadership; Member; Funder; Strategic Partner; Implementer

Leadership; Member; Funder; Strategic Partner; Implementer

Global Health

Infectious Diseases; Vaccines

Policy

Project

Financing Facility

Paradigmatic/ Campaign

Financing

Paradigm

Campaign

Academic/Research Institutions

Business/Industry

Governments

Implementation partners

Industry

institutions

International NGOs

National NGOs

Northern donor governments

Philanthropies

Regional Bodies

UN Bodies

Academic/Research Institutions

Business/Industry

Government

International Financial Institutions/DFIs

Northern donor govts

Philanthropies

Regional Bodies

UN bodies

Yes

The Christchurch Call is a commitment by Governments and tech companies to eliminate terrorist and violent extremist content online. It rests on the conviction that a free, open and secure internet offers extraordinary benefits to society. Respect for freedom of expression is fundamental. However, no one has the right to create and share terrorist and violent extremist content online.

To bring together a wide range of actors with influence including governments, civil society, and online service providers, such as social media companies, to build free, open and secure internet and to eliminate terrorist and violent extremist content online.

On 15 March 2019, people looked on in horror as, for 17 minutes, a terrorist attack against two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand, was live streamed. 51 people were killed and 50 injured and the live stream was viewed some 4,000 times before being removed. Two months later to the day, on 15 May 2019, New Zealand Prime Minister, Jacinda Ardern, and French President, Emmanuel Macron brought together Heads of State and Government and leaders from the tech sector to adopt the Christchurch Call.

Advisory Network; Secretariat

France (Northern donor govts); New Zealand (Northern donor govts); G8 (Northern donor govts); G20 (Governments); Access Now (International NGOs); Article 19 (International NGOs); Association for Progressive Communications (International NGOs); Brookings Institution (Academic/Research Institutions); Committee to Protect Journalists (International NGOs); Council on American-Islamic Relations (Academic/Research Institutions); Electronic Frontier Foundation (International NGOs); Global Disinformation Index (International NGOs); Global Network Initiative (International NGOs); Human Rights Centre, UC, Berkeley School of Law (Academic/Research Institutions); Institute for Strategic Dialogue (Academic/Research Institutions); Internet Governance Project, Georgia Tech (Academic/Research Institutions); Internet Sans Frontières (International NGOs); Reporters Without Borders (RSF) (International NGOs); The Internet Society (International NGOs); Tony Blair Institute for Global Change (Academic/Research Institutions); WITNESS (International NGOs); Google (Business/Industry); Facebook (Business/Industry); Microsoft (Business/Industry); Twitter (Business/Industry); Line (Business/Industry); Amazon (Business/Industry); Daily Motion (Business/Industry); European Commission (Regional Bodies); Council of Europe (Regional Bodies); UNESCO (UN Bodies);

Member; Strategic Partner

Member; Strategic Partner

Inernet and Data Governance

Security, Freedom of Speech, Terrorism

Policy

Paradigmatic/ Campaign

Paradigm

Campaign

Academic/Research Institutions

Business/Industry

Governments

Industry

institutions

International NGOs

National NGOs

Northern donor governments

Regional Bodies

UN Bodies

Northern donor govts

Updates available on its website

This is still an evolving field and several iniatives like this have forward in form of dialogue, guidelines, voluntary principles and it’s a cause of concern.

An informal, voluntary arrangement among 15 international organizations and secretariats with substantial programmes on forests. These agencies share their experiences and build on them to produce new benefits for their respective constituencies. They collaborate to streamline and align their work and to find ways of improving forest management and conservation and the production and trade of forest products. They also form startegic partnerships with each other for shared expertise and pooling of resources.

The mission of the CPF is to promote sustainable management of all types of forests, and to strengthen long-term political commitment to this end. CPF’s two objectives are to support the United Nations Forum on Forests (UNFF) and its member countries; to enhance cooperation and coordination among its members on forest issues; and promote the implementation of the UN Forest Instrument and the United Nations Strategic Plan for Forests as well as the contribution of forests and trees to the2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and other major forest-related agreements.

The Collaborative Partnership on Forests (CPF) is an interagency partnership on forests that was established in April 2001. It is modeled on the high-level, informal Interagency Task Force on Forests that supported the Intergovernmental Panel on Forests (1995-1997) and the Intergovernmental Forum on Forests (1997-2000). The CPF is comprised of 13 international forest-related organizations, institutions and convention secretariats.

FAO serves as the chair and the UN Forum on Forests as its secretariat

Led by 15 members: CIFOR, The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, Convention on Biological Diversity, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Global Environment Facility, International Tropical Timber Organization, IUCN, International Union of Forest Research Organizations, United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification, United Nations Development Programme, United Nations Environment Programme, United Nations Forum on Forests, United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, World Agroforestry Centre, World Bank

Target

Leadership

Climate, Environment, Energy, Extractives

Forests

Policy

institutions

International NGOs

National NGOs

UN Bodies

African Development Bank

Government

Northern donor govts

UN bodies

World Bank

http://www.cpfweb.org/73055/en/; https://www.un.org/esa/forests/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Updated-CPF-WorkPlan-2017-2020-version-July-2020.pdf

UN Forest Instrument, the United Nations Strategic Plan for Forests, 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and other major forest-related agreement

Foremost inclusive international and intergovernmental platform for all stakeholders to work together to ensure food security and nutrition for all.

To coordinate a global approach to food security; To promote policy convergence; To support and advise countries and regions; To coordinate at national and regional levels; To promote accountability and share best practices, and To develop a global strategic framework for food security and nutrition

as established in 1974 as an intergovernmental body to serve as a forum in the United Nations System for review and follow-up of policies concerning world food security including production and physical and economic access to food. The UN Committee on World Food Security (CFS) was reformed in 2009 in the context of the world food crisis (2007/2008). Among the core functions identified for the reformed CFS were the improvement of coordination between governments and other actors considered relevant for food security, as well as the promotion of policy convergence and coordination through the development of international guidelines and strategies on food security and nutrition, informed by country and regional experiences.

Plenary (General Assembly): central body for decision-taking, debate, coordination, lesson-learning and convergence by all stakeholders; CFS Bureau (Board of Directors) and Advisory Group: the Bureau is the executive arm of the CFS . It is made up of a Chairperson and twelve member countries. The Advisory group is made up of representatives from the 5 different categories of CFS Participants.; High Level Panel of Experts (Others): provides the science-policy interface of the CFS and independent, evidence-based analysis and advice at the request of CFS.; Secretariat: support team for the three other bodies.

Thanawat Tien (Gov't), International Agri-Food Network (Business/Industry); Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (Philanthropies (corporate); World Bank (IFI/DFI)

Advisory group

Initiator/Convenor; Host

Agri-agra, food, nutrition

Food security and nutrition

Policy

Academic/Research Institutions

Affected communities

Business/Industry

Industry

institutions

International NGOs

National NGOs

Philanthropies

UN Bodies

Northern donor govts

Others

Philanthropies

UN bodies

http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/cfs/CFS45/draft-final-report/MY266_CFS_2018_45_REPORT_en.pdf

UN Convetion on ECOSOC Rights; Right to Food and Nutrition; 2030 Sustainable Development Goals; UN Declaration on the Rights of Peasants

1) increased role and prominence of BMGF and corporate sector led by International Agri-Food Network

A central element in the reform process was the opening up of the intergovernmental body to the participation of other actors. These included civil society, UN agencies, regional financial institutions, agricultural research institutes, philanthropies, and the private sector. These actors now have the right to actively participate as “participants” in CFS policy discussions and submit proposals, while the “members” of the Committee, the 130 member States, retain exclusive decision making and voting rights.

FIAN report; CFS website

The Contract for the Web is a global action plan to address threats to an open web and to keep it safe and empowering for everyone. It guides the digital policy agendas of governments and the decisions of companies as they build tomorrow’s web technologies. It sets standards, rooted in human rights, for the development and implementation of new technologies, and the policies and laws needed to support them. It brings together the core parties shaping the future of the web — governments, companies and civic groups — around a shared set of commitments that are rooted in human rights, setting out concrete actions they and individual web users must take to build a web that works for all humanity.

to make sure our online world is safe, empowering and genuinely for everyone

In November 2018, Sir Tim Berners-Lee announced a project to build a new Contract for the Web that would bring governments, companies and citizens together around a shared set of commitments to build a better web. In January 2019, over 80 signatories to the contract principles debated and negotiated the full details and commitments to be outlined in the full Contract. That process was informed by a public consultation with input from more than 600 people, including policy experts. In July 2019, it published the first draft text of the Contract for the Web.

Core Group; Working Group; Secretariat The process is being guided by a core group of 10 which meets regularly to coordinate and plan for the contract’s success. Governments: France, Germany; Civil Society: Wikimedia, Avaaz, CIPESA, Web Foundation, The NewNow; Companies: Pango (formerly known as AnchorFree), Google, Microsoft. Five working groups formed to turn these principles into concrete commitments included in the final Contract: 1) Access, 2) Openness, 3) Privacy & Data Rights, 4) Positive Tech 5) Public Action Representation of the working group : 35% of working group members come from the private sector, 50% from CSOs, and the remaining 15% from government; 30% come from the Global South

Sir Tim Berners-Lee (Business/Industry); World Wide Web Foundation (International NGOs)

Initiator/Convenor; Host; Leadership; Member; Funder; Strategic Partner; Implementer

Strategic Partner

Internet and data governance

Human Rights

Standards

Academic/Research Institutions

Business/Industry

Governments

Implementation partners

Industry

institutions

International NGOs

National NGOs

Northern donor governments

Regional Bodies

Business/Industry

Companies

IFI/DFI

Investment Funds/Banks

Northern donor govts

Philanthropies

Self-generated revenue

Regular updates and products of the working groups available.

African Declaration on Internet Rights and Freedoms; African Platform on Access to Information Declaration; Internet Rights Charter, Association for Progressive Communications (APC); Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union; Corporate Accountability Index, Ranking Digital Rights; General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), European Union; Declaration on the Digital Future, GSMA; The Human Rights Principles for Connectivity and Development, Access Now; Joint declaration on freedom of expression and the Internet, OSCE; Mobile User Privacy Bill of Rights, Electronic Frontier Foundation; The Mozilla Manifesto, Mozilla; Internet Bill of Rights, Ro Khanna; The Toronto Declaration, Access Now & Amnesty International; Universal Declaration of Human Rights, United Nations

COVAX is one of three pillars of the Access to COVID-19 Tools (ACT) Accelerator, which was launched in April 2020 by the World Health Organization (WHO), the European Commission and France in response to this pandemic. Bringing together governments, global health organisations, manufacturers, scientists, private sector, civil society and philanthropy, with the aim of providing innovative and equitable access to COVID-19 diagnostics, treatments and vaccines. COVAX is co-led by Gavi, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) and WHO.

To accelerate the development and manufacture of COVID-19 vaccines, and to guarantee fair and equitable access for every country in the world.

Coordination Committee Mechanism; Working Groups; Secretariat The CCM is the high-level body that meets to coordinate efforts across the different elements of COVAX, the vaccines pillar of the Access to COVID-19 Tools (ACT) Accelerator. The CCM is chaired by the Board Chairs of CEPI and Gavi, and includes the institutional leads of all three organisations, providing a link to the established governance of each organisation. It meets to help coordinate, guide and resolve issues across COVAX. In addition three separate workstreams have been developed where members of the industry, philanthropy, government, foundations and all are represented and have say in policy, fund allocation and so on. Full details are here https://www.gavi.org/sites/default/files/covid/covax/COVAX_the-Vaccines-Pillar-of-the-Access-to-COVID-19-Tools-ACT-Accelerator.pdf

GAVI (Others); Governments; International Rescue Committee (International NGOs); International Federation of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers & Associations (Business/Industry); Developing Countries Vaccine Manufacturers Network, (Business/Industry); BMGF (Philanthropies Corporate); CEPI, (Academic/Research Institutions); WHO, (UN bodies); UNICEF (UN bodies)

Initiator/Convenor; Host; Leadership; Member; Funder; Strategic Partner; Implementer

Initiator/Convenor; Host; Leadership; Member; Funder; Strategic Partner;

Global Health

Covid, Vaccines

Policy

Project

Financing Facility

Paradigmatic/ Campaign

Financing

Paradigm

Campaign

Academic/Research Institutions

Business/Industry

Governments

Industry

institutions

Northern donor governments

Others

Philanthropies

Regional Bodies

UN Bodies

Business/Industry

IFI/DFI

Northern donor govts

Philanthropies

Regional Bodies

UN bodies

World Bank

https://www.gavi.org/gavi-covax-amc#resources

A development-focused, conflict prevention initiative that brings together NGOs, governments and the private sector in a concerted effort to help formalize and improve social and economic conditions in the artisanal diamond mining sector. Although it is completely independent, DDI works with and through the Kimberley Process, which it complements and parallels.

Through education and policy dialogue, DDI seeks to promote better understanding of the issues relating to the artisanal diamond mining sector. Working directly with governments of artisanal and alluvial diamond-producing countries throughout the design and implementation of projects focused on artisanal miners, DDI seeks to provide concrete solutions that are especially relevant to this sector.

Emerged from the Kimberley Process to strengthen the developmental impacts associated with artisanal diamond mining in Africa (Growth and Responsibility in the World Economy, Summit Declaration – 7 June 2007). Is considered a charitable organization under Canadian laws.

Board of Directors involve business, civil society, international development, human rights organizations, and academia

De Beers (Business/Industry); Ian Rowe (Others-director); Ian Smillie (Others-consultant); Marie-Chantal Kaninda (Business/Industry); Rapaport Group of Companies (Business/Industry)

Initiator/Convenor; Leadership

No information

Climate, Environment, Energy, Extractives

Extractives

Policy

Project

Environmental and Social Standard

Civil Society

Industry

Government

World Bank

No Link

Kimberly Process Certification Scheme

1) deemed as a successful MSI by the sector and observers

The initiators of the DDI De Beers Global Witness Partnership Africa Canada Jeffrey Davidson (Communities and Small-scale Mining Program) Rapaport Group of Companies Professional Consultant to the DDI Chaim Even-Zohar (Tacy Ltd. – Diamond Industry Consultants)

Multiple sources: Global Witness, Kimberly Process, DDI website

The Digital Public Goods Alliance is a multi-stakeholder initiative to accelerate the attainment of the sustainable development goals in low- and middle-income countries by facilitating the discovery, development, use of, and investment in digital public goods. It defines digital public goods as: “open source software, open data, open AI models, open standards and open content that adhere to privacy and other applicable laws and best practices, do no harm, and help attain the SDGs.”

To identify and source open-source solutions that contribute to an equitable world through the creation of a shared standard for DPGs and a fair, open registry.

Incubated by Norway and The United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), the DPGA relies on engagement and leadership from key pathfinder countries, private sector technology experts, government and philanthropic donors, implementing organizations and innovation groups across the UN system.

Secretariat The Secretariat of the Digital Public Goods Alliance is co-hosted by UNICEF and the Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation (Norad) and governed by an Interim Strategy Group consisting of: The Government of Sierra Leone; The Government of Norway; iSPIRT; and UNICEF.

UNICEF (UN Bodies); Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation (Northern donor govts); Sierra Leone (Governments); iSPIRT (National NGOs); High-Level Expert Panel on Digital Cooperation (UN Bodies)

Initiator/Convenor; Host; Leadership; Member; Strategic Partner

Initiator/Convenor; Host; Leadership; Member; Funder; Observer; Strategic Partner

Inernet and Data Governance

Open Source, Commons

Policy

High-impact Standard

Academic/Research Institutions

Business/Industry

Governments

Industry

institutions

International NGOs

National NGOs

Northern donor governments

UN Bodies

Government

Northern donor govts

UN bodies

Updates available on its website

UN Secretary Genera's Roadmap to Digital Cooperation 2020

A science-based global platform for food system transformation through sound science, impatient disruption & novel partnerships. EAT connects and partners across science, policy, business and civil society to achieve five urgent and radical transformations by 2050.

To shift the world to healthy, tasty and sustainable diets; To realign food system priorities for people and planet; To produce more of the right food, from less; To safeguard our land and oceans; and To radically reduce food losses and waste

EAT is a non-profit founded by the Stordalen Foundation, Stockholm Resilience Centre and the Wellcome Trust to catalyze a food system transformation.The founder of EAT [Gunhild Stordalen] was appointed as Young Global Leader by the WEF in 2015, when EAT was still an initiative within the Stordalen Foundation portfolio (since 2013) and before it was established independently in 2016 by the Stockholm Resilience Center (SRC) and the Wellcome Trust. The Wellcome Trust is a 'Health & Health Care' partner of the WEF. Stordalen will be in charge of Action Track 2 of the 2021 UN Food System Summit, having the WHO at her disposition as 'anchoring agency'.

Board of Trustees (Board of Directors): governs and manages EAT; Advisory Council (Advisory Group): strategic advise; Staff/Team (Secretariat): day-to-day operations; Special Advisors: Special Advisors: experts, appointed by EAT Leadership, to offer insights in specific capacities or geographies, strategic affiliation and hands-on support for ongoing EAT work.

Gunhild Stordalen (Others-founder); Prof. Johan Röckstrøm (Others-expert); Lee Howell/WEF (Business/Industry); Modi Mwatsama/Welcome Trust (Philanthropies (corporate)); Black Rock (Investors/Banks); Stockholm Research Center (Academic/Research Institutions); Peter Bakker/WBCSD (Business/Industry); Arne Haugen (Others-director); Howard Frumkin/Wellcome Trust (Philanthropies (corporate))

Leadership; Strategic Partner; Other-advisor

Strategic Partner (UNFSS21; FAO; IFAD; WFP)

Agri-agra, food, nutrition

Food systems

Paradigmatic/ Campaign

Paradigm

Campaign

Academic/Research Institutions

Business/Industry

Industry

institutions

International NGOs

Investors/Banks

National NGOs

Others

Philanthropies

Business/Industry

Northern donor govts

Philanthropies

https://eatforum.org/content/uploads/2019/06/Annual_review_dokument_2018_WEB.pdf

2030 Sustainable Development Goals; 2015 Paris Climate Change Agreement

1) EAT-WEF has a close partnership and WEF uses the Planetary Healthy Diet developed by EAT for The Great Reset Initiative. 2) emerging ecosystem of players and epistemic communities between science, business, governments and civil society; 3) World Resources Institute, Greenpeace International are part of the Board of Trustees while WWF is part of the "Action Stakeholders"; 4) Rockefeller Foundation is part of the "Engagement stakeholders"

*organized into three legal entities: the non-profit EAT Foundation and two limited companies, EAT Stockholm Food Forum AB in Sweden and EAT Stockholm Food Forum AS in Norway) + More than 1/4 of funding comes from philanthropies followed by the private sector. Funders include Nordic Choice Hotels; Aviva; Nofima; BAMA; Nestlé; Fazer; Seafood Innovation Cluster; Food Industry Asia (FIA); Oatly; Bayer; City Finansiering; Deloitte; Google; Government of Norway; Sweden; Coop Norway; Novo Nordisk; Umoe; Restaurants; Eurofins

EAT website; Blog of Frederic Leroy for the critique of WEF-EAT

ECW was established during the World Humanitarian Summit in 2016 by international humanitarian and development aid actors, along with public and private donors, to help reposition education as a priority on the humanitarian agenda, usher in a more collaborative approach among actors on the ground and foster additional funding to ensure that every crisis-affected child and young person is in school and learning.

To inspire political commitment so that education is viewed by both governments and funders as a top priority during crises. To generate additional funding to help close the $8.5 billion funding gap needed to reach 75 million children and youth. To plan and respond collaboratively, with a particular emphasis on supporting programmes that enable humanitarian and development actors to work together on shared objectives. To strengthen capacity to respond to crises, nationally and globally, including the ability to coordinate emergency support. To improve accountability by developing and sharing knowledge, including collection of more robust data in order to make better-informed investment decisions, and knowledge of what works and does not.

The 2015 Oslo Summit on Education for Development urged governments, non-governmental organisations (NGOs), foundations, the private sector, academia and the civil society to mobilise collective action and more funding for education in emergencies. Two months later at the UN Sustainable Development Summit, Member States reiterated their commitment to SDG 4 – Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education for all children and youth. The following year, under the UN Secretary-General’s leadership and through a series of reforms to humanitarian funding known as the Grand Bargain, the World Humanitarian Summit called for a new way to address emergencies and protracted crises through better collaboration and coordination between humanitarian and development actors, increased and more flexible funding, less bureaucracy, national ownership and a more holistic approach that addresses both immediate and long-term needs, leaving no one behind. Education Cannot Wait was launched during the Summit as a response to that.

High-Level Steering Group; Executive Committee, Secretariat Education Cannot Wait is hosted by UNICEF. The Fund is administered under UNICEF’s financial, human resources and administrative rules and regulations, while operations are run by the Fund’s own independent governance structure. The High-Level Steering Group provides strategic guidance to the Fund’s operations. Convened at the ministerial level, it is chaired by the UN Special Envoy for Global Education, Rt Hon Gordon Brown, and is comprised of partner organizations, including heads of UN agencies and multilateral aid agencies, CEOs of civil society organizations and foundations, and private sector representatives. These constituencies are represented in the Fund’s Executive Committee which oversees operations. Education Cannot Wait’s day-to-day activities are carried out by a Secretariat under the direction of the Education Cannot Wait Director Yasmine Sherif.

UNESCO (UN Bodies)

Leadership; Member; Funder; Strategic Partner

Initiator/Convenor; Host; Leadership; Member; Funder; Strategic Partner

Education

Primary Education, Conflict and Humanitarian Crises

Policy

Financing Facility

Financing

Business/Industry

Education

Governments

Industry

institutions

International NGOs

National NGOs

Northern donor governments

Philanthropies

Regional Bodies

Save the Children

UN Bodies

Business/Industry

Northern donor govts

Philanthropies

Regional Bodies

https://www.educationcannotwait.org/annual-report/

SDGS, Right to Education

The Education Commission is a global initiative encouraging greater progress on Sustainable Development Goal 4 – ensuring inclusive and quality education and promoting lifelong learning for all. The Commission aims to create a pathway for reform and increased investment in education by mobilizing strong evidence and analysis while engaging with world leaders, policymakers, and researchers. The commission is also known as the International Commission on Financing Global Education Opportunity. Drawing upon global consultations and new research and analysis from more than 300 partners in 105 countries, the Commission’s 2016 report – The Learning Generation: Investing in education for a changing world – put forward an action plan to deliver and finance an expansion of educational opportunity for the more than 260 million children and youth who are not in school today. This has led to significant number of policy developments, campaigns, financing mechanisms and so on.

To create a "Learning Generation" by transforming education systems so that all children can be in school and learning within a generation.

The Commission was co-convened in 2015 by the Prime Minister of Norway, the Presidents of Malawi, Indonesia, and Chile, and the Director-General of UNESCO. The Commission is chaired by the United Nations Special Envoy for Global Education Gordon Brown and supported by 26 high-level Commissioners. The members of the Commission include current and former heads of state and government, government ministers, five Nobel laureates, and leaders in the fields of education, business, economics, development, health, and security.

Chairperson; Commissioners (Member of Commission); Secretariat Working Groups; Expert Panels; Advisory Groups The UN Special Envoy for Global Education, Gordon Brown, serves as the Chair of the Commission. Commssioners include members of business, former head of states, Ministers, Nobel Laureates, artists, philanthropies etc. And has a Secretariat headed by Commission Director.

Gordon Brown (UN Bodies) Full list of commission members include UN body chiefs, Nobel Laureates, Former Head of States, Professors, Business Leaders, Former World Bank President etc. https://educationcommission.org/about/commission-leadership/

Leadership; Member; Strategic Partner; Advisory Group; Working Group

Initiator/Convenor; Host; Leadership; Member; Funder

Education

Education Finance

Policy

Academic/Research Institutions

Business/Industry

Education

Governments

Implementation partners

Industry

institutions

International NGOs

National NGOs

Northern donor governments

Philanthropies

Regional Bodies

UN Bodies

Commission's report is available and general updates on its impact are made available through mailing list, blogs and media releases.

SDGs, Right to Education

It is also called The International Commission on Financing Global Education Opportunity and is set up with the sole aim of implementing the recommendation of the report by UN Specical Envoy Gordon Brown. Education Commission functions as the initiator body for the recommendations of many of the report. Its the main driver of the International Finance Facility for Education.

Electronic World Trade Platform (eWTP) is a private sector-led and multi-stakeholder initiative, for public-private cooperation to incubate eTrade rules and foster a more effective and efficient policy and business environment for cross border electronic trade (including both B2B and B2C) development.

To promote public-private cooperation to improve the business environment and incubate future rules for cross border eTrade in some key areas, including simplification of regulations and standards, and harmonization of taxation. To cooperate with international organizations such as the World Trade Organization (WTO) in order to prioritize eTrade development needs and enhance eTrade articles in the WTO’s Trade Facilitation Agreement (TFA). To incubate e-Trade rules and foster a more effective and efficient policy and business environment for cross border electronic trade (eTrade) development.

The eWTP initiative was proposed in 2016 by Jack Ma, founder of the e-commerce powerhouse Alibaba. It aims to promote public-private dialogue to improve the policy and business environment to enable small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) to participate in cross-border electronic trade.

No Information

Alibaba (Business/Industry); Malaysia (Governments)

Initiator/Convenor; Host; Leadership; Member; Funder

Strategic Partner

Internet and data governance

Trade and e-commerce

Policy

High-impact Standard

Business/Industry

Governments

Implementation partners

Industry

Investors/Banks

Northern donor governments

Others

UN Bodies

Business/Industry

Companies

No information

Seems to have not made much progress, Alibaba chairman Jack Ma has been pushing it as a way to expand their business in diverse sectors but it doesn't seem to have found the necessary traction. WTO, WEF, UNCTAD, World Customs Organisation, G 20, International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development weblinks feature on the website but there is not much to report on what kind of discussions etc happened.

A global multi-stakeholder approach that bring together growers, farmworkers, retailers and consumers to transform agriculture and improve the lives of farmworkers.

To transform relationships across the produce industry, recognizing the role farm workers play in the supply chain. The EFI Standards have been crafted to improve labor practices, environmental stewardship and food safety for the benefit of workers, agricultural communities, businesses and consumers.

In 2008, under the leadership and vision of Costco Wholesale, United Farm Workers and Oxfam America, a group of experts and industry leaders in agriculture came together to explore the possibility of new ways to offer produce with fair working conditions for farmworkers and increased food safety. Oxfam America facilitated a series of exploratory discussions with this group over the next three years and was later incubated under Oxfam America from 2011-2015 before becoming an independent non-profit social enterprise in 2015.

Executive Board (Board of Directors); and EFI Standards Committee (Others), which develops and oversee the EFI Standards

Ernie Farley (Business/Industry); Peter O'Driscoll (Others-director); Carol Schrader (Others-consulting firm); Preston Witt (Business/Industry)

Initiator/Convenor; Member

No information

Agri-agra, food, nutrition

Sustainable agriculture

Environmental and Social Standard

Academic/Research Institutions

Affected communities

Business/Industry

Industry

institutions

National NGOs

Others

Business/Industry

Others

Philanthropies

https://equitablefood.org/wp-content/uploads/EFI-2019-Annual-Report_FINAL.pdf

Interesting initiative because initially focused on the US and slowly expanded to Central America and Canada

Funders include: The Atlantic Philanthropies (2012–17) Broad Reach Fund (2012–present) The California Wellness Foundation (2013–15, 2018) Cedar Tree Foundation (2015–17) Costco Wholesale (2018–present) Food System 6 (2016) Humanity United (2019–present) The James Irvine Foundation (2019– present) MacArthur Foundation (2012–17) Northwest Area Foundation (2018– present) Oxfam America (2008–18) Rosenberg Foundation (2011–15) Silicon Valley Community Foundation (2018–present) The Walt Disney Company’s Supply Chain Investment Program (2015–17) Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati (2013– present)

MSI Integrity Database, EFI website

Created the world´s first 'stakeholder'-led, independent, voluntary standards system for energy development. It works with communities, companies and governments to promote social and environmental best practices, transparency and accountability in natural resource development.

Its mission is to protect people and the environment by ensuring that energy development is conducted under the highest social and environmental standards.

Equitable Origin was born in 2009 out of personal experience with oil and gas development and indigenous communities in the Ecuadorian Amazon. Following extensive engagement with affected communities and other stakeholders in energy development throughout the Amazon Basin, Equitable Origin expanded to other regions, issuing the world's first independent certification of a responsibly-operated oil production site in 2014. Equitable Origin is currently active throughout North and South America, with staff in Ecuador, the United States, Mexico, and Colombia.

Advisory Council and 9 voting members of the Board of Directors are two key governing structure comprised of individual experts from the academe, business/industry, philanthropies, practitioners/consultants, former government ministers, legal community, non-profit/civil society, and indigenous communities

Miguel Moyano (Business/Industry); Assheton Carter (Others- consultant/advisory council); David Poritz (Business/Industry); Juan Carlos Jintiach (Affected communities); Manuel Pallares (Others-co-founder)

Initiator/Convenor; Leadership

No information

Climate, Environment, Energy, Extractives

Extractives

Policy

Environmental and Social Standard

Civil Society

Industry

Self-generated revenue

https://pronto-core-cdn.prontomarketing.com/2/wp-content/uploads/sites/1738/2021/01/Equitable-Origin-Annual-Report-2020-ENG.pdf

United Nations (UN) Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and the ILO Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention 169

1) definition of 'stakeholders'- self-identification of industry; 2) advisory council members are also part of other voluntary MSIs such as the Voluntary Initiative for Human Security

MSI Integrity database, Equitable Origin

A global Standard to promote open and accountable management of oil, gas and mineral resources.

It seeks to strengthen government and company systems, inform public debate, and enhance trust. In each of the 55 implementing country it is supported by a coalition of governments, companies and civil society working together.

As a multi-stakeholder organisation, the EITI builds trust between governments, companies and civil society. The EITI requires the disclosure of information along the extractive industry value chain, from licensing to extraction, to how revenue makes its way through to government, to how it contributes to the economy and wider society. In doing so, the EITI strengthens public and corporate governance, promotes transparent and accountable natural resource management, and provides data that informs debate and reform in the extractive sector.

The EITI Board is the EITI's main governing body, which decides on priorities for the organisation and evaluates countries' performance in reaching the requirements of the EITI Standard. It consists of 20 members representing implementing countries, supporting countries, civil society organisations, industry and institutional investors. Each Board member, except the Board Chair, is invited to have an alternate, who is welcome to observe Board meetings and deputise for the member. It meets two to four times a year. It also takes decisions via Board circulars on a more frequent basis. The current Chair of the EITI Board is Rt Hon. Helen Clark.; Apart from the Board, EITI's daily activities are managed by an International Secretariat.; While its Board Committees committees advise the Board of Directors on specific issues related to implementation, validation, policy and management

It is hard to determine who are the most influential actors inside the EITI since it's a big Board comprised of 20 representatives from cross section of industry, NGOs and the governments. Current Chair of the Board is Rt Hon. Helen Clark (Government; UN Bodies); BP (Business/Industry)

Leadership; Strategic Partners; Targets

Strategic Partner

Climate, Environment, Energy, Extractives

Extractives

Environmental and Social Standard

Civil Society

Industry

Business/Industry

Companies

Government

Investors/Banks

World Bank

https://eiti.org/funding; https://eiti.org/files/documents/board_paper_46-8-a_2019_eiti_annual_accounts_and_q1_2020_forecast_0.pdf

1) voluntary nature of governance/ self-regulation; 2) involvement of big corporations; 3) involvement of civil society experts such as Bantay Kita in the Philippines

MSI Integrity database, EITI Website

The international Social Standard for natural stone imports from developing and emerging markets.

To improve the working conditions in quarries and factories for natural stones in emerging economies.

Founded in 2006, Fair Stone was a Multi-Stakeholde-Iinitiative (MSI) right from the beginning. A group of dedicated professionals, mostly with long-term experiences in their fields, developed the project with the aim to improve the working conditions in China. None of these MSI members has any commercial interest in the natural stone business.

Since 2004, the members decide on strategic issues, while the 8-person Board of Directors, comprised of founding members and professionals with long-term experiences in their own fields, decide on pending applications for certifications.

Walter Riester (Northern donor government); Reiner Krug (Business/Industry); Gerhard Czuck (Others- international organizations); Heinecke Werner (Business/Industry)

Strategic Partners; Leadership

Startegic Partner (UN Global Compact)

Climate, Environment, Energy, Extractives

Extractives

Environmental and Social Standard

Business/Industry

Industry

international organizations

Others

https://www.fairstone.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2020/02/FS_Evaluation_2019_EN_final.pdf

ILO-Core Labor Conventions (e.g. without child or bonded labour, etc.)

In 2007 the Social- and Environmental Standard Fair Stone was developed by WiN=WiN GmbH - Agency for global Responsibility in close cooperation with experts from the International Social Security Association (ISSA) and other international experts. The standard focuses on ILO Conventions as well on safety and health at the workplaces, the management system and environmental issues. Its objective is to improve the working conditions in quarries and factories for natural stones in emerging economies. In 2014, the non-profit association Fair Stone e.V. was founded. Until now, Fair Stone e.V. takes care of natural stone supply chains from China, Vietnam and India.

MSI Integrity database, Fair Stone website

A global partnership that seeks to increase transparency and participation for a more sustainable management of marine fisheries

To provide governments, large-scale and small-scale fishers, and civil society with a comprehensive and credible way to achieve and maintain high levels of transparency on the management of the marine fisheries sector and the activities of fishers and fishing companies

From 2015-2017, an international advisory group discussed the FiTI standards based on the FiTI principles that stress the importance of transparency and participation in responsible and sustainable fisheries governance. In 2017, the report containing the standards were publicly released.

Members’ Meeting (General Assembly): global highest body that elects the international board and raises relevant issues; International Board (Board of Directors): global supervisory body of the initiative and accountable to the FiTI Members’ Meeting; International Secretariat: day-to-day operations and accountable to the International Board

Seychelles Gov't (Gov't); Prof. Dr. Peter Eigen (Others- advisor/founder); Transparency International (International NGOs); Valeria Merino (International NGOs)

Leadership; Implementation partners

Strategic Partners (FAO)

Agri-agra, food, nutrition

Fisheries

Environmental and Social Standard

Business/Industry

Industry

International NGOs

National NGOs

Philanthropies

IFI/DFI

Northern donor govts

Philanthropies

https://fisheriestransparency.org/funding

1) WWF International and Greenpeace are members of the international board

FiTI website; FAO website

An independent social and environmental standard for the flower sector that is backed by a strong team of agronomists, social workers and other professionals. Although Florverde® Sustainable Flowers is responsible for setting the standard and obtaining stakeholder approval, the certification itself is awarded by third party certification bodies, such as Icontec and NaturaCert. The certification process includes reviewing farm documentation, inspecting farms, interviewing workers, and reviewing lab tests results.

To develop, promote, and implement responsible codes of conduct, standards, and sustainable agricultural practices.

In 1996, the Association of Colombian Flower Exporters (Asocolflores) created a code of conduct for the flower sector, which led to the creation of the Florverde® standards in 2002. During 2011, Florverde® underwent a strategic review and was renamed Florverde® Sustainable Flowers. The new name and identity "reflects the desire to better communicate the benefits and positive impact of the standards, but also as a way to reflect changes in the standards and its supporting structure – with greater transparency and improved impact assessment".

The Advisory Council (Leadership Council) evaluates and validates priorities to Florverde Sustainable Flowers certification, evaluates Florverde Sustainable Flowers Technical and Administrative Secretariat's functions, and follows up certification scheme's objectives accomplishment. While the Secretariat is responsible for reviewing and updating the standard under the guidance of an advisory council.

Santiago Madrinan/CECODES-WBCSD (Business/ Industry); Benchmark Growers (Business/Industry); Asocoflores (Business/Industry); WWF Colombia (International NGO); Alexander von Humboldt Institute (Academic/Research Institute); Juan Ricardo Gomez/JavieranUniversity (Academe/ Research Instiutions); International NGOs; Daniel Maldonado/Agromonte (Affected communities); Ximena Franco-Villegas (Others-director)

Initiator/Convenor; Leadership

No information

Agri-agra, food, nutrition

Sustainable agriculture

Environmental and Social Standard

Affected communities

Business/Industry

Industry

International NGOs

National NGOs

https://florverde.org/our-impact/

1) WWF is part of the Board; 2) the Colombian chapter of WBCSD- CECODES is the Chair of the Advisory Council

MSI Integrity Database, Flora Verde website

A global partnership of governments, businesses, civil society, and Indigenous Peoples focused on reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation, forest carbon stock conservation, the sustainable management of forests, and the enhancement of forest carbon stocks in developing countries, activities commonly referred to as REDD+.

To Provide financial and technical assistance to assist eligible REDD Countries to achieve emission reductions from deforestation and/or forest degradation, and build recipient country capacity for benefitting from possible future systems with positive incentives for REDD; To pilot an emissions reduction performance-based payment system generated from REDD activities, to ensure equitable benefit sharing and promote future large scale positive incentives for REDD; To test ways within the REDD approach to conserve biodiversity and sustain or enhance livelihoods of local communities; and To disseminate the knowledge gained through the development and implementation of the FCPF and related programmes.

A programme created by the World Bank, discussions, initial discussions in 2006, concept note dated 16 March 2007 and it was launched in the same year. The FCPF became operationa on 25 June 2008 upon the operational date of the Readiness Fund.

Administered and created by the World Bank. There are two key groups within its governance structure (comprised of 6 committees): 1) The Participants Assembly which provides oversight and guidance to the Participants Committee. Primarily a forum for information exchange and knowledge sharing, it is attended by participants from the Carbon Fund, eligible REDD countries and donor countries. To overturn decisions of the Participants Committee, a minimum of two-thirds majority from REDD Country Participants and two-thirds collective majority from Donor Participants and Carbon Fund Participants is required.; and 2) Participants Committee, which is the managerial body responsible for overseeing and facilitating operations of the FCPF. The Committee consists of 28 members (14 REDD Country Participants and 14 members collectively from Donor Participants and Carbon Fund Participants) and each member is entitled to one vote. Decisions are made by consensus but should efforts to reach consensus fail, a two thirds majority of members present and voting will suffice.

World Bank

Observers; Participants

Strategic Partner (UNDP)

Climate, Environment, Energy, Extractives

Forests

Project

Affected communities

Business/Industry

Governments

Industry

International NGOs

National NGOs

Northern donor governments

World Bank

https://www.forestcarbonpartnership.org/fcpf-information-and-news

REDD+ in the 2015 Paris Agreement on Climate Change

1) there are observers to the Participants Assembly: Representatives of Relevant International Organizations, Relevant Non-governmental Organizations, Forest-Dependent Indigenous Peoples and Forest Dwellers and Relevant Private Sector Entities, may be invited by the Facility Management Team to attend Annual Participant Assembly Meetings as observers.; 2) Forest dwelling and indigenous peoples were not consulted prior to the launch of the FCPF in 2007. However, the World Bank responded to criticisms of this consultation failure, by organising a series of three regional consultations with representatives of forest dwellers and indigenous people in Kathmandu, Bujumbura and La Paz. As a result of these consultations, it was decided that representatives of indigenous peoples would be included on each of the FCPF Technical Advisory Panels and that they are fully consulted in the formulation of national REDD strategies.; 3) issue of consensus in decision making; 4) safeguard policies are not-right based

FCPF and Climate Funds website

The FLEG process is a worldwide movement, having emerged in different parts of the world (Asia, Europe, Africa, Russia and North Asia), including East Asia. It is a process that aim to harness national efforts, and enhancement of international collaboration and to address violations of forest laws and the commission of forest crimes.

In general, it aims to promote greater protection and sustainable management of the world’s remaining forests. In particular, it aims to eradicate illegal logging and associated illegal trade and corruption.

The FLEG process emerged from a series of multi-stakeholder consultations in 2001 prior to the World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD) Ministerial preparatory meetings in Bali, Indonesia. The Summit generated the Bali Action Plan, And since then, various countries and international and regional blocs have come up with their own action plans around FLEG

No global governance structure but are implemented/adopted by different countries and regional blocs such as ASEAN, EU, and partnerships between international conservation NGOs such as WWF, IUCN, and IFIs & regional actors such as WB, EU and others that have work in Eastern Europe and Russia. Active projects in East Asia, Europe and North America

EU; WB; WWF; IUCN; ASEAN

Target

No information

Climate, Environment, Energy, Extractives

Forests

Project

Governments

International NGOs

National NGOs

Northern donor governments

No Link

FLEG Bali Declaration (non-binding)

1) that the FLEG initiatives focus too sharply on forestry laws, rather than considering wider laws related to forests, such as land tenure regimes and human rights legislation. Many FLEG policy makers now agree that law enforcement measures need to be complemented with steps to review and revise inappropriate laws to ensure that people’s livelihoods and rights to their lands and forests are secured. Local people and NGOs need to be included in forest monitoring and FLEG discussions, not left out.; 2) the Asian FLEG has lost some momentum in recent years with only limited progress in implementing the actions from the 2001 Bali meeting.; 3) Problems exist with limited participation from some key countries.; 4) in the absence of a global framework for FLEG, there is bound to be overlap and inefficiencies between the various processes, especially for individual exporting countries.

The Bali Declaration recognizes the responsibilities of both producing and consuming countries in eliminating illegal logging and associated illegal trade and corruption and it lays the foundation for bilateral and international cooperation on a harmonized set of forest law enforcement and protection programs. The Bali Declaration is supported by an action plan which contains a comprehensive list of 70 indicative actions by East Asia FLEG participating countries to be undertaken by and among themselves at the national and international levels. These commitments range from political, legislative, judicial, administrative, research, policy, institution and capacity building, advocacy, information and expertise sharing/disclosure, conservation and protection, as well as bilateral and multi-lateral actions.

FAO website, FLEGT, IUCN

A Partnership that supports forest-centered nature-based solutions to climate change and other development challenges. To do so, the partnership will work with policymakers to make the protection of the world’s least disturbed forests a priority for national governments in meeting global climate, biodiversity and sustainable development targets, and mobilize new finances to support action to preserve the benefits from these forests, alongside their efforts to conserve forests that are highly threatened.

The Forest for Life Partnership aims to “halt and reverse forest degradation across one billion hectares of the most intact forests worldwide” to achieve global climate, biodiversity and sustainable development targets.

In 2019, in parallel to the UN Secretary-General’s Climate Action Summit, five organizations – Global Wildlife Conservation, Rainforest Foundation Norway, UN Development Programme (UNDP), Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS) and World Resources Institute (WRI) – launched the ‘Forests for Life Partnership’ in recognition of forests as a nature-based solution to climate change and biodiversity protection. he Partnership will focus on the Amazon, Congo Basin, New Guinea and the northern boreal zone as well as smaller, intact forests across Mesoamerica, Madagascar, and South and Southeast Asia. Efforts will include engaging indigenous peoples in the management and conservation of forests and promoting policies to protect forests from degradation and fragmentation.

Not clear on their websites

Global Wildlife Conservation; Rainforest Foundation Norway; UN Development Programme (UNDP); Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS); World Resources Institute (WRI)

No information

Initiator/Convenor; Leadership

Climate, Environment, Energy, Extractives

Forests

Policy

Academic/Research Institutions

institutions

International NGOs

National NGOs

Philanthropies

UN Bodies

No Link

2015 Paris Agreement on Climate Change

The Partnership has committed US$50 million over the next five years to protect the world’s most intact forests and aims to mobilize an additional US$200 million through a dedicated ‘Forests for Life Action Fund'. One of the first commitments under the Partnership is the ‘5 Great Forests of Mesoamerica Initiative,’ though which Belize, Guatemala, Costa Rica, Honduras, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Panama, and the Dominican Republic will work together to address deforestation and support forest governance and forest-friendly livelihoods

Multiple sources

GAVI, officially Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance (previously the GAVI Alliance, and before that the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization)is a public–private global health partnership with the goal of increasing access to immunisation in poor countries. GAVI brings together developing country and donor governments, the World Health Organization, UNICEF, the World Bank, the vaccine industry in both industrialised and developing countries, research and technical agencies, civil society, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and other private philanthropists. GAVI has observer status at the World Health Assembly.

To save lives, reduce poverty and protect the world against the threat of epidemics

By the late 1990s, the progress of international immunisation programmes was stalling. Nearly 30 million children in developing countries were not fully immunised against deadly diseases, and many others went without any immunisation at all. At the heart of the challenge was an acute market failure; powerful new vaccines were becoming available, but developing countries simply could not afford most vaccines. In response, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and a group of founding partners brought to life an elegant solution to encourage manufacturers to lower vaccine prices for the poorest countries in return for long-term, high-volume and predictable demand from those countries. In 2000, that breakthrough idea became the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunisation – today Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance.

Board of Directors; Secretariat The Gavi Board is responsible for strategic direction and policy-making, oversees the operations of the Vaccine Alliance and monitors programme implementation. The Board is comprised of 18 “representative” seats, 9 seats for independent or “unaffiliated” individuals and one seat for Gavi's CEO. Board has members from donor countries, developing countries, vaccine manufacturers from developing and developed countries and CSOs. UNICEF, WHO, the World Bank and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation hold permanent seats on the Board. Constituency representatives serve on a time-limited basis.

Bill and Milinda Gates Foundation (Philanthropies (Corporate)); UNICEF, WHO (UN Bodies); World Bank (International Financial Institutions/DFIs)

Initiator/Convenor; Host; Leadership; Member; Funder; Strategic Partner; Impelementer

Initiator/Convenor; Host; Leadership; Member; Funder; Strategic Partner; Impelementer

Global Health

Vaccines, NCDs

Policy

Project

Financing Facility

Paradigmatic/ Campaign

Financing

Paradigm

Campaign

Academic/Research Institutions

Business/Industry

Civil Society

Governments

Industry

institutions

Northern donor governments

Others

Philanthropies

Regional Bodies

Save the Children

UN Bodies

Business/Industry

IFI/DFI

Investment Funds/Banks

Northern donor govts

Philanthropies

Regional Bodies

UN bodies

World Bank

https://www.gavi.org/sites/default/files/programmes-impact/our-impact/apr/Gavi-Progress-Report-2019_1.pdf

SDGs, Right to Health

Generation Unlimited (GenU) is a global multi-sector partnership to meet the urgent need for expanded education, training and employment opportunities for young people, aged 10 to 24, on an unprecedented scale.

To provide youth with the education, training and employment to achieve their full potential through mobilising investments and skills.

Launched at the 73rd United Nations General Assembly, in September 2018, Generation Unlimited has generated interest from government and leaders from industry and other key sectors committed to cohere efforts around young people for large-scale impact.

Leadership Council; Board of Directors; Secretariat Global Leadership Council and Board of Trustees (members from UN, Governments, World Bank, Private Sector, Philanthropies, CSOs) supported by International Secretariat. The Leaders Group is co-chaired by the UN Secretary-General, the President of Rwanda, and the President of Trinidad & Tobago, and the GenU Board is co-chaired by the Executive Director of UNICEF and the Chairman of PwC.

UNICEF (UN Bodies) However, it is not clear who has the most influence, given it has representatives from every sector. https://www.generationunlimited.org/who-we-are

Leadership; Member; Funder; Strategic Partner, implementing partner

Initiator/Convenor; Host; Leadership; Member; Funder;

Education

Employment, Capacity Building

Policy

Project

Financing Facility

Paradigmatic/ Campaign

Financing

Paradigm

Campaign

Academic/Research Institutions

Business/Industry

Governments

Implementation partners

Industry

institutions

International NGOs

Investors/Banks

National NGOs

Northern donor governments

Philanthropies

Regional Bodies

UN Bodies

Government

Philanthropies

World Bank

https://www.generationunlimited.org/our-work/annual-report-2019

SDGS, Right to Education

The Geneva Dialogue on Responsible Behaviour in Cyberspace aims to map the roles and responsibilities of actors – states, the business sector, civil society, and the academic and tech communities – in contributing to greater security and stability in cyberspace in the context of international peace and security; identify good practices and possible gaps in existing efforts; and, ideally put forward recommendations for overcoming such gaps. It was established by the Swiss Federal Department of Foreign Affairs.

To convene global business sector actors to discuss responsible behaviour in cyberspace. To assist the business sector to develop its capacities to understand, follow, and meaningfully contribute to international policy and diplomatic processes To facilitate dialogue among global businesses towards shaping principles and an action plan contributing to the global efforts at the UN and elsewhere.

This forum is building on the work done by its predecessors Cybersecurity Tech Accord. 2018. Microsoft. The need for a Digital Geneva Convention. 2017. Microsoft. Charter of Trust for a Secure Digital World. 2018. Siemens. Digital Security & Due Process: Modernizing Cross-Border Government Access Standards for the Cloud Era. 2017. Google. IoT Cybersecurity Alliance. 2017. AT&T, IBM, Nokia, Palo Alto Networks, Symantec and Trusonic Paris Call for Trust and Security in Cyberspace. 2018. Government of France and Microsoft. Manifesto for a New Digital Deal. 2018. Telefonica. Digital Peace Now Campaign. 2018. Microsoft. Position Paper on Cybersecurity. 2019. Huawei. Global Transparency Initiative. 2018. Kaspersky.

Partners; Secretariat

Swiss Federal Department of Foreign Affairs (Northern donor govts); Geneva Internet Platform (International NGOs); United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research (UN Bodies); ETH Zurich (Academic/Research Institutions); University of Lausanne (Academic/Research Institutions); Diplo Foundation (Northern donor govts); ABB (Business/Industry); BiZone (Business/Industry); Cisco (Business/Industry); Ensign (Business/Industry); FireEye (Business/Industry); Huawei, Kaspersky (Business/Industry); Microsoft (Business/Industry); PNG ICT Cluster (Business/Industry); SICPA (Business/Industry); Siemens (Business/Industry); SwissRe (Business/Industry); UBS (Business/Industry)

Member; Observer; Strategic Partner

Strategic Partner

Internet and Data Governance

Cyber Security

Policy

High-impact Standard

Academic/Research Institutions

Business/Industry

Industry

institutions

International NGOs

Investors/Banks

National NGOs

Northern donor governments

Philanthropies

UN Bodies

Northern donor govts

The Geneva Dialogue phase one report is availabe here https://genevadialogue.ch/wp-content/uploads/Geneva-Dialogue-Final-Report.pdf

UN Groups of Governmental Experts (UN GGE) on Developments in the Field of Information and Telecommunications in the Context of International Security Report 2015

The question of internet governance is a key concern and it remains as such. This is in line with the several initiatives organised by the industry and different governments. However, there is a reference to the UN groups of Governmental experts ICT 2015 report but then in absence of an overarching framework, there seems to be several parallel efforts ongoing. This is only one such effort.

The Geneva Internet Platform (GIP), provides a neutral and inclusive space for digital policy debates, recognised by the majority of global actors as a platform where different views can be voiced. It serves permanent missions based in Geneva with tailored briefings and briefings on developments in Geneva IG politics. The GIP also works to strengthen the participation of small and developing countries (including those which - due to limited resources - have no permanent representations in the city) in Geneva-based digital policy processes, and supports the digital policy initiatives of Geneva-based institutions. The support includes tailored individual consultations, and online meetings to maximise resource use. The GIP facilitates research for an evidence-based, multidisciplinary digital policy approach beyond existing policy silos, and provides tools and methods for in situ and online engagements that can be used in other policy spaces in International Geneva and worldwide.

To provide a neutral and inclusive space for policy discussions To undertake digital policy monitoring and analysis To provide capacity development

Geneva is one of the main hubs where digital policies are debated, evaluated, and adopted. It is a hub where innovations are fostered, where policies are debated, where leaders, experts, and decision-makers meet regularly - and a place where solutions are born and implemented. More than 50% of digital policy issues are addressed in Geneva. However, many developing countries don't have enough resources to engage in these discussions and deliberations GIP was created to fill this vaccum.

Steering Committee; Secretariat

Swiss Federal Office of Communications (Northern donor govts); Swiss Federal Department of Foreign Affairs (Northern donor govts); Diplo Foundation (Northern donor govts); Broadband Commission for Sustainable Development (UN Bodies); ASUT (Business/Industry); Commssion on Science and Technology for Development (UN Bodies); Ecma International (Business/Industry); European Broadcastic Union (Governments); European Organisation for Nuclear Research ((Academic/Research Institutions); Geneva Centre for Security Policy (Academic/Research Institutions); Graduate Insitute (Academic/Research Institutions); Genvea Centre for the Democractic Control of Armed Forces (International NGOs);

Strategic Partner

Strategic Partner

Inernet and Data Governance

Public policy and cooperation

Policy

Academic/Research Institutions

Business/Industry

Governments

Industry

institutions

International NGOs

National NGOs

Northern donor governments

Philanthropies

Regional Bodies

UN Bodies

Northern donor govts

No annual report but updates from activity and events

The Global Fund is a partnership designed to accelerate the end of AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria as epidemics. As an international organization, the Global Fund mobilizes and invests more than US$4 billion a year to support programs run by local experts in more than 100 countries. In partnership with governments, civil society, technical agencies, the private sector and people affected by the diseases, it is challenging barriers and embracing innovation.

to invest the world’s money to defeat AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria epidemic.

The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria was created in 2002 to raise, manage and invest the world’s money to respond to three of the deadliest infectious diseases the world has ever known. The idea was discussed at a G8 summit in Okinawa, Japan, in 2000. The real commitment began to coalesce at the African Union summit in April 2001, continued at the United Nations General Assembly Special Session in June of that year, and was finally endorsed by the G8 at their summit in Genoa, Italy, in July 2001. A Transitional Working Group was established to determine the principles and working modalities of the new organization, and the Global Fund came into being in January 2002.

Governing Board; Country Coordinating Mechanism; Local Fund Agent; Office of the Inspector General; Principal Recepient; Staff; Technical Review Panel

WHO (UN Bodies); Global Fund to fight AIDS, TB and Malaria (UN Bodies); UNICEF (UN Bodies); World Bank (International Financial Institutions/DFIs); G 8 (Northern donor govts); Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (Philathropy (Corporate))

Leadership; Member; Funder; Strategic Partner; Implementer

Initiator/Convenor; Host; Leadership; Member; Funder; Strategic Partner; Implementer

Global Health

Finance, TB, Malaria, AIDS

Policy

Project

Financing Facility

Paradigmatic/ Campaign

Financing

Paradigm

Campaign

Academic/Research Institutions

Affected communities

Business/Industry

Governments

Implementation partners

Industry

institutions

International NGOs

Investors/Banks

National NGOs

Northern donor governments

Others

Philanthropies

Regional Bodies

UN Bodies

Business/Industry

Government

International Financial Institutions/DFIs

Investors/Banks

Northern donor govts

Others

Philanthropies

Regional Bodies

UN bodies

World Bank

https://www.theglobalfund.org/en/financials/

SDGs, Right to Health

An inclusive, voluntary and action-oriented multi-stakeholder platform on Climate-Smart Agriculture (CSA)

To scale up CSA practices to address the challenges facing food security and agriculture under a changing climate

The concept of Climate-Smart Agriculture (CSA) was originally developed by FAO and officially presented and at the Hague Conference on Agriculture, Food Security and Climate Change in 2010, through the paper "Climate-Smart Agriculture: Policies, Practices and Financing for Food Security, Adaptation and Mitigation". It was launched on 23 September 2014 during the Climate Summit, and the Alliance held its first meeting the following day in New York, US.

The Strategic Committee (Leadership Council) serves as a representative body of Alliance members and the decision authority for approving an annual Program of Work and a budget for the Facilitation Unit (Secretariat); Annual Forum (General Assembly): body for open dialogue, build consensus, set priorities and approve the overall direction, strategy and Programme of Work of the Alliance; Action Groups (Others)supporting the work of the Alliance and reports to the SC

FAO (UN Bodies); IFAD (UN Bodies); Dutch Ambassador, Hans Hoogeveen (Gov't); AGRA (Business/Industry); World Bank (IFI/DFI); CGIAR (Academic/Research Institutions); World Farmers Alliance (Affected communities)

Members; Leadership

Initiator/Convenor; Host

Agri-agra, food, nutrition

Sustainable agriculture

Policy

Project

Academic/Research Institutions

Affected communities

Business/Industry

Industry

institutions

International NGOs

National NGOs

Others

Regional Bodies

UN Bodies

UN bodies

No link

FAO website; SDG website

A Swiss-based foundation launched at the United Nations in 2002 to tackle the human suffering caused by malnutrition and works with governments, businesses and civil society to to find ways to change and improve how businesses and governments shape food systems for improved nutrition.

To transform food systems so that they deliver more nutritious foods for all people, especially the most vulnerable

Launched at the United Nations in 2002 to tackle the human suffering caused by malnutrition and works with governments, businesses and civil society to to find ways to change and improve how businesses and governments shape food systems for improved nutrition.

Board of Director: highest decision making body; Partnership Council (Advisory Group): advisory body to the GAIN Board and Strategic Management Team, providing guidance and recommendations on GAIN’s strategic and investment priorities. The Council is also a platform to support innovation and to mobilise new partnerships aimed at ending malnutrition; Secretariat

Catherine Bertini (Others-expert); Mauricio Adade (Business/Industry); Lawrence Haddad (Others-director)

Leadership; Strategic partner

Strategic partner; Leadership

Agri-agra, food, nutrition

Food security and nutrition

Policy

Project

Financing Facility

Financing

Academic/Research Institutions

Affected communities

Business/Industry

Industry

institutions

International NGOs

Investors/Banks

National NGOs

Northern donor governments

Others

Business/Industry

Northern donor govts

Philanthropies

https://www.gainhealth.org/sites/default/files/financial_statements/financial-statements-2019-2020.pdf; https://www.gainhealth.org/sites/default/files/annual_reports/annual-report-2018-2019.pdf

1) Half of the funding in 2020 came from the Government of Netherlands; followed by Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and CIFF with more than $4 million each.

Works with the WBCSD for the UNFSS21

GAIN website;

The Global Business Coalition for Education calls itself a movement of businesses committed to ending the global education crisis and unleashing the potential of the next generation. It serve as the business community’s social impact advisor, combining the expertise of education and business to develop customized programs and identify investments, partnerships, and opportunities that will have the greatest impact.

To bring together the expertise and resources of the business community with the campaign for global education and Sustainable Development Goal 4.

Established as an initiative of the global children’s charity Theirworld in 2012, the Global Business Coalition for Education draws its members from next generation business leaders who understand the power and potential of leveraging their knowledge, resources, and scale in coordination with peers, government, international organizations, and NGOs.

The Advisory Board is comprised of leaders from business, philanthropy, education, and civil society to provide expert advice and guidance. The Executive Board drawing upon members primairly from businesses/ industry is charged with overseeing the Global Business Coalition for Education’s work, ensuring it maintains its focus on outcomes and results for youth across the globe. Full list of members are here https://gbc-education.org/our-board/

The Office of Gordon and Sarah Brown (Philanthropy (Family)); TheirWorld (International NGOs; Accenture (Business/ Industry); Grupo Carso (Business/ Industry); Chevron Corporation (Business/ Industry); Dangote Industries (Business/ Industry); Discovery Communications (Business/ Industry); Econet Wireless Group (Business/ Industry); GUCCI (Business/ Industry); Hess Corporation (Business/ Industry); Intel Corporation (Business/ Industry); Lenovo Group Limited (Business/ Industry); McKinsey & Co (Business/ Industry); Pearson plc (Business/ Industry); Reed Smith LLP (Business/ Industry); Tata Sons Limited (Business/ Industry); Western Union (Business/ Industry);

Founders/ Convenor; Host; Leadership; Member; Funder; Observer; Strategic Partner; Client

UN Systems are not involved however, the office of the UN Special Envoy for the Global Education Gordon Education and his wife Sarah Brown are initiators of this platform and UN groups are an active partner in its functioning. Global Business Coalition for Education also has positions at various UN campaigns Advisory and Executive Boards. Initiator/Convenor; Host; Leadership; Strategic Partner

Education

Investment

Project

Paradigmatic/ Campaign

Paradigm

Campaign

Academic/Research Institutions

Business/Industry

Education

Governments

Implementation partners

Industry

institutions

International NGOs

Investors/Banks

National NGOs

Others

Philanthropies

UN Bodies

Companies

Philanthropies

https://gbc-education.org/year-in-review-2019/

SDGs

It’s an advisory service leveraging the private sector funds and have mobilised good amount of resources but also seems a tool for political influence within the UN bodies and other places where they have found place on the Board. This works to push the agenda of the business investment within the global education and creating market for the ecorporations and also provide deployment of the corporate social responsbility funds.

A multi-stakeholder sustainable coffee platform that unites stakeholders in a non-competitive approach working towards a thriving, sustainable sector. The GCP sets into action the global agenda made through the public-private initiative, Vision 2020, to ultimately improve the livelihoods of coffee farming communities and the natural environment of coffee production areas.

To enhance farmers’ prosperity with profitability of coffee production, improved livelihoods and well-being, and conservation of nature.

By combining and building on the achievements of the 4C Association’s expansive membership and the Sustainable Coffee Program’s programmatic activities, and the rich connections of the International Coffee Organization (ICO) representing its producing and consuming country government members, the Global Coffee Platform was formed in March 2016.

Board of Directors: guides the strategic direction of the organization and oversees and endorses the annual work plans and budgets.

Carlos Brando (Others-expert); Karel Valken/ Rabobank (Investors/Bank); Andrea Olivar/ Solidaridad (International NGOs); Annette Pensel (Others-director)

Leadership; Initiator/ Convenor

Strategic partner (COSA-UNCTAD)

Agri-agra, food, nutrition

Sustainable agriculture

Environmental and Social Standard

Affected communities

Business/Industry

Industry

International NGOs

National NGOs

Self-generated revenue

https://www.globalcoffeeplatform.org/latest/2020/gcp-annual-report-2019/

1) Nestle, Olam (trader), and Jacobs Douwe Egberts are the prominent corporations in leadership position; 2) Conservation International, Rainforest Alliance, and Solidaridad are part of the Board of Directors; 3) a representative from Rabobank is the treasurer of the Board

MSI Integrity Database; Global Coffee Platform website

The Global Commission on the Stability of Cyberspace (GCSC) was set up to promote mutual awareness and understanding among the various cyberspace communities working on issues related to international cybersecurity. It was tasked with holding dialogues on international security with the new communities created by cyberspaceand contribute to supporting policy and norms coherence related to the security and stability in and of cyberspace.

To develop proposals for norms and policies to enhance international security and stability and guide responsible state and non-state behavior in cyberspace.

Co-chairs; Advisroy Group; Commsionsers; Secretariat

Netherlands (Northern donor govts); France (Northern donor govts); Norway (Northern donor govts); Microsoft Corporation (Business/Industry); Cyber Security Agency Singapore (Governments); Internet Society (International NGOs); Afilias (Business/Industry); Switzerland (Northern donor govts); Japan (Northern donor govts); Estonia (Governments); African Union Commission (Regional Bodies); Google (Business/Industry); Tel Aviv University (Academic/Research Institutions); United Nations Institute for Disarmament (Un Bodies); The Hague Centre for Strategic Studies (Academic/Research Institutions); EastWest Institute (Academic/Research Institutions); Research Advisory Group (Academic/Research Institutions)

Member; Funder; Strategic Partner

Member; Funder; Strategic Partner

Internet and data governance

Cyber Security

Policy

High-impact Standard

Academic/Research Institutions

Business/Industry

Governments

Industry

institutions

International NGOs

Investors/Banks

National NGOs

Northern donor governments

Philanthropies

Regional Bodies

UN Bodies

Business/Industry

Companies

Northern donor govts

Philanthropies

UN bodies

Full report of the Commission is available on its site.

The Commission is supported by numerous funders, who facilitate its work and research. The Hague Centre for Strategic Studies, the EastWest Institute and the Commissioners would like to recognise and acknowledge the following funders for their generous support. Partners: Government of The Netherlands Microsoft Corporation Cyber Security Agency Singapore Ministry of Foreign Affairs of France Internet Society (ISOC) Afilias Sponsors: Federal Department of Foreign Affairs of Switzerland GLOBSEC Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Estonia Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications of Japan Supporters: African Union Commission Black Hat USA DEF CON European Union Delegation to the UN in Geneva Global Forum on Cyber Expertise Google Municipality of The Hague Packet Clearing House Tel Aviv University United Nations Institute for Disarmament These organizations and institutions are committed to advancing the debate and putting forward creative solutions to some of the most pressing challenges in the stability of cyberspace.

The Global Commons Alliance is an unprecedented partnership of more than 50 of the world’s most forward-looking organisations in the fields of philanthropy, science, environment, business, cities and advocacy. This new 21st century platform brings together scientific, business, government and nongovernmental organizations to transform the global economy, and to maintain the resilience and stability of Earth’s natural systems. Its four components-Earth Commission, Science-Based Target Network, Earth HQ and Systems Lab complement each other's work.

To create the most powerful network to scale science-based action to protect people and planet. Its mission is to empower citizens, cities, companies and countries to become stewards of our global commons. Its plan seeks to reverse negative trends in climate, biodiversity, oceans, and other ecosystems, moving us toward a sustainable global economy – and a future that benefits human well-being and the natural world.

Builds on the research work of the Stockholm Resilience Center that produced two important documents on the global commons-- Planterary Boundaries & Global Commons in the Anthropocene as well as the work of Elinor Ostrom. In 2016, a Dialogue was convened by the Global Environment Facility (GEF) and the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN), in partnership with the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), the Stockholm Resilience Centre (SRC), the World Resources Institute (WRI) and the World Economic Forum (WEF) Environmental Systems Initiative to discuss the state of play. In June 2019, the Global Commons Alliance was launched at the EcoProsperity event in Singapore. Two of its sub-component work: Earth Commission, the scientific arm of the Global Commons Alliance, and the Science Based Targets Network, which provides a platform for cities and businesses to adopt targets for all global commons, were launched. Naoko Ishii is a key initiator of the alliance.

Governed by a leadership comprised of top executives from the World Economic Forum, World Resources Institute, WWF International, Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, Center for Global Commons (former head of GEF); and two observers from the WBCSD and a High Level Champion for Climate Action-COP 26. It has its own coordination and communications teams that act as secretariat for the whole network

Leadership council: World Economic Forum; World Resources Institute; WWF International; Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research; Center for Global Commons (former head of GEF); Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors; WBCSD

Leadership

Target institution

Multiple sectors

Commons

Paradigmatic/ Campaign

Paradigm

Campaign

Business/Industry

Industry

IKEA Foundation

No Link

CBD

1) some active members/partners include: • Circle of Blue • Conservation International • Future Earth • Globaïa • Global Environment Facility • International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis • International Union for the Conservation of Nature • Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research • Stockholm Resilience Centre • We Mean Business Coalition • World Economic Forum; 2) appropriated the Global Commons framework under its whole earth system paradigm; 3) The World Economic Forum is one of the council members of the GCA. The UN Global Compact contributes to the GCA. WBCSD as an interest party/engaged in the GCA

There's an Investors Collaborative: A collective of core Alliance donors, the Collaborative current includes such funders as Good Energies Foundation, IKEA Foundation, MAVA Foundation, Moore Foundation, Oak Foundation, and Porticus. The Alliance’s fiscal sponsor and consultant, Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors, will help donors adjust their requirements and expectations to accommodate the unique nature of the Alliance’s efforts—such as by funding over the long-term, reducing reporting burden, and looking beyond short-term outcomes. RPA will also guide Alliance members toward complexity- and systems-aware monitoring, evaluation, and learning approaches, like the recently launched Blue Marble Evaluation.

Multiple sources

also known as Global Conference on Cyber Space (GCCS) is a prestigious global event where international leaders, policymakers, industry experts, think tanks, cyber wizards etc gather to deliberate on issues and challenges for optimally using cyber space. GCCS was launched with a view to establish internationally agreed ‘rules of the road’ for behavior in cyberspace, and create a more focused and inclusive dialogue between all those with a stake in the internet (governments, civil society and industry) on how to implement them.the ‘London Process’, are ad hoc multi-stakeholder conferences held so far in London (2011), Budapest (2012), Seoul (2013), The Hague (2015) and New Delhi (2017). The Global Forum on Cyber Expertise, established after the 2015 Conference, is a platform for identifying best practices and providing support to states, the private sector and organisations in developing cybersecurity frameworks, policies and skills.

The goal of GCCS 2017 is to promote an inclusive Cyber Space with focus on policies and frameworks for inclusivity, sustainability, development, security, safety & freedom, technology and partnerships for upholding digital democracy, maximizing collaboration for strengthening security and safety and advocating dialogue for digital diplomacy.

The first edition of GCCS was held in London in 2011. The conference witnessed a participation of 700 global delegates and helped in setting up rules and guidelines for the subsequent editions. The second conference was held in 2012 in Budapest with focus on relationship between internet rights and internet security which was attended by 700 delegates from nearly 60 countries. The third edition of GCCS was held in 2013 in Seoul focusing on Open and Secure Cyberspace with participation from 1600 delegates. The fourth version- GCCS 2015 was held in The Hague, Netherlands. Nearly 1800 members from about 100 countries participated in this conference and over 60 countries participated with delegations led at Ministerial level. The scale and importance of GCCS has grown significantly over successive conferences. An institutional mechanism GFCE (Global Forum on Cyber Expertise) was set up to enhance Capacity Building.

Advisory Body; Secretariat

(Northern donor govts); (Governments), (Regional Bodies); (International NGOs); (National NGOs); (Business/Industry); (International Financial Institutions/DFIs); (Philanthropies); (Academic/Research Institutions); (UN bodies) / This is a rotating conference with governemnts in the lead, no single website and information scattered all over.

Leadership; Member; Funder; Observer; Strategic Partner;

Leadership; Member; Strategic Partner

Internet and data governance

Cyber Security, Development

Policy

High-impact Standard

Academic/Research Institutions

Business/Industry

Governments

Industry

institutions

International NGOs

Investors/Banks

National NGOs

Northern donor governments

Philanthropies

Regional Bodies

UN Bodies

Business/Industry

Companies

IFI/DFI

Northern donor govts

Philanthropies

Self-generated revenue

No annual report but the declarations or chairman's address is available at event website, which itself is not very visible.

It’s a bi-enniel conference, even though it doesn't have any specific mandate but has served as an important space in development of the internet governance issues and more importantly on making it a safe and inclusive space. Different editions of the conference has been used by the conference participants and host governments to raise important issues related to the internet governance issues. The discussions feed in to more established and UN processes. The conference is also used for launch of new processes like launch of Global Forum on Cyber Expertise in 2015 at Holland Forum.

A WEF-led and convened multistakeholder and interdisciplinary knowledge network convened dedicated to promoting innovative thinking to shape a more resilient, inclusive and sustainable future in the area of food security. It is one of the 77 thematic/country/region-focused issues convened by the WEF.

To build a common agenda; To help raise awareness, leverage support for priority actions; To develop synergies to strengthen the global response to this challenge

Led by 28 global companies in collaboration with 14 governments, and a wide range of international organizations, civil society, academic and farmers’ organizations, the initiative has set concrete goals to achieve this vision through targeted investment, greater collaboration, and improved efficiency; balancing growth with sustainability. The initiative has outlined the role that the private sector can play in realizing sustainable agriculture through multi-stakeholder partnerships.

The council itself is the governing body comprised of Chair, Vice Chair and members coming from business and industry, government, academic/research institutions, UN bodies, national farmers' associations, and regional alliances.

IFPRI (Academic/Research Institution); UN SG Office (UN bodies); AGRA (Business/Industry)

Strategic partner; Initiator/convenor; Host

Strategic Partner

Agri-agra, food, nutrition

Food security and nutrition

Policy

Academic/Research Institutions

Affected communities

Business/Industry

Industry

institutions

Others

UN Bodies

https://reports.weforum.org/global-agenda-council-2012/#view/global-agenda-council-2012/councils/food-security

1) CEO-led initiative that promotes private sector-led development of the agriculture sector

WEF website

The Global Education Coalition is a platform for collaboration and exchange to protect the right to education during the unprecedented disruption caused by the Covid and beyond. It brings together more than 150 members from the UN family, civil society, academia and the private sector to ensure that learning never stops. Coalition members rally around three flagships, namely connectivity, teachers and ​gender.

To maintaining educational equity and inclusion as governments seek to provision teaching and learning opportunities to students through alternative means during periods of school closures

Secretariat

UNESCO (UN Bodies)

Leadership; Member; Funder; Strategic Partner; Implementer

Initiator/Convenor; Host; Leadership; Member; Funder; Strategic Partner; Implementer

Education

Digital

Project

Financing Facility

Paradigmatic/ Campaign

Financing

Paradigm

Campaign

Civil Society

international organizations

private sector

Save the Children

TheirWorld

United Nations agencies

Business/Industry

Philanthropies

World Bank

https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000374364

SDGs

https://en.unesco.org/news/covid-19-how-unesco-global-education-coalition-tackling-biggest-learning-disruption-history

Conceived in 2003 with a mission to help make national education systems more relevant, sustainable and scalable, the Global Education Initiative (GEI) launched initiatives in Jordan, Rajasthan (India), Egypt and the Palestinian Territories, forged new partnerships and structures with multilateral organizations and released a groundbreaking report on entrepreneurship education.

To identify, test and apply principles and models for successful educational partnerships involving the private sector, civil society, international organizations, donors and governments To promote the value of multistakeholder partnerships and the benefits of private sector involvement in these partnerships To enhance the capacities of key stakeholders to establish and implement their own effective MSPE models To contribute to a greater global understanding and coordination of MSPE initiatives

The idea for the GEI was conceived and launched at the World Economic Forum Annual Meeting 2003 during the Governors Meeting for Information Technology and Telecommunications. John Chambers, Chief Executive Officer of Cisco, along with many other CEOs present, proposed creating a collaborative partnership between business and government to transform education. It started as a country initiative with Jordan, India, Egypt and Palestine programmes and then joined hands with UNESCO in 2006 to make it a global programme.

Programme Management Office / Programme Secretariat at WEF; Each of the country iniatives had their own executive committee.

World Economic Forum (Business/ Industry)

Initiator/Convenor; Host; Leadership; Member; Funder; Strategic Partner; Implementer

Initiator/Convenor; Leadership; Member; Funder; Strategic Partner; Implementer

Education

ICT

Policy

Project

Paradigmatic/ Campaign

Paradigm

Campaign

Academic/Research Institutions

Business/Industry

Governments

Implementation partners

Industry

institutions

International NGOs

National NGOs

Northern donor governments

Others

Philanthropies

Regional Bodies

UN Bodies

Business/Industry

Government

Northern donor govts

Others

Final project report http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_GEI_PartnershipsEducationDevelopment_Report_2012.pdf

Right to Education and MDGs

One of the early generation of the MSI initiatives which made the idea attractive and developed the mechanism for it. It advocated for a shift from public-private partnership (PPP) model to the next generation of the MSIs and development partnerships.

The Global Financing Facility for Women, Children and Adolescents (GFF) is a multi-stakeholder global partnership housed at the World Bank. It is squarely focused on prioritizing and scaling up evidence-driven investments to improve reproductive, maternal, newborn, child and adolescent health and nutrition through targeted strengthening of primary health care systems – to save lives and as a critical first step toward accelerating progress on Universal Health Coverage (UHC) and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

To support low and lower-middle income countries with catalytic financing and technical assistance to develop and implement prioritized national health plans to scale up access to affordable, quality care for women, children and adolescents

Launched in July 2015, the GFF supports 36 low and lower-middle income countries with catalytic financing and technical assistance to develop and implement prioritized national health plans to scale up access to affordable, quality care for women, children and adolescents.

Board of Directors; Secretariat

G 8 (Northern donor govts ); Philanthropies (Corporate) Bill and Milinda Gates Foundation; Philanthropies (Corporate) (Susan Thompson Foundation); WHO (UN Bodies); UNICEF (UN Bodies); UNFPA (UN Bodies); World Bank (International Financial Institutions/DFIs); G 8 (Northern donor govts); Gavi, The Vaccine Alliance (Others), PATH (International NGOs)

Conveners, Leadrship, Member, Funder, Implementer

Initiator/Convenor; Host; Leadership; Member; Funder; Strategic Partner

Global Health

Finance

Policy

Project

Financing Facility

Paradigmatic/ Campaign

Financing

Paradigm

Campaign

Academic/Research Institutions

Affected communities

Business/Industry

Industry

institutions

International NGOs

National NGOs

Northern donor governments

Philanthropies

Regional Bodies

Business/Industry

Government

IFI/DFI

Northern donor govts

Others

Philanthropies

Self-generated revenue

UN bodies

World Bank

https://www.globalfinancingfacility.org/sites/gff_new/GFF-annual-report-2020/

SDGs

CSOs are involved but primarily at the national level and in implementation of various programmes and at times ensuring advocacy, support to the governemnt programmes and so on.

The GFCE is a multi-stakeholder community of more than 115 members and partners from all regions of the world, aiming to strengthen cyber capacity and expertise globally. It endeavours to be a pragmatic, action-orientated and flexible platform for international collaboration, reducing overlap and duplication of efforts in the cyber capacity building ecosystem to ensure an open, free, peaceful and secure digital world.

The current focus of the GFCE is three-fold: coordinating regional and global cyber capacity projects and initiatives; sharing knowledge and expertise by recommending tools and publications; and matching individual needs for cyber capacities to offers of support from the community as a clearing house function.

The GFCE was established during the 2015 Global Conference on Cyber Space in the Hague to strengthen cyber capacity building and coordinate existing international efforts more effectively. It was launched by the Dutch Government along with 41 ministers and other high-level representatives from business and international organizations. In its formative years, the GFCE was focused on building a strong network and raising awareness to existing global capacity building projects and programs. During this time, the GFCE structured its work around practical initiatives that were developed under the GFCE umbrella. In 2017, at the Global Conference on Cyber Space in New Delhi, the GFCE positioned itself as the coordinating platform for cyber capacity building by developing the Global Agenda for Cyber Capacity Building. After a year of conducting extensive consultations and research, the entire GFCE unanimously endorsed the Delhi Communique, which prioritizes 11 topics under 5 broad themes on cyber capacity building.

Governing Board; Advisory Board; Working Groups; Secretariat

(Northern donor govts); (Governments); Organisation of American States (Regional Bodies); Organisation for Security and Coperation in European States (Regional Bodies); ITU (Un Bodies); International Chamber of Commerce (Business/Indsutry); AT&T (Business/Indsutry); Cisco (Business/Indsutry); Huwaei (Business/Indsutry); IBM (Business/Indsutry); Vodafone (Business/Indsutry); World Bank (International Financial Institutions/DFIs); Chatahm House (International NGOs); Diplo Foundation Northern donor govts); UN Insitute for Disarmament and Research (Un Bodies); East West Institiute (Academic/Research Institutions); Global Cyber Security Capacity Centre (Academic/Research Institutions)

Member; Funder; Strategic Partner

Member; Strategic Partner

Internet and data governance

Cyber Security

Policy

Project

Academic/Research Institutions

Business/Industry

Governments

Implementation partners

Industry

institutions

International NGOs

National NGOs

Northern donor governments

Philanthropies

Regional Bodies

UN Bodies

Business/Industry

Companies

Government

IFI/DFI

Northern donor govts

Philanthropies

https://thegfce.org/report-on-the-gfce-annual-v-meeting-2020/

The Global Health Security Agenda (GHSA) is a group of 69 countries, international organizations and non-government organizations, and private sector companies that have come together to achieve the vision of a world safe and secure from global health threats posed by infectious diseases.

Enhance country capacities to prevent, detect and respond to infectious diseases; emphasize global health security as a national leader-level priority and galvanize high-level commitments to global health security; promote multi-sectoral engagement and collaboration; focus on common, measurable targets

The Global Health Security Agenda (GHSA) was launched in February 2014 in response to the global threat that infectious diseases constitute in our increasingly interconnected world. In the past, outbreaks such as SARS (2002), H1N1 influenza (2009), MERS-CoV (2012), H7N9 influenza (2013) and Ebola (2014) have had devastating human, security and economic impacts at the country, regional and global levels. The G7 endorsed the GHSA in June 2014, and Finland and Indonesia hosted commitment development meetings to spur action in May and August.

Steering Committee; Secretariat; Working Groups The GHSA is governed by a Steering Group comprised of approximately 15 countries, international organizations, and/or non-governmental stakeholders. Permanent Steering Group Members (2019 – 2023) Indonesia, Italy, Kenya, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Republic of Korea, Senegal, Thailand, United States, GHSA Consortium (GHSAC), Private Sector Round Table (PSRT) Rotating Steering Group Members (2019 – 2020) Argentina, Australia, Canada, Finland, Netherlands, World Bank Permanent Advisors : WHO, FAO and OIE, hold the role of Permanent Advisor. Time-limited Task Forces / MSI forums

WHO (UN Bodies); FAO (UN Bodies); OIE (UN Bodies); Private Sector Round Table (Business/Industry); G8 (Northern donor govts); GHSA Consortium (Governments)

Leadership; Member; Funder; Strategic Partner;

Initiator/Convenor; Host; Leadership; Member; Funder; Strategic Partner;

Global Health

Security

Policy

Academic/Research Institutions

Business/Industry

Governments

Implementation partners

Industry

institutions

International NGOs

Investors/Banks

National NGOs

Northern donor governments

Philanthropies

Regional Bodies

UN Bodies

Business/Industry

Companies

Government

IFI/DFI

Investment Funds/Banks

Northern donor govts

UN bodies

GHSA 2024 Vision https://ghsagenda.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/ghsa2024-framework.pdf

Its more a policy and coordination body between countries and an evolving platform and its importance has grown with the outbreak of global infectious diseases.

The Global Health Workforce Alliance (The Alliance) was created in 2006 as a common platform for action to address the crisis. The Alliance is a partnership of national governments, civil society, international agencies, finance institutions, researchers, educators and professional associations dedicated to identifying, implementing and advocating for solutions. Since its inception in 2006, the Alliance has acted as a global convener mobilizing worldwide attention to the human resources for health (HRH) crisis and generating political will and action for positive change.

Access for all to a skilled, motivated and supported health worker

The report of the Joint Learning Initiative (JLI) on Human Resources for Health (HRH), supported by the Rockefeller Foundation, launched in 2002, brought together 100 health professionals and experts from academia, countries and international agencies to examine the problem in greater depth, was published in 2004 and succeeded in shining the torch on the crisis. This was concurrent with the series of High-Level Fora on Health MDGs which provided further impetus. There were three consecutive annual World Health Assembly resolutions calling for international action to resolve the crisis. The decision to create a new global partnership - the Alliance - to address the health workforce crisis was taken during a Consultation held in Oslo in February 2005, where a special technical working group was formed. Soon after, WHO former Director-General Dr LEE Jong-wook appointed Dr Francis Omaswa, from Uganda, as Special Advisor to the Director-General on HRH and invited him to come to WHO headquarters in Geneva to set up the Alliance. The Alliance was officially launched on 25 May 2006, during the 59th World Health Assembly in Geneva.

Board of Directors; Secretariat; Task Force; Working Groups; Governance is overseen by a Board with a broad representation of stakeholders. The Secretariat, administered by WHO, as hosting partner, has a small core group of professionals driving and coordinating the implementation of ‘The Alliance Strategic Plan’ and the ‘Kampala Declaration and Agenda of Action’. The Secretariat reports directly to the Board for programmatic results and to WHO for administration of personnel and financial matters.

WHO (UN Bodies); World Bank (International Financial Institutions/DFIs); Global Fund (International Financial Institutions/DFIs); Save the Children (International NGOs); AMREF (International NGOs); NORAD (Northern donor govts); DFID (Northern donor govts); USAID (Northern donor govts);

Initiator/Convenor; Host; Leadership; Member; Funder; Implementers

Leadership; Member; Strategic Partner; Implementers

Global Health

Health Professionals

Policy

Project

Academic/Research Institutions

Affected communities

Business/Industry

Governments

Implementation partners

Industry

institutions

International NGOs

Investors/Banks

National NGOs

Northern donor governments

Others

Philanthropies

Regional Bodies

Trade Unions

UN Bodies

Academic/Research Institutions

Business/Industry

Government

International Financial Institutions/DFIs

Northern donor govts

Philanthropies

Regional Bodies

Self-generated revenue

UN bodies

https://www.who.int/workforcealliance/about/governance/secretariat/en/

MDGs

The Global Health Workforce Network was established in 2016, following a request by select Member States and building on a proposal by the Board of the Global Health Workforce Alliance. It succeeded the Alliance. The Network operates within WHO as a global mechanism for stakeholder consultation, dialogue and coordination on comprehensive and coherent health workforce policies in support of the implementation of the Global Strategy on Human Resources for Health and the recommendations the Commission.

Engagement - To inform and maintain high-level political engagement in support of the implementation of the Global Strategy. Dialogue - To provide forum for multi-sector and multi stakeholder agenda setting, best practice sharing and harmonization and alignment of international support to human resources for health (HRH). Effective implementation - To foster global monitoring and mutual accountability on international HRH goals, targets and commitments.

See Global Health Workforce Alliance

Core Team; Thematic Hub; Strategic Advisory group; Secretariat; Others-specify

Dr David Weakliam (Northern donor govts); WHO (UN Bodies); ILO (UN Bodies); World Bank (International Financial Institutions/DFIs); Global Fund;

Initiator/Convenor; Host; Leadership; Member; Funder

Leadership; Member; Strategic Partner; Implementers

Global Health

Health Professionals

Policy

Project

Academic/Research Institutions

Affected communities

Business/Industry

Governments

Implementation partners

Industry

institutions

International NGOs

Investors/Banks

National NGOs

Northern donor governments

Others

Philanthropies

Regional Bodies

Trade Unions

UN Bodies

UN bodies

Not available

SDGS

The Network seems to be inactive. The last information available there is from 2019.

The Global Internet Forum to Counter Terrorism brings together the technology industry, government, civil society, and academia to foster collaboration and information-sharing to counter terrorist and violent extremist activity online.

To empower a broad range of technology companies, independently and collectively, with processes and tools to prevent and respond to abuse of their platforms by terrorists and violent extremists. To enable multi-stakeholder engagement around terrorist and violent extremist misuse of the Internet and encourage stakeholders to meet key commitments consistent with the GIFCT mission. To promote civil dialogue online and empower efforts to direct positive alternatives to the messages of terrorists and violent extremists. To advance broad understanding of terrorist and violent extremist operations and their evolution, including the intersection of online and offline activities.

Founded by Facebook, Microsoft, Twitter, and YouTube in 2017, the Forum was designed to foster technical collaboration among member companies, advance relevant research, and share knowledge with smaller platforms. Since 2017, GIFCT’s membership has expanded beyond the founding companies to include over a dozen diverse platforms committed to cross-industry efforts to counter the spread of terrorist and violent extremist content online. These efforts have evolved in conjunction with the Christchurch Call to Action, a nine-point plan that governments, tech platforms, and civil society organizations committed to after the March 2019 mosque shootings in Christchurch, New Zealand and viral spread of the perpetrator’s live-streamed video of the attack.

Advisory Committee; Operating Board; Secretariat

Facebook (Business/Industry); Microsoft (Business/Industry); Twitter (Business/Industry); YouTube (Business/Industry); Microsoft (Business/Industry); Amazon (Business/Industry); The Global Network on Extremism and Technology (Academic/Research Institutions); International Centre for the Study of Radicalisation (Academic/Research Institutions); Tech Against Terrorism (Academic/Research Institutions); Peace Research Institute (Academic/Research Institutions); Lowy Institute (Academic/Research Institutions); United Nations Counter-Terrorism Executive Directorate (Un Bodies)

Initiator/Convenor; Host; Leadership; Member; Funder; Strategic Partner

Observer; Strategic Partner

Inernet and Data Governance

Cyber Security, Terrorism

Policy

Project

High-impact Standard

Academic/Research Institutions

Business/Industry

Governments

Implementation partners

Industry

institutions

International NGOs

Investors/Banks

National NGOs

Northern donor governments

Philanthropies

Regional Bodies

UN Bodies

Business/Industry

Companies

Philanthropies

https://gifct.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/GIFCT-Transparency-Report-July-2020-Final.pdf

The Global Network Initiative (GNI) is a multistakeholder platform which recognizes that the complex and evolving challenge of protecting digital rights globally requires a concerted and combined effort, drawing on the perspectives, leverage, credibility, and expertise of many different stakeholders. GNI members work together in two mutually supporting ways. The GNI Principles (“the Principles”) and Implementation Guidelines provide an evolving framework for responsible company decision making in support of freedom of expression and privacy rights. As company participation expands, the GNI Principles are taking root as global standard for human rights in the ICT sector. Every two years, GNI company members participate in an independent assessment to determine their progress in implementing the GNI Principles.

The mission of the Global Network Initiative is to protect and advance freedom of expression and privacy rights in the ICT industry by setting a global standard for responsible company decision making and serving as a multistakeholder voice in the face of government restrictions and demands. GNI implements its mission through four strategic pillars, as illustrated in the diagram below.

Governing Board; Members; Secretariat

Inter News (International NGOs); Huma Rights Watch (International NGOs); Open Technology Institute (International NGOs); Berkman Klein Centre (Academic/Research Institutions); Committee to Protect Journalists (International NGOs); Human Eights Institute (Academic/Research Institutions); Global Partners Digital (International NGOs); Internet Sans Frontières (International NGOs); Google (Business/Industry); Facebook (Business/Industry); Microsoft (Business/Industry); Vodafone (Business/Industry); Line (Business/Industry); Orange (Business/Industry); Ericsson (Business/Industry); BNP Paribas (Investment Funds/Banks); Trillium (Investment Funds/Banks);

Initiator/Convenor; Host; Leadership; Member; Funder

Strategic Partner

Inernet and Data Governance

Human Rights

Policy

High-impact Standard

Academic/Research Institutions

Business/Industry

Implementation partners

Industry

institutions

International NGOs

Investors/Banks

National NGOs

Philanthropies

Business/Industry

Companies

IFI/DFI

Investment Funds/Banks

Northern donor govts

Philanthropies

Self-generated revenue

https://globalnetworkinitiative.org/team/financials/

GNI Principles Freedom of Expression and Privacy

Global Partnership for Education mobilises finances, investments and brings together lower-income countries, donors, international organizations, civil society, including youth and teacher organizations, the private sector and private foundations to transform education systems so that all girls and boys, especially those who are marginalized by poverty, displacement or disability, can get a quality education.

To mobilize partnerships and investments that transform education systems in developing countries, leaving no one behind

Launched in 2002, the Global Partnership for Education was originally known as the Education for All – Fast Track Initiative. It was launched to accelerate progress towards the Millennium Development Goal of universal primary education by 2015. In 2013, Alice Albright joined as Chief Executive Officer and Julia Gillard, former Australian Prime Minister, was appointed Chair of GPE's Board. She led a successful second replenishment of GPE's resources for 2015–2018, bringing in US$28.5 billion in new commitments from developing countries and donor partners. Additionally, in 2016, Rihanna became GPE's first Global Ambassador. In this role Rihanna has encouraged world leaders and policymakers to boost their support for global education and education in emergencies through GPE. Since its inception, GPE has grown from partnering with 7 developing countries in 2002 to close to 70 countries in 2019.

Board of Directors (Members from each constituency Developing Country Partenr, Donor Country Partner, CSOs, Private Sector, Philanthropies, Multilateral Agencies); Five working committees support the Board in fulfilling its functions in a strategic, transparent, and efficient manner; 1) Coordinating Committee; 2) Finance and Risk Committee; 3) Governance and Ethics Committee; 4) Grants and Performance Committee; 5) Strategy and Impact Committee

World Bank (International Financial Institutions/DFIs); OECD (Northern donor govts); G8 Countries (Northern donor govts)

Leadership; Funder; Strategic Partner; implementation

Initiator/Convenor; Host; Leadership; Member; Funder; Strategic Partner; Implementer

Education

Right to Education

Policy

Project

Financing Facility

Financing

Academic/Research Institutions

Business/Industry

Education

Implementation partners

Industry

institutions

International NGOs

Investors/Banks

National NGOs

Northern donor governments

Others

Philanthropies

Regional Bodies

UN Bodies

Academic/Research Institutions

Business/Industry

International Financial Institutions/DFIs

Investors/Banks

Northern donor govts

Philanthropies

Regional Bodies

UN bodies

World Bank

https://www.globalpartnership.org/content/results-report-2020

SDGs, right to Education

A blue ribbon panel of 21 global experts from 16 counties representing the private sector, non-profit organizations, academia and multi-lateral institutions that provided recommendations for prioritizing and implementing sustainable ocean investment. It ceased operations in 2015 without explanation.

To tackle documented problems of overfishing, pollution, and habitat loss; To bring together and mobilize all oceans stakeholders around shared goals.

The Global Partnership for Oceans was launched in 2012 as a new approach to restoring ocean health. It sought to mobilize finance and knowledge to activate proven solutions for the benefit of communities, countries and global well-being. The GPO had over 150 partners representing governments, international organizations, civil society groups, and private sector interests committed to addressing the threats to the health, productivity and resilience of the ocean.

Assembly of GPO Partners (General Assembly): comprise the knowledge platform and adhoc working groups established around specific countries/themes/issues; Secretariat hosted by the World Bank that supports the GPO partners and various committees; GPO Fund Steering Committee (Steering Committee): manages the Multi-Donor Trust Fund for GPO activities; Oceans Investment Roundtable: GPO financiers (that is, bilateral and multilateral donors, dedicated finance instruments, and foundations) as a subset of the Assembly

WB (IFI/DFI); IOC-UNESCO (UN bodies); GEF (Others-financing facility); FAO (UN bodies); IUCN (International NGOs); UNEP Grid Arendal (UN bodies); UNEP Regional Seas Programme (UN bodies); UNDP (UN bodies)

Member; Strategic Partner

Leadership; Strategic Partner

Agri-agra, food, nutrition

Sustainable ocean investment

Policy

Academic/Research Institutions

Business/Industry

IFI/DFI

Industry

institutions

International NGOs

National NGOs

Philanthropies

UN Bodies

IFI/DFI

https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/bitstream/handle/10986/17795/858240WP0Frame00Box382162B00PUBLIC0.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y

2030 Sustainable Development Goals

1. The Nature Conservancy, Flora & Fauna International, and Conservation International are some of the INGO stakeholders; 2. Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, MacArthur Foundation, Clinton Climate Initiative, and Clinton Foundation are some philanthropy supporters; 3. For the private sector- Cotsco Interntional is the well-known brand

UNEP website; WB webiste; Influence Watch website

The Global Partnership on Artificial Intelligence or GPAI (Gee-Pay) is an international and multistakeholder initiative to guide the responsible development and use of artificial intelligence consistent with human rights, fundamental freedoms, and shared democratic values, as reflected in the OECD Recommendation on AI.

to bridge the gap between theory and practice on AI by supporting cutting-edge research and applied activities on AI-related priorities.

Launched in June 2020, GPAI is the fruition of an idea developed within the G7, under the Canadian and French presidencies. GPAI’s 15 founding members are Australia, Canada, France, Germany, India, Italy, Japan, Mexico, New Zealand, the Republic of Korea, Singapore, Slovenia, the United Kingdom, the United States and the European Union. They were joined by Brazil, the Netherlands, Poland and Spain in December 2020.

Council; Steering Committee; Working Groups; Secretariat

(Northern donor govts); (Governments); European Union (Regional Bodies); International Centre of Expertise (Academic/Research Institutions); French National Institute for Research in Digital Science and Technology (Academic/Research Institutions); OECD (Northern Donor Governments; UNESCO (UN Bodies)

Member; Strategic Partner

Observer; Strategic Partner

Internet and data governance

Artifical Intelligence

Policy

High-impact Standard

Academic/Research Institutions

Business/Industry

Governments

Industry

institutions

Northern donor governments

Regional Bodies

UN Bodies

IFI/DFI

Northern donor govts

Updates available on its website

OECD Recommendation on Artificial Intelligence

The GPAI Secretariat, hosted at the OECD in Paris, will support two high-level governance bodies, the GPAI Council and the GPAI Steering Committee. The GPAI Council, which is comprised of ministers or deputy-ministers from GPAI members and meets once a year, will provide strategic direction to GPAI. The GPAI Steering Committee, which is comprised of five government representatives and six nongovernment representatives and meets three times a year, will implement the direction provided by the GPAI Council to develop work plans and establish Working Groups. The group of founding members, collectively known as the GPAI Task Force, will serve as the transitional GPAI Council and Steering Committee until these governance bodies are established. Two Centres of Expertise in Montréal and Paris will support GPAI’s Working Groups. The Montréal Centre will support the Working Groups on Responsible AI (including a subgroup on AI and Pandemic Response) and Data Governance, while the Paris Centre will support the Working Groups on Future of Work and Innovation & Commercialization. The two Centres will also organize the annual Multistakeholder Experts Group Plenary to discuss findings and recommendations from the Working groups's activities.

A non-profit industry association that promotes industry sustainability, quality practices and standards, and demand for shea in food and cosmetics via public-private partnerships

To help build a more competitive, sustainable, and profitable shea industry by establishing shea kernel quality standards and the promotion of shea butter as a high quality ingredient; To improve the livelihoods of rural African women and their communities; To empower women through training sessions,

Established in 2011, the Global Shea Alliance is a non-profit industry association with headquarters in Accra, Ghana. The GSA currently has 350 members from 25 different countries. Members include women's groups, small businesses, suppliers, international food and cosmetic brands, retailers, and non-profit organizations.

Headed by an Executive Committee elected by the General Assembly for a two-year term. The Secretariat is responsible for the day-to-day operations of the Alliance and reports to the Executive Committee.; The Advisory Committee provides strategic advice comprised of EIF, USAID

USAID; Symballa Silla (Business/Industry); Aaron Adu (Others-director); EIF (Others-international trade organization); Sofi Tucker Foundation (Philanthropies (family)

Leadership; Strategic partner; Member

Strategic partner (UNIDO, FAO, UNDP)

Agri-agra, food, nutrition

Sustainable agriculture

Policy

Project

Environmental and Social Standard

Affected communities

Business/Industry

Industry

International NGOs

Investors/Banks

National NGOs

Others

Trade Unions

Business/Industry

Northern donor govts

Others

Philanthropies

Regional Bodies

https://globalshea.com/gsamain/storage/img/marqueeupdater/2020.06.28.03.32GSA%20Annual%20Report%202019.pdf

2030 Sustainable Development Goals

1) Biggest funder is USAID

USAID website; GSA website

HDC is a collaborative platform that leverages and aligns technical and financial resources (at all levels) to country owned strategies and plans for collecting, storing, analysing and using data to improve health outcomes, with specific focus on SDG targets and communities that are left behind.

To strengthen country capacity to plan, implement, monitor and review progress and standardized processes for data collection, availability, analysis and use to achieve national health related targets (and therefore eventual SDG health targets); To improve efficiency and alignment of technical and financial investments in health data systems through collective actions; To increase the impact of global public goods and tools on country health data systems through increased sharing, learning and country engagement.

The Health Data Collaborative (HDC) was launched in March 2016 following a 2015 high-level summit on Measurement and Accountability for Results in Health, endorsement in a 2015 Roadmap for Health Measurement and Accountability and a 5-Point Call to action.

Broad Global Partners Group; Constituency-based Stakeholder Representative Group; Secretariat; Multi-agency Working Groups (WGs). More details accessible here https://www.healthdatacollaborative.org/fileadmin/uploads/hdc/Documents/2020/1.1_SESSION_1_HDC_Governance_document_FINALdraft.pdf

BMGF Philanthropies (corporate); GAVI (Others); GIZ (Northern donor govts); JICA (Northern donor govts); NORAD Northern donor govts; UNAIDS (UN bodies); UNFPA (UN bodies); UNICEF (UN bodies); USAID (Northern donor govts); WHO(UN bodies); World Bank (IFI/DFI-financed)

Member, Advisory Group

Initiator/Convenor; Host; Leadership; Member; Funder

Global Health

Data

Policy

Project

Paradigmatic/ Campaign

Paradigm

Campaign

Academic/Research Institutions

Business/Industry

Governments

Implementation partners

Industry

institutions

International NGOs

Investors/Banks

National NGOs

Northern donor governments

Philanthropies

Regional Bodies

UN Bodies

IFI/DFI

Investment Funds/Banks

Northern donor govts

Philanthropies

UN bodies

Last annual report is from 2016 https://www.healthdatacollaborative.org/news/article/health-data-collaborative-year-in-review/

SDGs

The Collaborative is a group of practitioners, policy makers, academics, civil society representatives, agencies, decision-makers and other committed citizens seeking to connect and engage about important health systems governance issues. The Collaborative fosters creative and safe spaces to address the health systems governance challenges (such as corruption, power inequities, lack of capacities, gross mismanagement, poor distribution of knowledge and resources and unequal access to health) and promote real impact on the ground.

To focus on “actionable governance”, governance that addresses real challenges in health systems with a focus on the Universal Health Coverage.

Following a series of international consultations throughout 2016 and in early 2017 on the importance of governance to achieving UHC, a special meeting was convened by WHO in Brussels on 24 March 2017, devoted to creating the Constitutive Forum of the Collaborative and discussing the Collaborative’s workplan 2017-2019. Since then the plan has developed and for now focuses on the governance capacities of the Ministry of Health and Governance frameworks and measures of governance in health systems.

Not clear and still evolving. A Secretariat is hosted within the WHO and initial funding was provided by BMGF.

WHO (UN Bodies); BMGF (Philanthropy (Corporate))

Member and implementer

Initiator/Convenor; Host; Leadership

Global Health

Data, UHC

Project

Academic/Research Institutions

Business/Industry

Governments

Implementation partners

Industry

institutions

International NGOs

National NGOs

Northern donor governments

Philanthropies

Regional Bodies

UN Bodies

Philanthropies

https://hsgovcollab.org/en/node/4079

Its not very clear how this is going to supplement the UHC / SDGs. It seems to be floundering for now and there is not much credible activity to show as of now.

The Higher Education Sustainability Initiative (HESI),is a partnership between United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, UNESCO, United Nations Environment, UN Global Compact’s Principles for Responsible Management Education (PRME) initiative, United Nations University (UNU), UN-HABITAT, UNCTAD and UNITAR, and was created in 2012 in the run-up to the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20).

To teach sustainable development across all disciplines of study, To encourage research and dissemination of sustainable development knowledge, To green campuses and support local sustainability efforts, and To engage and share information with international networks.

The Higher Education Sustainability Initiative (HESI) for Rio+20 was initiated in 2012 by a group of UN partners (the Executive Coordinator of Rio+20, UN DESA, UNEP, UNESCO, UN Global Compact, UN Global Compact's Principles for Responsible Management Education (PRME) and UNU) as an unprompted initiative for Higher Education Institutions (HEI) in the run-up to the Rio+20 Conference.

Secretariat

United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UN Bodies); UNESCO (UN Bodies); United Nations Environment (UN Bodies); UN Global Compact’s Principles for Responsible Management Education (UN Bodies); Kedge Business School (Business/Industry); United Nations University (UN Bodies); UN-HABITAT (UN Bodies); UNCTAD (UN Bodies); and UNITAR (UN Bodies)

Initiator; Leadership; Member; Funder; Strategic Partner

Initiator/Convenor; Host; Leadership; Member; Funder; Strategic Partner; Implementer

Education

Higher Education

Policy

Project

Paradigmatic/ Campaign

Paradigm

Campaign

https://www.sulitest.org/files/source/hlpf2020_report.pdf

SDGs

Each year in the margins of the HLPF, a global HESI event is organized to showcase how the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the SDGs are being integrated by higher education institutions into sustainability strategies, research, teaching, pedagogy, and campus practices, and to position these institutions as key drivers for achieving the SDGs.

The High-level Panel on Digital Cooperation was convened by the UN Secretary-General to advance global multi-stakeholder dialogue on how we can work better together to realize the potential of digital technologies for advancing human well-being while mitigating the risks. Its final report, “The Age of Digital Interdependence” makes 5 sets of recommendations: - Build an inclusive digital economy and society - Develop human and institutional capacity - Protect human rights and human agency - Promote digital trust, security and stability - Foster global digital cooperation

to broaden public debate on digital cooperation frameworks and support UN Member States in their consultations on these issues. Theie report is expected to: 1) raise awareness about the transformative impact of digital technologies across society and the economy, 2) identify policy, research and information gaps as well as ways to improve interdisciplinary action on digital technologies, and 3) present concrete proposals to strengthen cooperation in the digital space in an effective and inclusive manner.

The High-level Panel on Digital Cooperation was established by the UN Secretary-General in July 2018 to identify good examples and propose modalities for working cooperatively across sectors, disciplines and borders to address challenges in the digital age. The Panel will conduct a broad engagement and consultation process, resulting in a final report with actionable recommendations in 2019.

Co-Chairs; Members; Secretariat

Melinda Gates (Philanthropies (Corporate)); Jack Ma (Business/Industry); UAE, Japan; Norway; Vinton Cerf (Business/Industry); Isabel Guerrero Pulgar (Academic/Research Institutions); Kira Radinsky (Business/Industry); Nanjira Sambuli (International NGOs); Dhananjayan Sriskandarajah(International NGOs); Un Secretary General (Un Bodies)

Initiator/Convenor; Host; Leadership; Member; Strategic Partner

Initiator/Convenor; Host; Leadership; Member; Funder

Internet and data governance

Technology

Policy

High-impact Standard

Academic/Research Institutions

Business/Industry

Governments

Implementation partners

Industry

institutions

International NGOs

Investors/Banks

National NGOs

Northern donor governments

Philanthropies

Regional Bodies

UN Bodies

Government

Northern donor govts

Philanthropies

UN bodies

Full report of the Commission is available on its site.

Two co-chairs are part of the world's biggest internet companies and the impact they have on the policy making and delibrations is anyone's guess.

The Hydropower Sustainability Assessment Protocol is a tool that promotes and guides more sustainable hydropower projects.The Protocol offers a way to assess the performance of a hydropower project across more than 20 sustainability topics.

It supports national and regional stakeholders in improving ownership of good practice through a structured process of training, assisted assessments, engagement and reflection. The Hydropower Sustainability Tools have been applied on more than 35 hydropower projects around the world.

The Hydropower Sustainability Assessment Protocol is the culmination of a long process of debate and dialogue in response to the World Commission on Dams final report in 2000. This led in 2004 to IHA developing Sustainability Guidelines for the sector, with the intention that they provided practical and realistically implementable guidance. By 2006, IHA had developed an initial sustainability assessment protocol, intended to provide a uniform method of assessing sustainability on hydro projects worldwide. Recognizing the value of this first version, WWF and The Nature Conservancy approached IHA with a view to further refining the tool. IHA agreed that the Protocol would benefit from a more inclusive process that would encompass sustainability perspectives from all hydropower stakeholders, and it was decided to bring together a group, the Hydropower Sustainability Assessment Forum to achieve this.

Governed by the Hydropower Sustainability Assessment Council, a multi-stakeholder group of representatives from energy companies, government agencies, financial institutions and social and environmental NGOs.

The Hydropower Sustainability Governance Committee (HSGC) represents the Hydropower Sustainability Assessment Council (HSAC), which is the main policy making body, in promoting the use and integrity of the Hydropower Sustainability Tools. The HSGC is composed by the chair and alternate of each HSAC chamber. The Board Energy companies (Sarawak Energy; Voith Hydro; Pacific Hydro); government agencies (NORAD; SECO; China's National Research Center for Development; Ministry of Energy-Nepal); IFIs/Development Bank(World Bank, New Development Bank), international conservation NGOs (WWF, IUCN).

Leadership; Strategic Partner; Member

Initiator/Convenor (World Commission on Dams); Strategic Partner

Climate, Environment, Energy, Extractives

Renewable Energy

Environmental and Social Standard

Business/Industry

Governments

Industry

institutions

International NGOs

National NGOs

Northern donor governments

Others

Self-generated revenue

https://assets-global.website-files.com/5f749e4b9399c80b5e421384/5fa7e1a769aa625323b46063_iha-annual-report-2019-20-single-pgs.pdf

1) problematic concept of "sustainable hydropower that has been used to build numerous dams that displace local communities; 2) presence of WWF, IUCN; 3) ambiguity around conflict of interest with energy companies present in the governing body; 3) democratic deficit- not elected and affected communities are represented by either energy companies or government

The IHA Sustainability acts as management entity to the Council and is responsible for overseeing training and accreditation and co-ordinating governance activities.

MSI Integrity database, IHA website, HSAP website

IMPACT was a partnership of all the major anti-counterfeiting players, including: international organizations, non-governmental organizations, enforcement agencies, pharmaceutical manufacturers associations and drug and regulatory authorities to stop the counterfeiting of medicines.

to fight a thriving multimillion-dollar illegal trade in counterfeit drugs, vaccines and other medical products.

WHO organized an international conference in Rome, 16–18 February 2006, which was attended by representatives of 57 national medicines regulatory authorities, seven international organizations, and 12 international associations of patients, health professionals, pharmaceutical manufacturers and wholesalers. The Declaration of Rome was adopted by all 160 participants and stated that WHO should take the lead in establishing a taskforce, the purpose of which would be to lead international collaboration on combating counterfeit medicines. The task force was named the International Medical Products Anti-Counterfeiting Taskforce (IMPACT) and defined as a voluntary coalition of stakeholders that coordinates international activities aimed at combating counterfeit medical products for the purpose of protecting public health.

General Assembly/Assembly of Delegates; Secretariat; Wokring Groups

WHO (UN Bodies); INTERPOL (IGOs)

Member; Strategic Partner; Implementer

Initiator/Convenor; Host; Leadership; Member; Funder

Global Health

Medicines

Policy

Academic/Research Institutions

Business/Industry

Governments

Implementation partners

Industry

institutions

Investors/Banks

Northern donor governments

Regional Bodies

Trade Unions

UN Bodies

Government

Northern donor govts

Others

UN bodies

Not available

Some developing country WHO members and health activists became concerned that the word was being used to confuse public opinion of legal, good quality generic drugs. It was felt that the use of the word counterfiet came on insistence of the pharmaceutical industry who were trying to protect their intellectual property.

IMPACT was removed from WHO, and governments fought over terms (including ‘falsified’) until they settled on a contortion that in a way perfectly reflected the level of disagreement among them: “substandard/spurious/falsely-labelled/falsified/counterfeit medical products,” or SSFFC (IPW, Public Health, 3 March 2011). The 2012 World Health Assembly, the Member State mechanism on SSFFC medical products was created. And on 23-25 November, at the fifth meeting of the mechanism, it was agreed to change the name to ‘substandard and falsified’. On 27 January, the Board approved the draft decision (EB140/23 Add.1), which recommends to the annual World Health Assembly to agree to a set of definitions and to substitute SSFFC with substandard and falsified. https://www.ip-watch.org/2017/01/30/board-agrees-drop-word-counterfeit-30-years/

https://www.twn.my/title2/IPR/pdf/ipr13.pdf

The Inclusive Education Initiative (IEI) was launched in 2019 by the World Bank with support from the United Kingdom’s Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) and the Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation (NORAD) to provide technical expertise and resources to help countries foster more inclusive educational systems, with a view to achieving SDG 4 with a specific focus on the children with disabilities.

to provide technical expertise and resources to help countries foster more inclusive educational systems, with a view to achieve SDG 4

World Bank is the host of the programme. No specific information.

World Bank (International Financial Institutions/DFIs);

No information

No information

Education

Primary Education, Disability

Policy

Project

Financing Facility

Financing

Governments

Implementation partners

institutions

Northern donor governments

UN Bodies

World Bank

No separate information available, should be within the World Bank Annual Reports

SDGSm United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities

Still evolving fund and is at pilot stage.

Offers independent third-party verification and certification against a comprehensive standard for all mined materials that provides ‘one-stop coverage’ of the full range of issues related to the impacts of industrial-scale mines. IRMA’s approach to responsible mining is to certify social and environmental performance at mine sites globally using an internationally recognized standard that has been developed in consultation with a wide range of stakeholders.

To establish a multi-stakeholder and independently verified responsible mining assurance system that improves social and environmental performance.

IRMA was founded in 2006 by a coalition of nongovernment organizations, businesses purchasing minerals and metals for resale in other products, affected communities, mining companies, and labor unions.

It claims that its governance is "equitable and shared by civil society, communities, and organized labor alongside the private sector". What this means in practice is that IRMA has a decision-making process that strives for consensus, and where consensus cannot be achieved we then vote. However, topics may not pass if one of the stakeholder groups is fundamentally opposed. In those cases, the topic must continue to be discussed so a resolution may be found. How voting happens, who has a vote, and what weight a vote carries, is key in multi-stakeholder leadership. This equitable governance model is one of the reasons more than 60 civil society organizations have stepped forward to publicly state their expectation that mines should engage in IRMA.

The Board of Directors with two representatives from each of five sectors, including: mining companies ArcelorMittal (Business/Industry); Anglo American (Business/Industry); Companies that purchase mined materials to make other products: Tiffany & Co; Microsoft; Non-governmental organizations: Earthworks (INGOs); Human Rights Watch (INGOs); Affected communities: irst Nations Women Advocating for Responsible Mining; Mining Affected Communities United in Action; and Organized labor: IndustriALL Global Union; United Steelworkers Canada

Leadership

Strategic Partner

Climate, Environment, Energy, Extractives

Extractives

Environmental and Social Standard

Affected communities

Business/Industry

Industry

International NGOs

Investors/Banks

National NGOs

Trade Unions

No Link

1) works with Forest Stewarship Council, Alliance for Responsible Mining, Responsible Jewellry Council, Responsible Steel; 2) some of its CSO partners include Oxfam America

MSI Integrity database, IRMA website

A private-public advisory group committed to transforming rural economies by delivering partnerships and investment structures that promote financial inclusion for rural enterprises and smallholder farmers

By combining industry-leading research with hands-on technical expertise, ISF aims to develop practical, profitable, and sustainable financial solutions geared towards the development of financial services for smallholder farmer market

Launched in 2013, and is housed at the Global Development Incubator, an incubator for transformational development ventures. Its main activities are practical research and active engagement with financial service providers, policy makers, and funders to enable approaches at scale.

Advisory Group consists of leading funders and practitioners in the rural financial inclusion space; ISF Team (Secretariat): day-to-day activities and rolling out of programs and plans

Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (Philanthropies (corporate); CGAP, Citi Foundation, Ford Foundation (Philanthropies (family)), Mastercard Foundation (Philanthropies (corporate); Syngenta Foundation (Philianthropies (corporate); USAID (Northern gov't/donors); Consultative Group to Assist the Poor (Others-MSG); World Bank (IFI/DFI); IDH (Investors/Banks)

Leadership

No information

Agri-agra, food, nutrition

Financial Inclusion

Policy

Project

Financing Facility

Financing

IFI/DFI

Others

Philanthropies

No link

1) quite an opaque website but the implications of their work in terms of policy, practice and fate of smallholders seem ominous in terms of what financial inclusion or transformation mean; 2) CGAP which is administered and housed in the WB is a key advisor; 3) Other advisors are One Acre Fund, Root Capital, Skoll Foundation, Small Foundation,

ISF Website

http://www.fao.org/3/ca7485en/ca7485en.pdf; http://www.fao.org/3/nd058en/nd058en.pdf

* Proposed new MSGs by the FAO (not yet approved). This is not covered in this mapping because it's still an emerging MSG

The International Finance Facility for Education (IFFEd) is a new financing engine for global education, further complementing the existing grant instruments like the Global Partnership for Education (GPE) and Education Cannot Wait (ECW) fund. It is specifically designed to tackle the education crisis in lower-middle-income countries (LMICs) which are home to 80% of the world’s children.

To increase funding for the primary education in the lower and middle income countries

Education Commission first recommended the International Finance Facility for Education (IFFEd) in its September 2016 report, The Learning Generation.

Evolving, World Bank serves as the trustee of the IFFEd Trust Fund.

World Bank (International Financial Institutions/DFIs);

Leadership; Member; Funder; Strategic Partner, implementing partner

Initiator/Convenor; Host; Leadership; Member; Funder; Strategic Partner

Education

Primary Education

Policy

Project

Financing Facility

Financing

Academic/Research Institutions

Business/Industry

Governments

Implementation partners

Industry

institutions

International NGOs

Investors/Banks

National NGOs

Northern donor governments

UN Bodies

Government

Northern donor govts

World Bank

https://educationcommission.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/2020_IFFEd_Update.pdf

SDGS, Right to Education

Concerns are that IFFEd might add to the debt crisis of the countries given the conditions which the MDBs will impose on the countries, since the returns on the social investments like education are not immediate and as a result tied loans for education even at less than the commercial rates are not attractive to target lowe and middle income group countries.

Its still an evolving fund and many of its stakeholder categories and governance structures are still evolving.

https://www.cgdev.org/blog/international-finance-facility-education-wrong-answer-right-question

A global alliance of civil society and intergovernmental organisations working together to promote secure and equitable access to and control over land for poor women and men through advocacy, dialogue, knowledge-sharing, and capacity-building

To connect members to each other and to change makers beyond the Coalition, creating opportunities for dialogue, mutual learning, and joint action; To mobilize members by facilitating informed and effective action, through accessible and usable knowledge and tools, and by creating opportunities for innovation, piloting and scaling up; and To influence key decision makers, including governments, their partners, and corporate actors and investors to engage with civil society actors as legitimate and necessary interlocutors and partners in achieving land governance for and with people

The successor of the Popular Coalition to Eradicate Hunger and Poverty which was born out of the 1995 Conference on Hunger and Poverty in Brussels. Since 2003, the alliance has grown to 250 organization members with strategic focus on land access issues.

Global Assembly of Members (General Assembly): highest policy making body; Coalition Council (Board of Directors): responsible for the overall responsibilities of governance between meetings of the Assembly. The Council consists of representatives from 16 members and meets twice each year. Chaired by IFAD; Regional Committees composed of the elected Council Members from the region, the host of the Regional Coordination Unit, and any other member as elected by regional assemblies; Management Team (Secretariat) acting as the lead of the global secretariat

IFAD (UN Bodies); WB (IFI/DFI); Others-Regional NGOs; Mike Taylor (Others- director); International NGOs; National NGOs

Others- targets of policy

Leadership (IFAD; FAO; UNEP); Host; Strategic Partner

Agri-agra, food, nutrition

Land governance

Paradigmatic/ Campaign

Paradigm

Campaign

Academic/Research Institutions

Affected communities

institutions

International NGOs

National NGOs

Others

UN Bodies

IFI/DFI

Northern donor govts

Others

Regional Bodies

UN bodies

https://d3o3cb4w253x5q.cloudfront.net/media/documents/annual_report_2019_en_web_spread.pdf

2030 Sustainable Development Goals; Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure (VGGT); Principles for Responsible Investment in Agriculture and Food Systems (RAI); UNDRIP

1) Some key actors involved in LMI also involved in ILC- IFAD, CIRAD; 2) German BMZ, EC, and SDC are same funders; 3) The WB has seeded the ILC until 2007, representing 8% of total funding. More than funding, its framework is very influential to the positions taken by ILC.; 4) Academic/Research Institutions such as CIFOR and ICRAF (World Agroforestry Center) are part of the Global Council

1) controversial alliance that historically promoted market-assisted land reform and large-scale land deals

ILC website; internal knowledge; WB website

A global, multistakeholder, non-profit partnership among the tuna industry, scientists and World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF). Its mission is to undertake science-based initiatives for the long-term conservation and sustainable use of tuna stocks, reducing bycatch and promoting ecosystem health

To Improve the sustainability of global tuna stocks by developing and implementing verifiable, science-based practices, commitments and international management measures that result in tuna fisheries meeting the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) standard 1 without conditions, and become the industry standard for vessel owners, traders, processors and marketers

In 2009, acclaimed scientists, leaders in industry and environmental champions launched the International Seafood Sustainability Foundation (ISSF) based on shared concerns about the future of global tuna fisheries and a desire to do something about it – together.

Board of Directors: strategic direction; Scientific Advisory Committee (Advisory Group): advises on the science-based analysis of issues; Environmental Stakholder Committee: represented by envirionmental and conservation civil society groups; ISSF Staff (Secretariat): day-to-day operations

WWF (International NGOs); Bolton Alimentari (Business/Industry); Bumble Bee Foods (Business/Industry), LLC / Clover Leaf Seafoods (Business/Industry); MW Brands (Business/Industry); Princes Ltd. (Business/Industry); Sea Value Co., Ltd. (Business/Industry); StarKist Co. (Business/Industry); Thai Union Manufacturing Co. Ltd / Chicken of the Sea Intl. (Business/Industry); TriMarine International (Business/Industry); DR. Victor Restrepo (Others-expert); Susan Jackson (Others- director)

Initiator/Convenor; Leadership; Member;

Strategic Partner

Agri-agra, food, nutrition

Sustainable ocean

Policy

Project

Environmental and Social Standard

Academic/Research Institutions

Business/Industry

Industry

institutions

International NGOs

National NGOs

Others

Philanthropies

Business/Industry

https://reports.iss-foundation.org/2019-annual-report/issf-2019-annual-report/

Wikipedia; ISSF website

A globally leading certification system covering the entire supply chain and all kinds of biobased feedstocks and renewables. Independent third party certification ensures compliance with high ecological and social sustainability requirements, greenhouse gas emissions savings and traceability throughout the supply chain. ISCC can be applied in various markets including the bioenergy sector, the food and feed market and the chemical market.

As a no-deforestation standard with a strong commitment to protect forests, high-carbon stock lands and biodiversity, ISCC strives for a world where biomass and other raw materials are produced in an environmentally, socially and economically sustainable manner.

It has been developed through an open multi-stakeholder process and is governed by an association with more than 130 members, including research institutes and NGO’s.

The ISCC Association (ISCC e.V.) is the legally registered body responsible for governing ISCC, for guiding the strategic decisions taken by ISCC and for unifying and representing ISCC’s stakeholders. Members can participate in the organisation and have a voting right. The General Assembly is the annual meeting of the members held by the ISCC Association, where members of the ISCC Association elect the ISCC Board and discuss and decide on strategically important matters. The ISCC Board represents three different stakeholder groups.

Archer-Daniels Midland (Business/Industry); EcoOils Limited Singapore; (Business/Industry); Muenzer Bioindustrie GmbH(Business/Industry); Ambrian Energy GmbH (Business/Industry); National Committee for Global Change Research/Kiel Institute for Global Economy (Academic/Research Institution)

Leadership; Member

Strategic Partner (UN Global Compact)

Multiple sectors

Renewable Energy

Environmental and Social Standard

Government

No Link

Sustainability Ordinances for Bioenergy in Germany, the EU and developing countries

1) identification as "stakeholder"; 2) corporate take over and led initiative; 3) international conservation organizations such as WWF-Germany is a member

Since March 2016, ISCC is a participant of the UN Global Compact, a non-binding UN pact of approximately 10,000 companies worldwide. The UN Global Compact aims to mobilise a global movement of sustainable companies and supports businesses by aligning their strategies and operations with ten principles on human rights, labour environment and anti-corruption. Hundreds of companies are members of the ISCC with big corps such as Cargill, DuPont, ExxonMobil, Siemens, Shell, etc.

MSI Integrity database, ISCC website

The Internet & Jurisdiction Policy Network is the multistakeholder organization addressing the tension between the cross-border Internet and national jurisdictions. Its Secretariat facilitates a global policy process engaging over 400 key entities from governments, the world’s largest internet companies, technical operators, civil society groups, academia and international organizations from over 70 countries.

to jointly develop policy standards and operational solutions to pressing legal challenges at the intersection of the global digital economy, human rights and security.

In 2011 a series of consultations with global key actors showed the need for a new type of issue-based cooperation process that gathers governments, internet companies, technical operators, civil society, academia and international organizations to advance legal interoperability in cyberspace. At the United Nations Internet Governance Forum in Nairobi, Kenya Executive Director Bertrand de La Chapelle and Deputy Executive Director Paul Fehlingeris, two co-founder managed to secure seed funding and set up the Internet & Jurisdiction Policy Network (initially called the “Internet & Jurisdiction Project”) in 2012.

Governing Board; Steering Committee; Secretariat

Council of Europe (Regional Bodies); European Commission (Regional Bodies); ICANN (International NGOs); OECD (International Financial Institutions/DFIs) United Nations ECLAC (UN Bodies); UNESCO (UN Bodies); France (Northern donor govts); Canada (Northern donor govts); Germany (Northern donor govts); Bertrand de la Chapelle (Business/Industry); Paul Fehlinger (Academic/Research Institutions); William Flora Hewlett Foundation (Philanthropy (Corporate)); Facebook (Business/Industry); Amazon (Business/Industry); Google (Business/Industry); GoDaddy (Business/Industry); Apple (Business/Industry); Verisign (Business/Industry); Brazilian Internet Steering Committee (Business/Industry)

Initiator/Convenor; Host; Leadership; Member; Funder; Strategic Partner

Initiator/Convenor; Leadership; Member; Funder; Strategic Partner

Internet and data governance

Jurisdication & legal interoperability

Policy

Project

High-impact Standard

Paradigmatic/ Campaign

Paradigm

Campaign

Academic/Research Institutions

Business/Industry

Governments

Implementation partners

Industry

institutions

International NGOs

National NGOs

Northern donor governments

Philanthropies

Regional Bodies

UN Bodies

Business/Industry

Companies

IFI/DFI

Investment Funds/Banks

Northern donor govts

Philanthropies

Self-generated revenue

UN bodies

https://www.internetjurisdiction.net/about/progress-reports

The regular Global Conferences of the Internet & Jurisdiction Policy Network are institutionally supported by six international organizations: Council of Europe, European Commission, ICANN, OECD, United Nations ECLAC, and UNESCO. Partner countries include France (2016), Canada (2018) and Germany (2019).

The Internet Governance Forum (IGF) serves to bring people together from various stakeholder groups as equals, in discussions on public policy issues relating to the Internet. While there is no negotiated outcome, the IGF informs and inspires those with policy-making power in both the public and private sectors. At their annual meeting delegates discuss, exchange information and share good practices with each other. The IGF facilitates a common understanding of how to maximize Internet opportunities and address risks and challenges that arise.

Discuss public policy issues related to key elements of Internet governance in order to foster the sustainability, robustness, security, stability and development of the Internet; - Facilitate discourse between bodies dealing with different cross-cutting international public policies regarding the Internet and discuss issues that do not fall within the scope of any existing body; - Interface with appropriate inter-governmental organizations and other institutions on matters under their purview; - Facilitate the exchange of information and best practices, and in this regard make full use of the expertise of the academic, scientific and technical communities; - Advise all stakeholders in proposing ways and means to accelerate the availability and affordability of the Internet in the developing world; - Strengthen and enhance the engagement of stakeholders in existing and/or future Internet governance mechanisms, particularly those from developing countries; - Identify emerging issues, bring them to the attention of the relevant bodies and the general public, and, where appropriate, make recommendations; - Contribute to capacity building for Internet governance in developing countries, drawing fully on local sources of knowledge and expertise; - Promote and assess, on an ongoing basis, the embodiment of WSIS principles in Internet governance processes; - Discuss, inter alia, issues relating to critical Internet resources; - Help to find solutions to the issues arising from the use and misuse of the Internet, of particular concern to everyday users; - Publish its proceedings

Internet governance was one of the most controversial issues at the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) and at the subsequent WSIS+10 review by the General Assembly in the wake of the adoption of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in 2015. Cognizant of the fact that any Internet governance approach should be inclusive and responsive, the WSIS mandated the Secretary-General of the United Nations to convene the Global Internet Governance Forum (IGF) for multistakeholder policy dialogue. The convening of the IGF was announced by the Secretary-General of the United Nations on 18 July 2006. Since its establishment in 2006, it has gained global prominence among stakeholders as an open, inclusive, and transparent forum for dialogue and collaboration. The IGF mandate was renewed for 5 years in 2010 (2011-2015) and again in 2015 during the WSIS+10 review for another 10 years (2016-2025).

Multistakeholder Advisory Group (MAG); Chair of the Multistakeholder Advisory Group (MAG); Secretariat

UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs (Un Bodies); UN Secretary-General's Multistakeholder Advisory Group (Un Bodies); Association for Progressive Communications (International NGOs); Mr. Afonso, Carlos Alberto (National NGOs); UAE (Governments); National Telecommunications and Information and Administration (Northern donor govts); GIZ (Northern donor govts); DiploFoundation (Northern donor govts); Facebook (Business/Industry)’Committee to Protect Journalists (International NGOs); Small and Medium Telecom Operator's Association (Business/Industry); African Union (Regional Bodies); European Union (Regional Bodies); ITU (UN Bodies); UNESCO (UN Bodies); UNCTAD (UN Bodies); WIPO (UN Bodies)

Leadership; Member; Funder Strategic Partner

Initiator/Convenor; Host; Leadership; Member; Funder; Strategic Partner

Internet and data governance

Public policy and cooperation

Policy

Project

High-impact Standard

Paradigmatic/ Campaign

Paradigm

Campaign

Academic/Research Institutions

Business/Industry

Governments

Implementation partners

Industry

institutions

International NGOs

Investors/Banks

National NGOs

Northern donor governments

Others

Philanthropies

Regional Bodies

Trade Unions

UN Bodies

Business/Industry

Companies

Government

IFI/DFI

Northern donor govts

Others

Philanthropies

UN bodies

https://www.intgovforum.org/multilingual/content/igf-2020-outputs

The Internet Rights and Principles Dynamic Coalition is working to uphold human rights on the internet and to root internet governance processes and systems in human rights standards. It sets out to promote, and provide a space for multi-stakeholder dialogue and collaboration. It also aim to be an umbrella platform for facilitating collaboration on human rights issues in the Internet Governance Forum process. Members of the coalition work individually and in partnership to promote processes and instruments to frame and enforce rights on the Internet.

More specifically, the coalition aims to: Raise awareness of fundamental human rights and what they mean on the Internet. Discuss and anchor global public policy principles to preserve the openness of the internet and ensure that its continued evolution is framed by the public interest, through open and extensive stakeholder involvement. Encourage all stakeholders to address issues of human and civil rights in policy-making, contributing to a people-centric discourse and policy formulation in the Internet Governance space. Identify ways in which human rights can be applied to the Internet and other ICT technologies, and evaluate the applicability of existing formal and informal guidelines and regulatory frameworks. Identify measures for the protection and enforcement of human rights on the Internet, while pushing for people-centric issues and public interest based internet governance policy making. Describe the duties and responsibilities of internet users and other stakeholders which, together with their rights, will serve to preserve and promote the public interest on the internet.

The Internet Rights and Principles Dynamic Coalition was formed during the Hyderabad IGF in 2008, following a decision to merge the Internet Bill of Rights and Framework of Principles for the Internet coalitions and joined later by the Freedom of Expression Coalition.

Co-Chairs; Steering Committee

Minda Moreira, (International NGos); June Parris (International NGos); Marianne Franklin (Academic/Research Institutions); Sahajman Shrestha (National NGos); Rigobert Kenmogne (National NGos); Mohamed Farahat, (National NGOs); Michael Oghia (National NGOs)

Member; Strategic Partner

Member; Funder; Strategic Partner

Internet and data governance

Human Rights

Policy

High-impact Standard

Academic/Research Institutions

Business/Industry

Governments

Implementation partners

Industry

institutions

International NGOs

National NGOs

Philanthropies

Regional Bodies

Trade Unions

UN Bodies

The Coalition has been particularly focused on articles 1- Right to Access to the Internet, 2 – Right to Non- Discrimination in Internet Access, Use and Governance, 8 – Right to Privacy on the Internet and 9 – Right to Digital Data Protection of the Charter to discuss access and protection of rights of minority groups, such as migrants and refugees and the new challenges of the emerging technologies (IGF2018 WS346 Refugee Rights and Emerging Technologies: Building Digital Futures for all, IGF2016 – [Lightning Session] Human Rights Online: What has Internet Governance got to do with Refugees?, EuroDIG2016: Confronting the Digital Divide : WS2 Internet Access and/as Human Rights for Minorities and WS10 Refugees, human rights and Internet access) in a bid to tackle the digital divide and to reduce inequalities.

Human rights and internet

An independent global land monitoring initiative made up of a number of global and regional partners from Northern academic/research institutions, Southern civil society and regional alliances, Northern donors, and multistakeholder group.

To stimulate inclusive debate on the trends and impacts of LSLAs; To contribute to evidence-based decision-making and monitoring of impacts of LSLAs; To support greater public involvement in critical decisions that affect the lives of land-use; To contribute to the growing movement towards open data; and

Originally established in 2009 to address the lack of robust data on large-scale land acquistions (LSLAs), the first version of the Land Matrix database was launched in April 2012 and provided a systematic overview of large-scale agricultural investments. Today, the public database covers 85 countries with four Regional Focal Points (RFPs) in Africa, Asia, Eastern Europe, and Latin America, together with its National Land Observatories (NLOs) in Argentina, Cameroon, Philippines, Senegal and Uganda, capture country-specific data, providing a critical regional lens.

Steering committee (SC): comprised of 5 global organizations and 4 regional focal points (RFPs); Decentralized coordination team (Others): implement the decisions taken by the SC and support the RFPs

Centre for Development and Environment (CDE) (Academic/Research Instituion); CIRPAD (Academic/Research Institution); GIGA (Academic/Research Instituion); GIZ (Northern donor/gov't); International Land Coalition (ILC) (Other- MSG)

Others- targets of policy

Leadership (IFAD hosts/co-chairs ILC)

Agri-agra, food, nutrition

Land governance

Policy

Academic/Research Institutions

institutions

National NGOs

Others

Northern donor govts

No link

2030 Sustainable Development Goals; Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure (VGGT); Principles for Responsible Investment in Agriculture and Food Systems (RAI)

1) there's power assymetry inside the Land Matrix Initiative, with regional focal groups having less power; 2) EC, German BMZ and Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC) are the current funders

1) Started as a Private-Public Partnership and then evolved into an independent entity

Land Matrix Initiative; Interviews with Shalmali, Kirtana & Sofia

A non-for-profit organization that creates online resource for information, data and knowledge-exchange on land governance issues.

To create a better information ecosystem for land governance through a platform based on cutting-edge open data technologies through various partnerships and initiatives

It was set up in 2009 as a partnership project dedicated to supporting the efforts of the rural poor to gain equitable access to land by addressing the fragmentation of information resources on land. In 2014, the Land Portal became an independent non-profit.

Core team (Secretariat): comprised of coordinator and staff; Local Knowledge Engagement Network (Others- partners); Board of Directors: oversees the Land Portal and comprised of leading experts in land, property rights and information management, who volunteer their time to support the work of the foundation; Policy Advisory Group (Advisory group): composed of representatives of donors and founding organizations, provides continuity and stability to our organization; Technical Advisory Group (Advisory Group), comprising leading experts from diverse fields

Unclear from their website

Leadership

Advisor

Agri-agra, food, nutrition

Land governance

Policy

Academic/Research Institutions

Business/Industry

Industry

institutions

Others

UN Bodies

Investors/Banks

Northern donor govts

Others

UN bodies

https://landportal.org/sites/landportal.org/files/2020/08/Annual%20Financial%20Report%20Land%20Portal%20Foundation%202019.pdf; https://landportal.org/library/resources/landportal-annual-report-2019

Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land, Fisheries and Forests in the Context of National Food Security

ILC website; Land Portal website

a global multi stakeholder open source platform to support the development of methods for natural capital valuation in business. It created the Natural Capital Protocol, a standardized global framework for including natural capital in decision making focused on businesses. It has recently worked on creating regional platforms with focus on Brazil, Colombia, West Africa, Australia, South Africa, US, UAE, Spain and Scotland. These regional platforms act as platforms to bring various players at the national, sub-national, local and regional levels to advance natural capital thinking and approach. Apart from providing policy advise, the Coalition works to "transform the system" by changing the math (in terms of valuation of nature), changing the conversation and changing the rules of the game. Its projects also employ multistakeholderism, with specific focus on Africa, AgriFood, Business for Nature, Data Information Flow, Capital Assessments, Financial Accounting and creating a massive coalition for capital (recently launched the Capitals Coalition by joining forces with the Social and Economic Capital Coalition).

Its aim is to achieve a shift in corporate behaviour to preserve and enhance, rather than deplete the earth’s natural capital (treating nature, its ecosystems and services as capital/ natural capital accounting). It also aims to promote an intergated capitals approach that links natural capital with social and economic, human capital.

Originally established in 2012 as the TEEB For Business Coalition and hosted by ICAEW, the Natural Capital Coalition quickly became the global leader in mainstreaming natural capital approaches in the private sector, and released the internationally recognized Natural Capital Protocol in 2016.

The Natural Capital Coalition is headed by Mark Gough as its ED and hosted by the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales in London. It is not clear on their website what the governance structure is and who are part of the advisory board. But the Capitals Coalition, which the NCC is part of have an 30-member advisory panel comprised of business, finance, policy, science, and academia, standard setting, membership organizations and civil society.

Headed by its ED/CEO who worked with REED Elsevier and has been involved in UN international committees such as the UN CEO Water Mandate. Its founding members hold sway in the direction of the organization: Chartered Institute of Management Accounts Conservation International Corporate Ecoforum The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity Entrepreneurial Development Bank-FMO Global Initiatives Global Reporting Initiatives ICAEW International Federation of Accountants IUCN Accounting for Sustainability World Bank World Business Council for Sustainable Development

Leadership; Initiator/Convenor: WBCSD is co-developing the Natural Capital Protocol. Different roles of the private sector--as members, contributors (in terms of financing), and anchor of different projects under the Natural Capital Coalition's umbrella. One of its projects in the agriculture and food sector is the TEEBAgriFood which entails a multi-pronged strategy to advocate for the Evaluation Framework & Operational Guidelines for Businesses via training, convening roundtables, etc. This is part of a new project generously supported by the EU, according to its website "the Capitals Coalition will work with businesses as part of this global UNEP project, with the overall goal of building resilience, mainstreaming best practice, protecting biodiversity and contributing to a more sustainable agriculture and food sector in seven EU partner countries: Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Mexico and Thailand."

Strategic Partner (FAO with UCN, CISL, EY, IERS, Trucost, True Price developed the sector guide for food and beverage)

Multiple sectors

Natural Capital

Paradigmatic/ Campaign

Paradigm

Campaign

Civil Society

Philanthropies

No Link

1)The natural capital agenda reinforces the notion that nature has no value unless you can extract cash from it and crowds-out non-market values for protecting nature. 2)Can be a tool for dispossession and displacement of communities dependent on nature. 3) dangerous coalition that aims to change the system by shfiting not only discourse and policy but also corporative behaviors and rules of the game. 4) no representation of affected communities. 5) one of the biggest multistakeholder coalitions/platforms that also focus on multiple issues and potentially have impacts on other sectors and not only on agriculture and food.

While there are leading national level accounting frameworks such as the UN System of Environmental Economic Accounting (UNSEEA) implemented by governments, for example through the World Bank led Wealth Accounting and Valuation of Ecosystem Services (WAVES) global partnership, the Natural Capital Protocol is focused at a business decision-making level and helps organizations to understand the value of their dependence on ecosystem flows, rather than the value of natural capital stocks.

Kirtana and website of Natural Capital Coalition; https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/may/15/price-natural-world-destruction-natural-capital

The NCS Alliance brings together public and private stakeholders to identify opportunities and barriers to investment into carbon credits in new, and existing markets, to increase financing for natural climate solutions. The Alliance also serves as a forum for knowledge sharing and technical capacity building to ensure natural climate solutions reach their full potential in reducing GHG emissions, abating climate change.

To scale up affordable natural climate mitigation solutions for achieving the goals of the Paris Agreement on climate change. These include: reforestation protection and conservation, livestock, animal and land management, and coastal wetland and peatland restoration, among a wide array of cost-effective solutions.

In 2019, the Natural Climate Solutions (NCS) Alliance was established. It is a CEO-led group of stakeholders committed to applying a set of principles to our sphere of influence to deliver NCS with integrity at scale. It is convened by the World Economic Forum (WEF) and the World Business Council on Sustainable Development (WBCSD) with the support and advice of Nature4Climate.

Its not clear on the website but Convened by the World Economic Forum and the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD)

World Economic Forum; WBCSD; ERM Foundation (Philanthropies)

Leadership; Initiator/Convenor

Target institution; Strategic Partner

Climate, Environment, Energy, Extractives

Natural Climate Solutions

Paradigmatic/ Campaign

Paradigm

Campaign

Philanthropies

No Link

2015 Paris Agreement on Climate Change

1) completely led by business; 2) their two main approaches focus on financialization and marketization of nature--"unlocking finance to deliver NCS at scale: creating value through NCS crediting and delivering investment efficiently: voluntary and compliance markets"; 3) synergy with Nature for Climate (Nature4Climate)

Key report mentioned: The Future of Nature and Business Report released by WEF, which identified USD $10 trillion in business opportunities and the potential creation of 395 million jobs by 2030 linked to addressing the drivers of nature loss. I

WEF website; UNEP

Nature4Climate is the world’s first coordinated effort to address the totality of natural climate solutions – across forests, farms, grasslands and wetlands. Nature4Climate is a new campaigning vehicle which is supported by a multi-stakeholder coalition. Its purpose is to use strategic communications to drive action on natural climate solutions (as a science-backed concept). N4C brings voices from governments, IGOs, NGOs, and business – underpinned by a steering group with communications and advocacy representation currently from CBD, CI, TNC, the UNDP, WHRC, WRI and WWF.

To increase investment and action on natural climate solutions in support of the 2015 Paris climate agreement and to adress the huge, untapped potential of land sector to rapidly and economically reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Established in 2018, Nature4Climate (N4C) is an initiative of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and five world-leading not-for-profits (Conservation International, The Nature Conservancy, Woods Hole Research Center, World Business Council for Sustainable Development and World Resources Institute). Nature4Climate will work over the next five years with national and subnational governments, and business groups at the global and national levels, to increase policy action and investment on natural climate solutions. N4C works in partnership with international policymakers, national governments and private sector organizations to catalyse action on natural climate solutions.

The steering group is made up of individuals from development, indigenous and conservation organizations, currently from CBD, CI, TNC, UNDP, WHRC, WRI and WWF.

CBD, CI, TNC, the UNDP, WHRC, WRI and WWF

Members; Strategic Partners (WBCSD)

Leadership; Initiator/Convenor

Climate, Environment, Energy, Extractives

Natural Climate Solutions

Paradigmatic/ Campaign

Paradigm

Campaign

Business/Industry

IGOs

Industry

http://4fqbik2blqkb1nrebde8yxqj-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Nature-positive-recovery_For-people-economy-and-climate_July-2020_Final.pdf

2015 Paris Agreement on Climate Change

It's not clear who hosts the Nature for Climate Coalition but according to one website, it's The Nature Conservancy

Nature For Climate website;

An "ideas accelerator" multistakeholder collaboration between relevant Dutch organisations and international partners to achieve urgent changes that contribute to sustainable food systems and nutrition security and reach SDG2 by 2030.

To support coalitions of relevant Dutch and international actors that have transformative plans which contribute to improved food security, healthy diets and promote sustainable agriculture via need assessments, design of theories of change, access to local networks, the development and implementation of strategies and action plans; To collect, connect, and combine knowledge of all involved stakeholders and coalitions; To create experimental space to create new approaches and solutions; To organize reflections and learning; To give visibility to solutions

AgriProFocus was established in 2005 as a multi-stakeholder initiative to promote agriculture in Dutch development policy and to organise a network approach to link and learn between stakeholders. In its origin AgriProFocus was a Netherlands-based initiative bringing together organisations working to enhance the role and plight of organised producers in developing countries. In 2021, it transitioned to NFP initiated from the Dutch Ministerial Level and operational starting January 1, 2021. https://agriprofocus.com/intro

No information

Dutch Ambassador-NL (Gov't); Frederike Praasterink (Academic/Research Institutions); Ministry of Foreign Affairs-NL (Gov't)

Strategic partner

No information

Agri-agra, food, nutrition

Food security and nutrition

Paradigmatic/ Campaign

Paradigm

Campaign

Business/Industry

Industry

Others

Northern donor govts

No link

2030 Sustainable Development Goals (SDG2)

1) still in metamorphosis but many Dutch actors are involved in the launching of NFP

Some corporate and other Dutch actors to watch out for: Friesland Campina, LTO Nederland, FoodFirst Coalition, Rabobank

AgriProFocus website; NFP webite;

The Net Mundial Initiative was launched with a goal to consolidate principles of Internet governance and the proposal for a roadmap for future development of this ecosystem. It represented the beginning of a process for the construction of such policies in the global context, following a model of participatory plurality.

To consolidate principles of Internet governance and the proposal for a roadmap for future development of this ecosystem.

The NETmundial meeting held in São Paulo, Brazil, in April 2014 saw 1,480 people from 97 countries come together to discuss internet governance issues in light of mass surveillance by the US government revealed by Edward Snowden. Attendees came from a wide range of sectors: government, private sector, civil society, technical community, and academia. Its concluding, non-binding Multistakeholder Statement contained a shared set of Principles and a Roadmap to guide the evolution of Internet cooperation and governance. Months later, DNS overseer the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), the Brazilian Internet Steering Committee (CGI.br), and the World Economic Forum (WEF) funded an 'initiative' named after the conference with the goal of working together to apply the NETmundial Principles to address Internet issues in concrete ways. The NMI was launched in on 6 November 2014 as an "open source platform" and a "shared public resource" that would provide help to any "calls for assistance on non-technical issues

High-Level Multistakeholder Committee; Secretariat

Brazilian Internet Steering Committee (Governments); ICANN (International NGOs); World Economic Forum (Business/Industry); Un Internet Governance Forum (UN Bodies); USA (Northern donor govts)

Leadership; Member; Funder; Observer; Strategic Partner

Member; Strategic Partner

Internet and data governance

Public policy and cooperation

Policy

High-impact Standard

Academic/Research Institutions

Business/Industry

Governments

Implementation partners

Industry

institutions

International NGOs

National NGOs

Northern donor governments

Regional Bodies

UN Bodies

Government

Northern donor govts

None

Issues of centralisation and its governance mechanism was opposed by the civil society right from its beginning. There was also substantial controvery around it due to the proposed UN Secutiry council like structure for the global internet governance. The iniaitive finally died down its natural death in 2016

A World Economic Forum initiative led by 32 global partner companies that addresses the major challenges of global food and agricultural sustainability. The initiative serves as a platform to build collaboration among stakeholders to achieve a vision of agriculture driven by market-based, multistakeholder approach that can achieve food security, environmental sustainability and economic opportunity. It has 16 country-level multistakeholder PPPs, 2 multistakeholder regional PPPs, and a private-public dialogue at the global level • Demonstrate that the can deliver food security, environmental sustainability and economic opportunity

To develop a shared agenda for action and to enhance multistakeholder collaboration in order to achieve sustainable agricultural growth through market-based solutions; To increase production by 20% while decreasing emissions by 20% and reducing the prevalence of rural poverty by 20% each decade; To upport countries in realizing their agriculture-sector goals by aligning investments, programmes and innovations around shared priorities for agricultural growth

Launched in 2009, this project is part of the World Economic Forum’s Shaping the Future of Global Public Goods Platform. The initiative has started four major public-private partnerships, including country-level initiatives in Mexico, Vietnam, Indonesia, and India, as well as the regional partnership platform Grow Africa which includes seven African countries. At the global level, the initiative enables public-private dialogue with the G20 and B20 Food Security Task Force, as well as through informal networks such as the Global Agenda Council on Food Security. http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_CO_NVA_Overview.pdf

Project Board (Others): led by 32 Partner companies, IFIs/DFIs, Investors/Banks of the World Economic Forum (see Notes) in coordination with governments, civil society, international organizations, farmers associations, research institutions and many other stakeholders.; Project Advisor (Advisory Group): Mckinsey & Company

World Economic Forum (Business/Industry); International Finance Corporation (IFI/DFI); Syngenta (Business/Industry); Mondelez International (Business/Industry); McKinsey & Company (Others- consulting firm)

Leadership; Host; Initiator/Convenor

Strategic Partner

Agri-agra, food, nutrition

Food security and nutrition

Policy

Academic/Research Institutions

Business/Industry

Industry

institutions

International NGOs

National NGOs

Others

Regional Bodies

No link

1) Sole funder of NVA is Government of Netherlands; 2) Grow Africa is funded by the US Agency for International Development (USAID) and the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC); 3) IFPRI advises them on their report

Anheuser-Busch InBev; AGCO; Corporation; A.P. Møller-Maersk; BASF; Bayer; CropScience AG; Brambles Limited; Bunge Ltd; Cargill Inc.; Carlsberg Group; CF Industries Holdings Inc.; The Coca-Cola Company; Diageo Plc.; DuPont; HEINEKEN; International Finance Corporation; Louis Dreyfus Commodities; Mondelez International; Monsanto Company; Nestlé SA; Novozymes A/S; PepsiCo Inc.; Rabobank; International Royal DSM; SABMiller Plc; Sinar Mas Agribusiness & Food; Swiss Reinsurance Company Ltd; Syngenta International; AG; Unilever; United Phosphorus Inc.; Wal-Mart Stores Inc.; Wilmar International; Yara International ASA

WEF website; Climate Initiatives Platform website

P4H is a global network dedicated to health financing and social health protection for universal health coverage through insight and knowledge brokerage, collaborative technical expertise; and policy dialogue.

Efficient, equitable and sustainable health financing to put Universal Health Coverage (UHC) in the center of the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Since its inception in 2007, the P4H network has promoted active exchanges and collaborations between the various health financing stakeholders at national and global level to progress towards the MDG targets.

No Information

WHO (UN Bodies); World Bank (International Financial Institutions/DFIs)

No Information

Initiator/Convenor; Host; Leadership; Member; Funder

Global Health

Finance

Policy

Paradigm

Academic/Research Institutions

Governments

institutions

Investors/Banks

Northern donor governments

Regional Bodies

UN Bodies

IFI/DFI

Investment Funds/Banks

Northern donor govts

UN bodies

Not available

SDGs

No annual report, no governance structure, seems like a data gathering structure but it claims to be providing and mobilising fianances for the health. However these are listed on its website as its members WHO, World Bank, ILO, Global Fund, Global Financing Facility, African Development Bank, Asian Development Bank, The Council of Europe Development Bank, France, Germany, Kazakhstan, Morocco, the Russian Federation, Spain, Switzerland, USAID and School of Public Health of Seoul and Fudan-Shanghai.

The Paris Call for Trust and Security in Cyberspace is a call to come together to face the new threats endangering citizens and infrastructure. It is based around nine common principles to secure cyberspace, which act as as many areas for discussion and action. It invites all cyberspace actors to work together and encourage States to cooperate with private sector partners, the world of research and civil society.

to create an open, secure, stable, accessible and peaceful cyberspace

Secretariat

France (Northern donor govts); NameShield (Business/Industry); ICANN (International NGOs); Hague Centre for Strategic Studies (Academic/Research Institutions); Transatlantic Commission on Election Integrity (Academic/Research Institutions); Microsoft (Business/Industry); Alliance for Securing Democracy (Academic/Research Institutions); Linux fòundation (International NGOs); World Intellectual Property Organization Standing Committee on Copyright and Related-rights (UN Bodies); Ecuadorian Cybersecurity Association (National NGOs); Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (Regional Bodies); Nuclear Threat Initiative (International NGOs)

Strategic Partner; Others - Supporter

Strategic Partner; Others - Supporter

Internet and data governance

Cyber Security, Terrorism

Policy

High-impact Standard

Academic/Research Institutions

Business/Industry

Governments

Implementation partners

Industry

institutions

International NGOs

National NGOs

Northern donor governments

Philanthropies

Regional Bodies

UN Bodies

Northern donor govts

PMNCH is the world’s largest alliance for women’s, children’s and adolescents’ health (WCAH), bringing together over 1,000 partner organizations across 192 countries. It provides a multistakeholder platform allowing these diverse organizations to align objectives, strategies and resources, and to amplify evidence for action to support the attainment of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), including through universal health coverage and primary health care.

Addressing preventable maternal and child mortality, including newborn deaths and stillbirths, with a particular focus on humanitarian and fragile settings; addressing morbidity and mortality relating to Sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHr), as well as the politicization of SRHR and threats to rights and adolescent health and well-being.

PMNCH was launched in September 2005, when 50 organizations belonging to the Partnership for Safe Motherhood and Newborn Health, the Healthy Newborn Partnership and the Child Survival Partnership joined forces. The founding organizations agreed that by working together under one partnership they could do more to accelerate action by partners and countries to achieve Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) 4 (reduce child mortality) and 5 (improve maternal health).

PMNHC Board; Partner’s Forum; Steering Committee; Secretariat

BMGF (Philanthropies (corporate)); GAVI (Others); NORAD (Northern donor govts); UNICEF (UN Bodies); WHO (UN Bodies); UNFPA (UN Bodies); Governments; World Bank (International Financial Institutions/DFIs)

Leadership; Member; Funder; Strategic Partner; Implementer

Initiator/Convenor; Host; Leadership; Member; Funder; Strategic Partner

Global Health

Human Rights

Project

Paradigmatic/ Campaign

Paradigm

Campaign

Academic/Research Institutions

Affected communities

Business/Industry

Governments

Implementation partners

Industry

institutions

International NGOs

Investors/Banks

National NGOs

Northern donor governments

Others

Philanthropies

Regional Bodies

UN Bodies

Business/Industry

Companies

IFI/DFI

Investment Funds/Banks

Northern donor govts

Philanthropies

UN bodies

https://www.who.int/pmnch/knowledge/publications/pmnch_2019_report/en/

SDGs

Develops innovative, efficient financing mechanisms to avance market readiness for clean energy services in low- and middle-income countries. REEEP invests primarily in disruptive approaches led by small- and medium-sized enterprise (SME) players in low- and middle-income countries, facilitating market- and community-led energy transitions. Market readiness means: Households and productive users have access to affordable Clean Energy Services; This access is provided largely by the market, by a range of Clean Energy Service providers which are profitable; affordable finance is available for Clean Energy Service providers and end users; Relevant market information is available, and awareness, stakeholder networks and capacity are in place; Policies help create a vibrant business ecosystem and provide the right incentives for innovation, competition and market growth while safeguarding consumer rights.

Overall aim is to facilitate market transformation for renewable energy. Specifically, to demonstrate how countries can, effectively and efficiently, advance market readiness for clean energy, energy efficiency and energy access, for the benefit of the most vulnerable populations; contributes to global efforts under the United Nations 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development to advance energy access; combat climate change and improve resiliency; reduce damage to the environment; improve livelihoods and facilitate economic growth

Launched after the Paris Agreement to help achieve market transformations/change in renewable energy using private funding mechanism and an autonomous entity with the backing of UNIDO

The Meeting of Members (MoM) is the assembly of all REEEP Members according to the Austrian Association Act (Vereinsgesetz 2002). The Meeting of Members is convened by the Governing Board and held at least once every two years. It is chaired by the Chair of the Governing Board or another Board member. The MoM approves the accounts, acknowledges the four-year strategy, and elects the Governing Board. The Advisory Board provides high-level advice and strategic guidance.

Governing body: General Electric; Austrian Federal Ministry for Sustainability and Tourism; First Energy Asia; The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI); UNIDO; European Commission- Directorate Research and Innovation; Baker and McKenzie; GEI China

Initiator/Convenor; Leadership: General Electric, GEI China, and Baker Mckenzie are part of the governing body

Leadership; Strategic Partner

Climate, Environment, Energy, Extractives

Renewable Energy

Policy

Project

Financing Facility

Financing

Academic/Research Institutions

Business/Industry

Governments

IGOs

Industry

institutions

International NGOs

National NGOs

Others

Philanthropies

Government

https://reeep.org/sites/default/files/REEEP%20Annual%20Report%202020%20spreads_0.pdf

SDG 2030; 2015 Paris Agreement on Climate Change

1)A potential funding source for global climate change management but REEP Is managed outside UNFCCC or COP process; 2) A governing board that has little claim to democratic selection; 3) Reports also do not follow any agreed definitions or measurements of financial flows or investments. One initiative it hosts with UNIDO is the Private Financing Advisory Network, which is a global network of expert consultants provides free business coaching and investment facilitation to entrepreneurs developing climate adaptation and clean energy projects in Eastern and South Africa and South/Southeast Asia as well as mobilize private investments for RE

legal status under Austrian law is that of Quasi-International Organization (QuIO), a category of international organization introduced in 2015 to accommodate international organizations with multi-stakeholder institutional structures similar to those of inter-governmental organizations, but also allowing membership of non-government actors.

https://www.reeep.org/

A global platform for multi-stakeholder dialogue on responsible soy; and develops, implements and verifies a global certification standard.

To encourage current and future soybean is produced in a responsible manner to reduce social and environmental impacts while maintaining or improving the economic status for the producer.

Building on the discussions of 2004 Responsible Soy Global Forum, the Round Table on Responsible Soy Association was founded in 2006 in Zürich, Switzerland as a non-profit organisation promoting the growth of production, trade, and use of responsible soy. It works through cooperation with those in, and related to, the soy value chain, from production to consumption. It does this through: A global platform for multi-stakeholder dialogue on responsible soy; and the development, implementation and verification of a global certification standard.

Three governing bodies: General Assembly/Assembly of Delegates: highest decision making level. It includes all participating and observer members, although only participating members have voting rights. Executive Board/Board of Directors: the resolution-making body of RTRS with powers as delegated by the General Assembly Meeting or the RTRS Statutes.; and Secretariat: responsible for executing the decisions made by Executive Board.

Marina Born/ Caldeness SA (Business/Industry); AMAGGI (Business/Industry); Fundación Vida Silvestre (National NGOs); Alliance 4 Soy (Business/Industry); Bartira Agropecuária S.A. (Business/Industry); Rabobank (Investors/Banks); Marcelo Visconti (Others-director)

Leadership

Strategic Partner (UNDP)

Agri-agra, food, nutrition

Sustainable agriculture

Environmental and Social Standard

Business/Industry

Industry

International NGOs

National NGOs

Self-generated revenue

https://responsiblesoy.org/nuestra-gestion?lang=en#informes

1) RTRS lacks support and is not representative; 2) RTRS criteria are seriously flawed; 3) RTRS cannot address macro-level impacts of industrial farming; 4) RTRS claims climate benefits

Criticisms by progressive civil society and social movements are well developed on the RTRS- See La Via Campesina, CEO, ASEED Europe for more info.

MSI Integrity Database; RTRS website; websites of La Via Campesina, CEO, ASEED Europ

A global, multi-stakeholder independent organisation that drives the development of a new world bioeconomy through sustainability solutions, certification, innovation and collaborative partnerships.

To "provide and promote the global standard for socially, environmentally and economically sustainable production and conversion of biomass; provide a global platform for multi-stakeholder dialogue and consensus building; ensure that users and producers have access to credible, practical and affordable certification; support continuous improvement through application of the standard."

Established in 2007, it provided credible tools and solutions for sustainability that mitigate business risk, contribute to achieving the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals and have the world’s most trusted, peer-reviewed, global certification standard for sustainable biomaterials, biofuels and biomass production.

The Assembly of Delegates is the highest decision making body of the Roundtable on Sustainable Biomaterials. Each chamber elects up to three Delegates, thus giving each chamber the same weight and influence in decision making. Chamber Delegates represent their chamber at assembly meetings and there they engage with the Delegates of other chambers to deliberate on issues of governance and standard development – and in some cases to vote. The Assembly approves modifications to the RSB Standard and appoints the Board of Directors to run the affairs of/ manage the RSB.

Difficult to ascertain who are the most influential memebrs of the Board, but the lead reps from sectors are Maiju Helin (Business/Industry); Laurel Harmon (Business/Industry); Robert Boyd (Business/Industry); Applied Environmental Research Foundation (Academic/Research Institution); Heriot Watt University (Academic/Research Institution); Associated Labor Unions-Trade Union Congress of the Philippines (Trade Unions)

Leadership: Industry/business populate the Assembly of Delegates chambers' representatives- 11 out of 15, two of which are elected representatives for the UN, governments and research. In the Board of Directors, 3 are from the industry/business out of 6.

Strategic Partner (UNCTAD)

Climate, Environment, Energy, Extractives

Renewable Energy

Environmental and Social Standard

Business/Industry

Civil Society

Industry

Business/Industry

Philanthropies

https://rsb.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/2019-RSB-Annual-Report-distribution_compressed.pdf

MSI Integrity, RSB website

A global, multi-stakeholder initiative on sustainable palm oil with a vision to transform the markets by making sustainable palm oil the norm.

To advance the production, procurement, finance and use of sustainable palm oil products; To develop, implement, verify, assure and periodically review credible global standards for the entire supply chain of sustainable palm oil; To monitor and evaluate the economic, environmental and social impacts of the uptake of sustainable palm oil in the market; To engage and commit all stakeholders throughout the supply chain, including governments and consumers

In 2001, WWF explores the possibilities for a Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) and the year after, An informal co-operation among Aarhus United UK Ltd, Migros, Malaysian Palm Oil Association and Unilever, together with WWF was formed. Its inaugural meeting in Malaysia, 200 participants from 16 countries adopted the Statement of Intent (SOI), a non-legally binding expression of support for the Roundtable process. In April 2004, RSPO was formally established under Article 60 of the Swiss Civil Code By 31 August 2004, 47 organisations signed the SOI declaring their intention to participate in the RSPO. To date, there are 4,000 members from across the world.

Managed by a Board of Governors comprised of 16 members, designated by the General Assembly for 2 years. To ensure an efficient and progressive management, the Board of Governors is supported by 4 Standing Committees (Others). Each Standing Committee is comprised of members from the Board of Governors (including Alternate Board of Governors) as well as RSPO members. The Board of Governors is also supported by Advisors.

United Plantations Bhd (Business/Industry); WRI (International NGO); AAK (Business/Industry); Golden Agri Resources; (Business/Industry); AgroCaribe (Business/Indusry); Wilmar International (Business/Industry); Uniliver (Business/Industry); Procter & Gamble (Business/Industry); Aeon Co. Ltd. (Business/Industry); Retailers’ Palm Oil Group (Business/Industry); Standard Chartered Bank (Investors/Banks); WWF Singapore (International NGOs); Both Ends (International NGOs); Forest People's Programme (International NGOs)

Leadership

Strategic Partners (UNDP; UNEP)

Agri-agra, food, nutrition

Sustainable agriculture

Environmental and Social Standard

Academic/Research Institutions

Business/Industry

Industry

institutions

International NGOs

Investors/Banks

National NGOs

Self-generated revenue

https://rspo.org/resources/rspo-reports/financial-reports

1) Increased deforestation, and loss of biodiversity and habitat of animals, esp. orangutans; 2) various human rights violations

There are various critical studies conducted on the RSPO. The latest one https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0048969720342340?via%3Dihub

MSI Integrity database; Mongabay; RSPO website

Save Our Future is a global campaign wcich seeks to ensure that: all children and youth continue to learn during lockdowns through inclusive distance learning; every child and youth is supported to return to school when it’s safe to do so; and governments and donors invest in education now so we can build better, more inclusive, and resilient education systems for the future.

all children and youth continue to learn during lockdowns through inclusive distance learning

No specific information but this is what its annual report says : Save Our Future is led by a core hub of the Association for the Development of Education in Africa, the Asian Development Bank, BRAC, Education Above All, Education Cannot Wait, the Education Commission, the Education Outcomes Fund, the Global Partnership for Education, Save the Children, UNESCO, UNHCR, UNICEF, the World Bank, and the World Food Programme in partnership with over 600 organizations and youth.

Atlasisan Foundation, (Philanthropies (corporate)); Lego Foundation, (Philanthropies (corporate)); Education Cannot Wait, (Philanthropies (others)); Education Outcomes Fund, (Investment Funds/Banks); Global Partnership for Education, (Investment Funds/Banks); Development of Education in Africa (Regional Bodies); Asian Development Bank International Financial Institutions/DFIs; World Bank International Financial Institutions/DFIs; BRAC (International NGOs); Education Above All (International NGOs); Save the Children (International NGOs); UNESCO (UN Bodies); UNHCR (UN Bodies); UNICEF (UN Bodies); the World Food Programme (UN Bodies)

Initiator/Convenor; Host; Leadership; Member; Funder; Strategic Partner;

Initiator/Convenor; Host; Leadership; Member; Funder; Strategic Partner

Education

Digital

Project

Campaign

Civil Society

IGOs

international organizations

Philanthropies

private sector

United Nations agencies

https://saveourfuture.world/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/SOF-Impact-Report_FINAL.pdf

SDGs

A global multi-stakeholder initiative that was launched in 2010 during the World Bank and IMF Spring Meetings. Self-described as a "government-led movement", its goal and mission is to end malnutrition in all its forms by 2030.

To expand and sustain an enabling political environment; To prioritize and institutionalize effective actions that contribute to good nutrition; To implement effective actions aligned with Common Results; To effectively use, and significantly increase, financial resources for nutrition. The promotion of collaboration between all actors and the establishment of multi-stakeholder platforms at country level forms the basis of SUN’s strategy. According to SUN’s Theory of Change, this collaboration will lead to behaviour change in the respective actors, the ‘scale-up’ and alignment of actions and resources on nutrition, and ultimately the improvement of nutrition status.

History is tied with the developments in the UN and the reforms of the CFS, WHO and World Council on Food and Nutrition, as well as the increasing involvement of the private sector, backed by the World Bank and IMF."The recent evolution of global nutrition governance confirms the unfolding dynamics, well-articulated within WEF’s Global Redesign Initiative, of progressively transferring governance of “conflicted policy areas” from multilateral intergovernmental spaces to multi-stakeholder ones, which are strongly influenced, if not led by private sector agendas and interests. Many would argue that this places market interests over human rights and exposes marked deficits of public participation and democratic accountability, given the active exclusion of dissenting voices and the bypassing of existing intergovernmental food and nutrition policy spaces, such as the CFS, the World Health Assembly and the FAO Conference.

Lead Group (Leadership Council): oversight, policy and strategic direction body that's responsible for its progress towards achieving its strategic objectives; Secretariat: responsible for coordinting the activities, plans, programs, actions; SUN’s Stewardship Arrangement (Others-implementing partners): includes an Executive Committee to oversee the development and implementation of SUN’s strategy; SUN Countries (General Assembly)

UNICEF (UN bodies); Gerda Verburg (Others-director); Belinda and Mill Gates Foundation (Philanthropies (corporate)); SDC (Northern gov't/donors); USAID (Northern gov't/donors; Irish Aid (Northern gov't/donors); World Food Programme (UN bodies); IFPRI (Academic/Research Institutions); Save the Children UK (International NGOs); GAIN (Others-MSG)

Leadership; Member; Funder

Leadership; Funder; Strategic Partner (UN Network for SUN)

Agri-agra, food, nutrition

Right to food and nutrition

Paradigmatic/ Campaign

Paradigm

Campaign

Academic/Research Institutions

Business/Industry

Industry

institutions

International NGOs

National NGOs

Others

Philanthropies

UN Bodies

Northern donor govts

Philanthropies

UN bodies

Right to food and nutrition

Key critique of FIAN: an elite, top-down initiative with little democratic credentials. SUN effectively narrowed the space for nutrition discussions and sidelined critical voices. Its broad objective, framed in HR language, in practice translates into the promotion of narrow technical interventions targeting only immediate causes of malnutrition. The interventions promoted not only carry human rights risks, but also distract from the structural causes of malnutrition and measures to address these. Lastly, the initiative contributes to the erosion of accountability and further fragmentation in nutrition governance. 1) While SUN creates the illusion of a bottom-up inclusive movement, in reality the civil society that participates in SUN consists largely of international, service delivery-oriented NGOs, while critical voices and those of communities themselves are left out. There is no recognition of, nor attempt to balance power within and between SUN ‘stakeholder’ constituencies, nor mechanisms to solve internal disputes. 2) The initiative does not have any accountability mechanism in place towards communities affected by malnutrition. At the same time the institutional changes promoted by SUN (shift towards MSPs) make it even harder for these communities to hold their governments accountable for negative or foregone impacts. 3) Countries join SUN without any democratic process or scrutiny with a simple letter of commitment from a high-level government representative. This is highly problematic given the profound institutional and policy changes promoted by the initiative.

1). The entries have been lifted from FIAN's research. 2). The SUN Secretariat is funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF), Canada, the European Union, France, Germany, Ireland, the Netherlands, Norway, the United Kingdom and the United States. Each SUN Network raises its own resources independently. The SUN Civil Society Network has received support from the Multi-Partner Trust Fund (MPTF), the BMGF, the Children’s Investment Fund Foundation (CIFF), the UK, Ireland and Germany. Moreover, there are contributions by CSN members through staff time, organizational resources and strategic leadership. Since 2017 there is a SUN Movement Pooled Fund. The Pooled Fund, which replaces the former Multi-Partner Trust Fund, is intended to provide a “last resort, catalytic source of grant funding to support SUN Civil Society Alliance activities at the national and subnational level”. The 2018-2020 fund is supported by Canada, Germany, Ireland, Norway and Switzerland and currently focuses on: “Strengthened participation by in-country non-state stakeholders (civil society, private sector actors, academics, and journalists, among others) and parliamentarians in national multi-stakeholder platforms to implement scale up nutrition plans”. 3). To date, 61 countries have signed on to the initiative. While SUN claims to be government-led, only four (previously only two) of the current 26 Lead Group members represent SUN country governments.

https://www.fian.org/files/files/WhenTheSunCastsAShadow_Eng.pdf

The Smart Africa Alliance is a framework for implementation, monitoring and evaluation of the SMART Africa Manifesto designed to make it actionable. It is a partnership bringing together all African countries adhering to the Manifesto represented by the AU, the ITU, World Bank, AfDB, ECA, the GSMA, ICANN and the Private Sector.

to accelerate sustainable socioeconomic development on the African continent, ushering it into a knowledge economy through affordable access to Broadband and usage of Information and Communications Technologies.

The Transform Africa Summit held in Kigali, Rwanda on 28th-31st October 2013 culminated in the adoption of the Smart Africa Manifesto document by seven (7) African Heads of States (Rwanda, Kenya, Uganda, South Sudan, Mali, Gabon, Burkina Faso) in which they committed to provide leadership in accelerating socio-economic development through ICT’s. On 30th-31st January 2014, The SMART Africa Manifesto was endorsed by all Heads of State and Government of the African Union at the 22nd Ordinary Session of the Assembly of the African Union in Addis Ababa. This development placed the Manifesto at the heart of the ICT agenda in Africa beyond just the 7 original signatories at the Summit to all the 53 African countries.

Board; Steering Committee; Secretariat

Rawanda (Governments); African Union (Regional Bodies); Huwaei (Business/Industry); Tata Communications (Business/Industry); Orange (Business/Industry); Price Water House Coopers (Business/Industry); Facebook (Business/Industry); Intel (Business/Industry); Microsoft (Business/Industry); Carnegie Mellon University (Academic/Research Institutions); World Bank (International Financial Institutions/DFIs); ITU (UN Bodies); ICANN (International NGOs); Omidyar (Investors/Banks)

Initiator/Convenor; Host; Leadership; Member; Funder; Strategic Partner

Initiator/Convenor; Leadership; Member; Funder; Strategic Partner

Internet and data governance

Access, Development

Policy

Project

High-impact Standard

Paradigmatic/ Campaign

Paradigm

Campaign

Academic/Research Institutions

Business/Industry

Governments

Implementation partners

Industry

institutions

International NGOs

Investors/Banks

National NGOs

Northern donor governments

Philanthropies

Regional Bodies

Trade Unions

UN Bodies

Business/Industry

Companies

Government

IFI/DFI

Investment Funds/Banks

Northern donor govts

Philanthropies

UN bodies

No

Private sector at the core of the inaitiave

http://smartafrica.org/new/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/smart_africa_manifesto_2013_-_english_version.pdf

Work towards three ambitious objectives by 2030 (SDGs): • ensuring universal access to modern energy services • doubling the share of renewable energy in the global energy mix • doubling the global rate of improvement in energy efficiency An international organization that works in partnership with the United Nations and leaders in government, the private sector, financial institutions, civil society and philanthropies to drive faster action towards the achievement of Sustainable Development Goal 7 (SDG7) – access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all by 2030 – in line with the Paris Agreement on climate. SEforALL works to ensure a clean energy transition that leaves no one behind and brings new opportunities for everyone to fulfil their potential.

Under its new business plan, SEforALL aims to strengthen global agenda-setting while expanding its activities to an engagement model that prioritizes data-driven decision-making, partnerships with high-impact countries and implementation on the ground. SEforALL focuses on driving impact in key areas, including: • Securing and tracking new commitments from countries and companies through ‘energy compacts’ to meet SDG7 and energy transitions. • Accelerating the adoption of best-in-class integrated energy plans and policy and regulatory frameworks to guide efforts and drive investment in the sustainable energy sector. • Ensuring that scaled-up and appropriate finance is flowing towards sustainable energy and energy access, including continuing to track and report on finance flows annually through the Energizing Finance research series. • Supporting a significant increase in the pace of new energy connections, including implementing a new results-based financing facility in partnership with donors, and supporting sustainable energy for healthcare facilities. • Mainstreaming inclusive and gender-sensitive action on energy, including supporting more women entering and advancing in the sustainable energy sector.

In September 2011, then UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon announced at the UN General Assembly a new initiative called on Sustainable Energy for All. This was in the context of a resolution that declared 2012 the International Year of Sustainable Energy for All, sending a clear signal about the centrality of energy in ending poverty and addressing climate change. As part of the initiative, the Secretary-General called for action around 3 objectives to be achieved by 2030: ensure universal access to modern energy services; double the rate of improvement of energy efficiency; double the share of renewable energy in the global energy mix. To advance substantive work on the initiative, in 2012 the Secretary-General announced Kandeh Yumkella as his Special Representative for Sustainable Energy for All and the first CEO of the initiative. It is now an independent organization that maintains close ties with the UN via relationship agreements and its CEO as the UN's Secretary General Special Representative for Sustainable Energy for All and Co-Chair of the UN Energy.

Its governance structure consists of an Administrative Board, a Funders’ Council, and is defined by bylaws and statutes incorporated in Vienna, Austria (quasi-international organization). It retains a special Relationship Agreement with the United Nations. The Administrative Board is the principal governing body that oversees SEforALL’s organizational strategy and governance, and ensuring its effective and efficient operations. Currently, the Board is comprised of 4 reps from the corporate sector, with Enel (Chair) and Shell representatives; 3 from philanthropies/ charities including the UN Foundation as vice chair; 1 from a profit-oriented social enterprise, and one from the government of Mexico. In the past, as the initiative continued to grow and evolve, additional governance mechanisms were established, including an advisory board co-chaired by the Secretary-General and World Bank President Jim Yong Kim. An executive committee was also established for operational guidance, headed up by Bank of America’s then Chairman Chad Holliday.

CEO- Damilola Ogunbuyi; Francesco Starace, Enel (Business/Industry); Elizabeth Cousens, UN Foundation (UN Bodies); Emma Gallagher, UK FCDO (Northern donor governments)

Leadership: The private sector- comrpised of big energy corporations and banks comrpise the majority of the Admin Board, which is the principal governing body of the SEE4ALL. It maintains a special relationship with the UN and is privy to many initiatives of the UN Energy, with its CEO as Co-Chair

Initiator/Convenor; Strategic Partner; Leadership

Climate, Environment, Energy, Extractives

Renewable Energy

Policy

Business/Industry

Governments

Industry

International NGOs

National NGOs

Northern donor governments

Others

Philanthropies

UN Bodies

IKEA Foundation

Philanthropies

https://www.seforall.org/system/files/2020-06/SEforALL_2019-Annual-Report.pdf

1) UN Resolution declaring 2012 as International Year of Sustainable Energy for All. Started as a UN Initiative, evolved into an independent organization with its own bylaws and governing structures; 2) SDG7; and 3) Paris Agreement

1)Started under the UN SG’ s office without an intergovernmental debate or resolution in the GA or UNFCCC 2)Created its goals before the SDGs were adopted 3)Publishes reports of impact on energy finance without any agreed definition of financial flows 4) Democratic Governance Issues • Multistakeholderism can re-define intergovernmental goals while still asserting they are implementing an intergovernmental statement. However no intergovernmental body can correct this autonomous action • When some governments in the General Assembly wanted to be involved in the oversight of SE4ALL , it became an independent organization

legal status under Austrian law is that of Quasi-International Organization (QuIO), a category of international organization introduced in 2015 to accommodate international organizations with multi-stakeholder institutional structures similar to those of inter-governmental organizations, but also allowing membership of non-government actors.

SE4ALL website; Harris Gleckmann's presentation

A multi-stakeholder alliance with over 100 institutional members from public, private, research, civil society and the financial sector

To transform the global rice sector by improving smallholder livelihoods, reducing the social, environmental and climate footprint of rice production; and by offering the global rice market an assured supply of sustainably produced rice.

The SRP initiative was originally co‐convened by the International Rice Research Institute (IRRI), the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH (GIZ) and is now an independent member association.

General Assembly: annual meeting to discuss the affairs of the SRP; Board of Directors: oversight and advisory body on the strategy and annual working plans and ensures that the Platform achieves its objectives; Technical Committees (Others): tasked to help shape the goals, tools and activities of the SRP; Secretariat: overall coordination body that provides support to the Board, Technical Committees and Task Forces;

GIZ (Northern gov't/donors); Olam International (Business/Industry); IRRI (Academic/Research Institutions); UNEP (UN bodies); Wyn Ellis (Others-director)

Leadership; Member

Initiator/Convenor; Strategic Partner

Agri-agra, food, nutrition

Sustainable agriculture

Policy

Project

Environmental and Social Standard

Academic/Research Institutions

Business/Industry

Industry

institutions

International NGOs

National NGOs

Others

Regional Bodies

Northern donor govts

UN bodies

No link

1.) WWF, Solidaridad are members; 2) For research instututions- IFPRI and ICRAF are members

SRP Website; UNEP website

An industry-led task force that was established in December of 2015 with the goal of developing a set of voluntary climate-related financial risk disclosures which can be adopted by companies so that those companies can inform investors and other members of the public about the risks they face related to climate change.

Seeks to develop guidelines and recommendations for voluntary climate-related financial disclosures that are consistent, comparable, reliable, clear, and efficient, and provide decision-useful information to lenders, insurers, and investors across industries