Report on the Global South Access Summit: Barriers and Solutions to UN Participation

Overview

In March 2026, Global Divide convened a virtual engagement session to examine the challenges faced by Global South civil society actors in participating within United Nations forums, particularly among organisations that hold or are pursuing ECOSOC consultative status. Prior to the session, surveys were distributed to evaluate  participation in UN forums, with 47 NGOs and CSOs from 13 different countries in the Global South taking part.

The Summit highlighted a systemic access gap: despite the majority of respondents holding ECOSOC status, most reported that they rarely or never manage to attend UN forums.

Participants were asked to identify topics or outcomes they would like addressed during the Summit. Analysis of responses revealed the following priorities:

• Financial Support Mechanisms
• Visa Facilitation
• Meaningful and Equitable Participation Structures
• Hybrid and Digital Participation
• Simplified Accreditation and Information Access

1. Participant Profile

2. Regional breakdown:

• Africa (Cameroon, Uganda, Ghana, Malawi, Chad, Rwanda, Burkina Faso, Bangladesh): 28 respondents (60%)
• South Asia (Pakistan, Nepal, Sri Lanka): 17 respondents (36%)
• Latin America (Argentina, Colombia): 2 respondents (4%)

 3. Year Founded

Participating organisations represent a diverse range of institutional maturities, with founding years spanning from 1991 (NRSP, Pakistan) to 2025 (Rohingya Youth Union, Bangladesh). The distribution indicates that constraints to participation in UN processes are not limited to newly established organisations but are also experienced by organisations with decades of operational experience. While most participating organisations were established between 2000 and 2014, access related challenges remain evident across all cohorts.

4. ECOSOC Consultative Status

Of the 47 participating organisations, 46 hold ECOSOC consultative status. Rohingya Youth Union, established in 2025, is the only participating organisation that has not yet obtained accreditation. Among accredited organisations, consultative status was granted between 2006 and 2025, with the largest concentration of accreditations occurring between 2011 and 2024. The prevalence of ECOSOC accredited organisations among participants suggests that formal accreditation, while necessary for engagement in many UN processes, does not in itself guarantee meaningful or sustained participation. Access constraints persist even among organisations that have successfully secured consultative status.

5. Participation Patterns

23 organisations amounting to 49% participate either never or rarely. Only 7 participating organisations (15%) reported to participate regularly. This pattern suggests that having the ECOSOC status is far from sufficient to ensure participation. For a majority of Global South NGOs, the status exists on paper while practical participation remains out of reach.

 6. Barriers Identified

Lack of Travel Funding — The Primary Barrier

Travel funding is rated ‘Most urgent’ by the majority of respondents/participants. They noted that:

• There is no dedicated UN fund to support Global South CSO participation in ECOSOC or General Assembly forums.
• Dependence on project-based funding means there is rarely a budget line for ‘advocacy travel’.
• The closure of grants such as the USAID grants (noted specifically by Ugandan organisations) has eliminated a key source of operational support.
• Even organisations with the capacity to fundraise face timing constraints as events are announced too late to raise funds in time.

 Visa Restrictions 

Visa restrictions barriers appeared most prominently in the participants’ testimonies as the single factor most likely to cause complete, last minute exclusion. The key patterns that were observed were:

• US Embassy visa applications were described as ‘discouraging’ (CEWS, Pakistan) and more often result in denial without an explanation.
• Switzerland visa applications must more often be made from a third party country. For instance, Ugandan organisations state that they must apply from Kenya, which requires earlier planning and additional cost.
• YONECO (Malawi) specifically reported failing to attend the 2026 Commission for Social Development due to visa failure.
• CCREAD in Cameroon reported that 13 rainforest communities doubted their work after their documented evidence could not be shared at a UN forum due to a visa denial.
• Invitation letters from UN bodies are reportedly not consistently recognised by embassies (Kingdom Excellence Leadership Institute, Ghana).
• Short notice of events makes timely visa processing nearly impossible.

High Cost of Accommodation

Accommodation especially in cities like New York and Geneva is extremely expensive for most Global South NGOs. The participants noted:

• There are no subsidised accommodation options for ECOSOCaccredited organisations.
• KIRUCODO (Uganda) reported being denied event space within the UN building even after paying for travel and accommodation, because they couldn’t pay the room rental fee.
• The combined cost of flights and accommodation often prices out organisations.

Difficulty Securing Speaking Slots

The NGOs reported access to speaking opportunities within UN forums as structurally inequitable:

• Awaz Centre (Pakistan) noted that speaker selection processes are heavily influenced by INGOs, donors, and UN agencies, excluding grassroots NGOs.
• PRDS (Pakistan) observed a preference for INGOs over grassroot organisations in representation.
• The three-minute time limit allocated for statements at HLPF or UNGA is described as inadequate.
• Badge allocation which is usually on a ‘first come, first served’ basis disadvantages Southern delegates who often arrive later because of distance (Avocats sans frontières, Cameroon).
• Disability Organization i.e. Joint Front (Sri Lanka) described UN forums as ‘monopolised by certain key organisations… not at all democratic.’

 7. Additional Barriers Identified in Qualitative Responses

Beyond the four ranked items, the participants identified several other barriers:

• Short notice: Events are announced too close to the date for organisations to arrange visas, funding, or travel. For instance, in some cases, Swiss visa applications require up to six months’ advance planning due to appointment availability, administrative procedures, and supporting documentation requirements. For grassroots organisations operating with limited resources and often responding to emerging policy developments, such timelines can present a significant barrier to participation.
• Language barriers: Participants reported that, despite the multilingual nature of the UN system, English and French often function as the dominant working languages in many informal consultations, side events, networking spaces, and engagement opportunities. Organisations from Spanish speaking and other linguistic backgrounds reported additional challenges in accessing information, participating in discussions, and engaging effectively across UN processes.
• Complex accreditation process: The UN accreditation process was described as lengthy, inaccessible and opaque to new or smaller organisations 
• Lack of information: Organisations reported not receiving timely or clear information about upcoming consultations, calls for input, or side events.
• Exclusion of refugee led organisations: The Rohingya Youth Union highlights the difficulty faced by stateless or refugee communities who lack travel documents entirely.

 8. Impact on Ground-Level Work 

The participants were asked to describe how limited access to UN forums has affected their work on the ground. The following cases are illustrative of the broader patterns.

9. Practical Solutions from Participating NGOs

Following the survey, some of the respondents were convened in a virtual consultation. Participating NGOs were organised into four thematic breakout groups to identify actionable recommendations addressing structural barriers to UN engagement.

Group 1: Financing and Participation Costs

This group examined financial and travel related barriers to participation. Key recommendations included:

• Expansion of virtual participation modalities to ensure equitable access for organisations unable to travel.
• Establishment of a dedicated Global South Participation Facility to support NGO engagement in UN processes.
• Development of in kind support mechanisms, including visa facilitation support, accommodation assistance, and related participation costs where direct funding is unavailable.
• Reduction of administrative and compliance related burdens that limit NGO participation in UN processes.
• Creation of a permanent institutional information mechanism to ensure timely dissemination of documentation, procedural guidance, and engagement opportunities.

Group 2: Visa, Mobility, and Geographic Inequities

This group focused on structural constraints related to mobility and visa regimes affecting participation in UN processes.

Group 3: Access to Speaking Opportunities and Informal Negotiation Spaces

Key recommendations included:

• Strengthening the inclusion of intersectional and marginalised constituencies, including refugees and intersex persons, across participation modalities, speaking opportunities, and accreditation processes.
• Advancing more equitable distribution of influence between large, well resourced organisations and smaller grassroots actors within UN engagement spaces.

Group 4: Coalition Architecture and Collective Advocacy 

Key recommendations included:

• Addressing limited awareness of existing UN and Geneva based engagement platforms, identified as a structural barrier to participation, particularly among grassroots organisations.
• Strengthening coordination mechanisms to improve linkage between grassroots actors and United Nations processes, ensuring more systematic channeling of locally generated evidence and priorities.
• Expanding capacity building initiatives on UN systems, procedures, and engagement modalities to enhance effective participation.
• Promoting more inclusive decision making structures within global forums to ensure equitable speaking opportunities for grassroots organisations.
• Strengthening multi level partnerships between grassroots organisations and larger institutions to improve access to funding, technical assistance, and logistical support.

Conclusion

This consultation, involving 47 NGOs and CSOs across 13 countries, indicates that ECOSOC consultative status, while formally constituting a mechanism for civil society access, is not consistently translating into substantive participation in UN decision making processes.

Across responses, structural barriers were consistently identified, including financial constraints, visa and mobility restrictions, administrative and procedural burdens, and asymmetries in access between well resourced international organisations and smaller grassroots actors.

These constraints collectively limit the effective inclusion of community based organisations whose constituencies are directly affected by UN policy outcomes. The absence of these actors from formal and informal policy spaces constitutes a persistent representational gap within global governance architecture.