A/HRC/43/37 for the work of the Council and its various components. Yet, there is a great difference between an approach in which prevention is a by-product of one’s work and one in which prevention is explicitly adopted as a strategic aim. The Council should include a prevention component in the mandates of the new mechanisms it establishes to ensure that they systematically integrate prevention in their work. It could also request the Advisory Committee to carry out a review of the terms of reference of existing mechanisms, especially special procedures, to ensure that prevention is explicitly included in their mandates. 57. Adopting a preventive approach would require that the Council’s mechanisms rethink the way in which they operate and reflect on the preventive impact they have had in the past in order to assess which actions to replicate and what should be improved. The Council’s mechanisms should adopt a longer term approach to prevention. However, the consultations have shown that prevention is mainly envisaged as an institutional response to emerging crises. A shift to a longer term approach to prevention would entail the development of incremental strategies adapted to each context, with set objectives and more tailored, results-based and timebound advice and recommendations. This would enable the Council’s mechanisms to play a greater role in designing prevention programmes in national contexts. 58. It is also critical that the Council’s mechanisms avoid working in isolation from other United Nations entities and mechanisms. To address this challenge, the Special Rapporteur on the promotion of truth, justice, reparation and guarantees of nonrecurrence advocated for the adoption of a framework approach to prevention, which would contribute to breaking the existing silos of knowledge and expertise and enable upstream prevention with a longer term perspective. A framework approach to prevention would help design strategies and guide decision-making. The framework would include all elements for which there is empirical evidence of a preventive potential, including judicial and constitutional reforms, reform of the security sector, measures to create economic opportunities, as well as initiatives in the domain of culture and personal dispositions (see A/HRC/30/42, A/70/438 and A/72/523). B. Need for enhanced implementation of human rights recommendations 59. It was generally acknowledged that the implementation of accepted recommendations from the universal periodic review, and recommendations from special procedures and human rights treaty bodies contribute to the prevention of human rights violations. However, a large number of these recommendations have not been implemented. One main reason given for this situation is the sheer number of recommendations, and States’ limited technical capacity and resources to implement them. States should ensure that provision is made in their budgets to implement the recommendations of the Council’s mechanisms. In addition, while the responsibility to implement human rights recommendations must be State-owned, the international community, and specifically the Council, should support States in their implementation efforts and their quest to prevent human rights violations. States have sought support from OHCHR, and whenever possible such support has been provided and has proven vital. The resources available to OHCHR for technical cooperation and capacity-building, however, have been insufficient to match the need. Funding is also available from a number of bilateral and multilateral sources, and support should be given to States on ways to access such resources. Furthermore, there is scope for more North-South, South-South and triangular cooperation between States, to enable mutual learning through the sharing of experiences. 60. A number of initiatives have been taken in recent years in order to enhance the capacity of States to implement recommendations. This has included an initiative to assist States in the establishment of national mechanisms for implementation, reporting and follow-up that go beyond the existing national reporting and follow-up mechanisms and include a focus on the implementation of recommendations. Another initiative, led by Norway and Singapore, proposes a voluntary platform for dialogue and cooperation on human rights capacity-building and technical cooperation, under agenda item 10 of the Council’s sessions. Such a platform will provide a space for States to report on the progress achieved in implementing recommendations, provide 13