A/HRC/19/70 and emotional impact of development. They allowed new forms of collaborative interactions to be shaped. 37. The above presentations were followed by interventions from representatives of Housing and Land Rights Network, the Association of World Citizens and the Special Rapporteur on the right to education. It was pointed out that work on budgets was widespread. The question was asked whether budget related analysis could effectively change the neoliberal system, policies and address inequalities. As concerned participatory video, it was pointed out that it was difficult to capture human rights violations for practical reasons and difficult to screen participatory videos on mainstream channels. It was pointed out that budget allocations to education had to be commensurate to the importance of the right to education for development. 38. In concluding remarks, the panellists answered specific questions addressed to them. In response to a question on the use of specific art forms, it was pointed out that community-based art projects gave space to the communities involved to decide on the form of activity. The point was made that participatory video enabled people to specify what development meant to them. While communities might not even be aware of the right to development, young people worldwide were already using communications technology to express their concerns. It was argued that technology was increasingly present to capture human rights violations but with the risk that only certain perspectives were represented, so agencies had a role in facilitating training for rights and equity. As concerned the impact of budget analysis on broader macroeconomic policies, it was pointed out that the prevailing model could only be changed through a change of mindset. It was important to mobilize people, especially the youth, to induce a culture of policy change based on human rights. C. International assistance and cooperation, as well as the promotion of an enabling environment for the realization of the right to development 1. International institutional framework: an enabling environment for the right to development 39. Zeljka Kozul Wright, United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, provided an overview of the 2010 Least Developed Countries Report: Towards a New International Development Architecture for LDCs.4 She underlined that globalization led, in the case of LDCs, to heightened economic volatility and rise in inequality. Even in countries with strong economic growth, progress towards achieving the MDGs lagged. LDCs were dependent on export of commodities and raw industrial materials and labour-intensive manufacturing and faced with malnutrition and food insecurity. Structural weaknesses were compounded by weaknesses of the global architecture. LDCs were vulnerable to external shocks with limited capacity to raise productivity. In the light of those realities, the new international development architecture called for more inclusive governance, in the areas of finance, trade, commodities, technology, climate change and South-South cooperation. It was a comprehensive development framework consisting of five pillars: the international financial architecture, including aid and debt relief regime and capital flows; the multilateral trade regime; the commodity regime; the knowledge architecture, including technology transfer and acquisition; and the regime for mitigation and reparation of climate change. The objectives of the new architecture are to support domestic resource mobilization and places emphasis on greater ownership, autonomy and policy space. 4 United Nations publication, Sales No. E.10.II.D.5. 13