“Reforms only matter when people feel them”

Stefan Liller on what development transitions really demand

July 15, 2026

Watercolor portrait of a man with glasses in a suit and tie. — UNDP Bangladesh outgoing Resident Representative

Stefan Liller reflects on four years as UNDP Resident Representative in Bangladesh, a country that has compressed decades of development change into a single generation. Below, his thoughts on how to pursue reform amidst crises, the lived experience of climate finance failure, and why the gap between policy and practice remains development's defining problem.

You've spent four years in one of the world's most watched development stories. What does it teach us about the current state of global development?

Bangladesh has been a poster child for development. What it has achieved over 30 to 40 years in poverty reduction and economic growth surpassed many observers’ expectations. It proved that progress is possible even in very challenging circumstances.

But the very success of that journey has created a new set of demands. Society evolves. Expectations rise. People who have overcome poverty start asking harder questions: about accountability, about fairness, about who benefits and who doesn't. That shift is not unique to Bangladesh. You see it across the Global South. Development success, paradoxically, generates new pressures that development institutions weren't necessarily designed to handle. In that sense, it’s been an instructive four years for me.

Many governments are caught between immediate crises and longer-term reform. Is it possible to do both at once?

This is the central tension I've seen play out here, and it is not unique to any one country. Many governments today are facing a perfect storm of slower growth, suffocating inflation, rising fuel and food prices, and aid cuts, all compounded by geopolitical pressures. In such conditions, the instinct may be to firefight.

But the lesson I keep coming back to is that short-term responses and long-term reforms cannot be treated as separate tracks. You must do both simultaneously. A digital platform for farmers addresses an immediate need while also building infrastructure that will matter for decades. The framing of "we either respond to the crisis or we pursue reform" is a false choice, and a dangerous one. Crises don't pause for institutional transformation. The challenge is political will and sequencing.

When reforms stall or feel abstract, what is usually missing?

Legitimacy. And legitimacy stems from whether citizens can actually feel the change in their daily lives.

Reforms that exist only on paper, or that improve systems without improving people's experience, erode trust rather than build it. What people want to know is: is the judiciary independent? Is the process fair? Can I access services without knowing the right people?

I've seen this vividly here. After a period of enormous public pressure for change — driven especially by young people — there was a genuine effort to promote reforms. Real progress was made in terms of judicial independence, anti-corruption, strengthening institutions, and selecting public servants. But the pressure from society hasn't eased, because people are waiting to see how much of it is felt. That accountability from below is healthy; it sustains reform.

Political differences are natural in any democracy. The strength of democratic culture lies not in avoiding disagreement, but in building institutions where it can be expressed peacefully and constructively.

Photograph of an outdoor award ceremony with a man speaking at a table, flowers and audience.

Judicial reform and human rights are central in these reforms. How do you see progress in this area?

These reforms are essential, but they are also complex and take time. Issues like judicial independence, human rights, and institutional accountability cannot be solved through quick fixes. They require consultation, broad ownership, and sustained effort.

In Bangladesh, we’ve seen important steps, particularly in strengthening judicial independence, enhancing the human rights protection ecosystem and discussing reforms to key institutions. But as with any reform process, the real question is not what is written on paper, but how it is implemented and experienced by people.

UNDP’s role is to support national institutions in that process. This requires bringing our technical expertise, helping convene dialogue, and supporting implementation. But these reforms must be nationally driven.

And it comes back to trust. People will judge progress based on whether they feel greater fairness, access to justice, and confidence in institutions. That’s what determines whether reforms truly take hold.

Many developing countries are graduating from preferential trade status or facing similar economic transitions. What does Bangladesh's experience reveal about that journey?

First, it's a success story, and should be recognized as such.

But it also means the rules of the game change. Tariff preferences that made exports competitive fall away. Competing solely on cost is no longer an option; instead, productivity, diversification, and innovation are the criteria. It’s different league, and it leads to a more resilient economy.

The pattern I see is that the plan usually exists. Governments and private sectors generally know what needs to be done. The gap is in implementation speed. The window between knowing and doing is where countries get caught. What's needed is not more strategy documents, but the political and institutional capacity to execute quickly and efficiently — especially when global conditions are unfavourable, as they are now.

Climate finance is declining globally even as climate vulnerability is intensifying. What does that contradiction look like from the ground?

It looks like injustice. Bangladesh contributes less than 1% of global greenhouse gas emissions and is among the most climate-vulnerable countries in the world. I've travelled extensively through communities on the climate change frontlines — coastal areas where you can see what rising waters and intensifying storms mean for families, for livelihoods, for entire ways of life. It is not abstract. It is at people's doorstep.

Bangladesh is already spending billions of its own resources every year on adaptation, while the gap between what's needed and what's available keeps growing. So when international climate finance retreats, it falls hardest on the countries that did the least to cause the problem.

I believe the path forward is a combination of international climate finance, private green investment, blended finance mechanisms, and government resources. Public funding alone will not close the gap. This is no time for the international community to step back. The credibility of every climate commitment made over the last decade is being tested right at this moment.

Youth unemployment and skills mismatches are common across developing economies. What needs to change fundamentally?

The challenge isn't just creating jobs — it's creating decent, well-paid, sustainable jobs that offer people dignity. That distinction matters, because informal, precarious work doesn't fulfil the aspirations of today’s educated young people.

It is the private sector that creates jobs, not governments nor the UN. The most important thing public institutions can do is create an enabling ecosystem: make it easier to do business, reduce unnecessary barriers, make countries more attractive for investment, and support economic diversification.

But alongside that, there is a persistent and costly mismatch between what education systems produce and what employers actually need. I've had companies tell me directly: we cannot find the talent we need for the jobs we have now, let alone the future. Closing that gap through sustained investment in skilling, upskilling, and lifelong learning is core infrastructure for inclusive growth.

Diverse group of people seated at wooden desks in a classroom, listening attentively.

After years of field work across very different communities, how has your view of development changed?

I've visited communities across an enormous range of circumstances, many of them multiple times over several years. What that longitudinal view reveals over time is something you don't typically get from reports: the emergence of agency. You go back to a place where UNDP has been working for a few years, and you see women who were in extremely vulnerable situations now standing in front of local government officials, demanding accountability. Telling them to build a road here, put more money there, this is what my family needs, this is what our community requires.

That shift from vulnerability to voice, that boost in capacity and confidence, is what development is ultimately about. I've found a deep source of inspiration in the most vulnerable communities. Their resilience, clarity, and sense of agency stays with me.

What is the one thing you would say to national partners any government navigating a difficult development transition right now?

Continue with the reforms, even when it is hard and immediate pressures are screaming for attention. Pursue inclusion, transparency, and sustainability as lived experiences for citizens.

But also: be kind to each other. Build social cohesion. Channel energy into making lasting progress toward a shared long-term vision that extends beyond political cycles.

On a personal note, I must say that the generosity and warmth I've encountered from people at every level in Bangladesh has been extraordinary. My wish is that people treat each other with the same grace they've shown me. If they did, there would be very little they couldn't achieve together.