text: political aspects of UNHCR activities and expressed Finland's support for him in his endeavours to tackle the root causes of the refugee problem. 21. His delegation recognized the need for greater predictability to allow UNHCR to carry out its mandate, and recommended that further attention be devoted to multi-year budgeting and pledging. 22. The General Programme budget for 1990 was a reasonable one, and it was acceptable to Finland. However, all UNHCR activities should be carried out within available fimds and work to improve UNHCR's administration and operations must be continued in order to avoid shortfalls in coming years. 23. Although Finland had a population of only 5 million, it had more than doubled its contribution towards UNHCR in 1989, bringing its share of UNHCR's total fimding to 4 per cent, and had further increased its contribution in 1990. The 1990 contribution of $14 million already contained an increase of $5 million. However, in view of the special appeals of the High Commissioner and the Chairman of the Executive Committee, Finland had made available $6.5 million in the spring and had recently decided to grant a further $6.8 million to UNHCR, bringing its total contributions to over $27 million. His delegation urged other donors to follow suit; a concerted effort by all was the best way of persixading traditional donors to maintain a high level of contributions in the future. 24. Mr. AASLU (Norway) emphasized that the true burden-sharing required to resolve refugee problems was not just a matter of increasing contributions, and that the manner in which resources were spent was equally important. 25. In addition to the Nkr 80 million annoimced at the pledging conference in New York in November 1989, and already paid in full, Norway had paid an additional Nkr 30 million to alleviate the difficult situation of the General 
analysis: This text appears to be discussing the financial and logistical aspects of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) activities, with a focus on the organization's budget, funding, and contributions from various countries, including Finland and Norway. The text does not mention specific projects or initiatives related to economic development, natural resources, or industry, and instead focuses on the broader humanitarian aspect of refugee relief.