Conclusion 23 development banks could also be created, which could be more accountable and interested in facilitating investments which improve the public welfare. Governance problems, such as corruption and cronyism, can emerge and undermine the effectiveness of such institutions. However, the problem is not with the concept that public banks or financial regulations can be used to support human rights. Instead, the challenge is to design effective institutions for mobilizing and directing a country’s financial resources to socially productive ends. V II. Conclusion This report has proposed various ways of clarifying, elaborating, and extending the concept of maximum available resources. In so doing, it has challenged the approach to maximum available resources which takes the broad policy parameters that determine the resources available to support economic and social rights as given. There are many ways that governments can access financial resources in order to support the principle of using the maximum available resources (MAR), as first introduced in the Covenant. The mobilization of resources extends to consideration of debt financing, monetary policy, financial reform, and taxation. The aim of this report is to introduce new ways of thinking about these issues. The report highlighted numerous questions and issues which could be raised in the context of evaluating whether a state is using the maximum resources available for the fulfillment of economic and social rights. In most cases, the questions and issues are broad and represent a starting point for rethinking the concept of maximum available resources. A detailed application of these ideas requires taking into account specific economic, social, and political situations on a country-by-country basis. Nevertheless, the report has begun to lay the groundwork for a much more expansive consideration of what it means to use the maximum available resources to realize fundamental human rights.