After the MDGs – what then?
From Wikiprogress.org
What to do after 2015?
“ This paper examines some of the debates taking place as we approach 2015, the target date for attainment of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). It provides reflections, drawn from discussions with donor agencies and international NGOs, on what the focus will be for international development work after that date. Will it be more of the same – nationally based targets to reduce poverty? Will it be a more refined approach with targets reflecting the specific needs of diverse groups of the poor? Or will it be something radically different, involving a revolution in the way we think about how to overcome problems of poverty and marginalisation?”
Janice Giffen and Brian Pratt first proceed to a review of failings encountered with the current MDGs. First, there have been discussions about how the goals and targets of the MDGs and the focus on improvement on these issues make other topics related to poverty and well-being seem irrelevant. They point out that the broad sweep approach of the MDGs have caused the oversight of poor and marginalized groups (ethnic minorities, disabled people, adolescents and women -?-). Furthermore, new research establishes that most poverty is found not in the poorest countries but in the middle income ones. Targets and goals of the MDGs lead to isolated programs designed to attain specific goals while more integrated programs that considers the complexity of poverty might be more relevant.”UNICEF, for example, has stated that investment in vaccination programmes and the focus on a reduction in infant mortality is not enough, particularly when once the children grow up there may not be the support for them to achieve fulfilment in life. It argues for more attention to be paid to creation of job opportunities for young people, among other things”
Concerning the post-2015 development agenda, there are three possibilities: extend he current MDGs and to put the focus on countries and sectors more off-track; elaborate a new set of wider goals more cross-cutting and broader based, or locally developed in different regions or acknowledge the success of the MDGs and following up with a new approach/ framework.
Option 1: more of the same, but with refinements and specific focus
Focus on the off-track MDGs such as MDGs 4 and 5. This has been partly answered with the UN Secretary General’s Global Strategy for Women and Children’s Health at the September 2010 summit. It includes greater coordination and pledges from countries, private sectors and academic institutions. The World Bank’s Learning for All Programme outlines a broad strategy focusing on education. This new strategy will encompass education in its broader sense, including early childhood development and opportunities for older people and those out of school. According to the authors there seems to be a reluctance from traditional donors to invest in long-term programs but the WB is pushing for China, Brazil and other emerging countries to step in. “The World Bank Global Monitoring Report 2011 highlights that fragile states are particularly off-track in relation to the MDGs and that the international community needs to step up support for these states. This is reflected in the activities of the OECD-DAC, DFID, and the UN over the last few years related to fragile states, aid effectiveness and the MDGs.”
Option 2: developing wider goals differentiated by context, which include cross-cutting issues and a human rights’ focus.
The Institute of Development Studies (IDS) stated that a post-2015 MDG framework will need to include pro-poor policy indicators and targets. The organism “Beyond 2015”is a global platform to discuss the ‘essential must-haves that would need to be met in order for any new framework to be considered legitimate.” These must-haves are based on the recommendations of the WSF and focus on the process of who should lead, own and implement any post-2015 agenda (UN and national governments) developed by the UN in collaboration with a transparent process involving national and local governments, civil society, and other initiatives such as Rio+ 20. That framework should aim for global goals and contextualized national targets addressing the causes of poverty and issues of sustainability and dispose of mechanisms for accountability (between donors and recipient governments, national parliaments, civil society and government peer reviewe processes).
Governance and accountability are lobbied by organisms such as the UK Department for International Development (DFID) and was mentioned in President Obama’s speech in the September 2010 summit. when we gather back here next year, we should bring specific commitments to promote transparency, to fight corruption, to energise civic engagement and to leverage new technologies so that we strengthen the foundation of freedom in our own countries while living up to ideals that can light the world
Option 3: completely new approaches or alternative paradigms
There is a resurgent literature on returning to the primacy economic growth and the importance of markets which tends to downplay the social development approach. Public-Private Partnership is equally considered as a an alternative paradigms. On the other hand, environmental issues and climate change are viewed as key to sustainable development and a “must-have”in any future development framework. The rise of the BRIC countries will lead to a rethinking and new approaches to development. The changing economic situation in the OECD countries and the numerous aid cuts further this point.. The fact that poverty is no longer confined to less-developped countries and has overflown significatively to middle-income ones might engender new approaches The authors conclude by saying that overall post-2015 will be about development rather than aid.
See also
References
Giffen, Janice and Brian Pratt.2011.After the MDGs – what then? International NGO Research and Development Centre. Policy Briefing Paper 28
External links
- [Giffen, Janice and Brian Pratt.2011.After the MDGs – what then? International NGO Research and Development Centre. Policy Briefing Paper 28. Read more:http://www.intrac.org/data/files/resources/713/Briefing-Paper-28-After-the-MDGs-what-then.pdf]
