What Next for the MDGs?
February 15, 2013 in Economics, International Development
Establishing a framework for reducing global poverty
In September 2000 the UN Millennium Summit set out its vision for reducing global poverty, establishing time-bound targets that were to become known as the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). These ambitious targets were designed as a response to the challenges of globalisation, in particular towards addressing global inequality that had arisen “because the global market is not yet underpinned by rules on shared social objectives… If we are to get the best out of globalisation and avoid the worst,” the Secretary General report noted, “we must learn to govern better, and how to govern better together.”[1]
The agreement was a landmark in international relations and development history, and its impact in many areas has been laudable. Infant mortality rates have fallen across the globe, particularly in Northern Africa and Southern Asia. Child enrolment in primary education has improved. Debt repayments across the developing world are generally less egregious than at the turn of the millennium.[2]
Yet despite these improvements, the MDGs have also fallen short in a number of areas. Some targets have proven un-measurable or have been assessed with inadequate data,[3] whilst in many areas there has been no progress towards some goals, and even regression since 2000. The MDG’s have also been criticised for what they leave out – from agriculture and land rights, to non-communicable diseases and expanding wealth inequality within nation states.
The world is also a very different place since the millennium. Huge wars and both natural and man-made disasters have wreaked havoc on populations, invariably in the developing world. New nations have been born, whilst several old ones have thrown off the shackles of dictatorship and demanded power back to the people.
If the MDGs were a response to globalisation in 2000, then the post-MDG framework must recognise that globalisation has changed. Migration is quickly becoming a big issue for Western governments affected by austerity budgets, yet remittance money sent back home by migrants to developing countries dwarfs global aid budgets, topping US$530bn last year alone.
Some of the world’s biggest companies control human and financial resources larger than the majority of states. However, they are often not involved in the development agenda or subjected to any meaningful checks on corporate responsibility. This is despite the pronounced effect many have on human rights and the environment. Job creation and labour opportunities are rightly promoted as a means out of poverty, yet with the global population continuing to rise, land grabs and housing insecurity are increasingly undermining efforts for social and economic improvement.
If the past 13 years have taught us anything, it is that the global community is more willing than ever to take an active role in its own governance and development. With rapid growth in technology and social media, we are more able to achieve this now more than ever before.
At Generation Development we actively support campaigns that empower an inclusive response to the post-MDG challenge. In particular, the exclusion of the global youth cannot be ignored. If you want a voice in how your world is going to look, now is the time to get involved. Find out more about our mission at Generation Development here and how to make your voice heard on the changes that you want to see.
“Change will not come if we wait for some other person, or if we wait for some other time. We are the ones we’ve been waiting for. We are the change that we seek.” – Barack Obama
[1] Report of the Secretary General, “We the Peoples: The Role of the United Nations in the 21st Century”, A/54/2000 (2000), http://www.un.org/millennium/sg/report/summ.htm accessed 31/01/13
[2] Lois Jensen (2010) The Millennium Development Goals: Report 2010, New York, N.Y.: United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs
[3] Amir Attaran (2005) “An Immeasurable Crisis? A Criticism of the Millennium Development Goals and Why They Cannot Be Measured”, PLoS Medicine, Volume 2, Issue 10
This goal deals with an integral issue, which solution should involve concepts related to development from all its approaches; its accomplishment depends on many factors, like empowerment of the communities and implementation of entrepreneurship programs, along with financial assistance, in order to attack the issue from the root, rather than only diminishing its consequences. Furthermore, involvement from the civil society constitutes an essential factor in the quest for equality and social justice, along with the political will of government representatives of any kind and level; they should be encourage to build a reliable database using empirical evidence, that will allow those in charge of resources to properly allocate them. We strongly suggest the leaders throughout the world to become involved in the solution of this issue, taking into account that every person has dignity and is entitled to the right t food and development.
The following are actions taken around the globe, which can be more broadly utilized, to implement Goal 2 of the Millennium Development Goals; to ensure that by 2015, children everywhere, boys and girls alike, will be able to complete a full course of primary schooling. Remove fees associated with attending school, including the cost of tuition, books, supplies, uniforms, and transportation. Provide amnesty for undocumented, migrant, and refugee children to attend school with out deportation or other consequences. Provide two meals a day to encourage families facing poverty to send their children to school. Address gender barriers, especially in rural areas. Provide feasible transportation to children, or adopt mobile schools.
It become evident in the group discusions that the 8 MDG is not recognised and the information around the issues that it affects is not well recognised. This goal deals with developing an open finance system and non discriminatory trading practices. After much delibaration some points were agreed upon as to how this MDG could be improved to suit a system based approach of how the MDG’s should be implemented. Overally the group felt the MDG was articulated on a top down approach and very much western centric.Thus not representing the real issues of all countries. Firstly the use of ‘partners’ in wording of the MDG should be replaced with ‘stakeholders’ as this word is more inclusive of all the actors in achieving this MDG. There was a consesus that debt problems is not only on developing countries thus it should change focus and include all countries and also include debt owing to international monetary organisations. Also that the issue of tarrifs should be reduced or removed as countries for example the UK places high tariifs on products from Africa of which the collect more money then the one the give aid to the African continent. Much needs to be done on this MDG in order to achieve its targets.
The Millennium Development Goals (MDG) are the world’s time bound and quantified targets for addressing extreme poverty, hunger, disease, lack of adequate shelter and exclusion while promoting gender equality, education and environmental sustainability. There are eight goals and this article focuses on MDG 6 which targets to combat HIV/AIDS, Malaria and other diseases.
Bangladesh, being geographically positioned at the receiving end of perhaps the largest river system, and owing to other concomitant factors like the deltaic formation history and low-line coastal morphology has become the most disaster prone region on earth. Processes embedded in the nature, caused by multitudinous factors, constitute hazards to the environment of this region having severe aftermath on local lives, property and livelihoods of the population, and eventually, impeding the overall socio-economic development of Bangladesh. The (co)occurrence of these natural events are often coupled and multiplied with the high base vulnerabilities of the individuals, households and communities results in disasters that further drive the country towards greater environmental degradation, hunger, poverty, social deprivation and political conflicts, thereby impeding the development of Bangladesh. Therefore, over the last few decades, both national and international communities have been engaged in counteracting the negative developmental impacts of disasters as well as ensuring that development interventions do not exacerbate vulnerability to hazards.
It become evident in the group discusions that the 8 MDG is not recognised and the information around the issues that it affects is not well recognised. This goal deals with developing an open finance system and non discriminatory trading practices. After much delibaration some points were agreed upon as to how this MDG could be improved to suit a system based approach of how the MDG’s should be implemented. Overally the group felt the MDG was articulated on a top down approach and very much western centric.Thus not representing the real issues of all countries. Firstly the use of ‘partners’ in wording of the MDG should be replaced with ‘stakeholders’ as this word is more inclusive of all the actors in achieving this MDG. There was a consesus that debt problems is not only on developing countries thus it should change focus and include all countries and also include debt owing to international monetary organisations. Also that the issue of tarrifs should be reduced or removed as countries for example the UK places high tariifs on products from Africa of which the collect more money then the one the give aid to the African continent. Much needs to be done on this MDG in order to achive its targets.