Post 2015: What’s next for International Development?

If you’re passionate about international development or anything that can loosely fall under this category than you have most heard of the Millennium Development Goals, if you have no clue what the MDGs are or want to learn more about them please click here.

What I’m particularly interested in is what happens after 2015? We all know that the MDGs won’t be entirely successful; in fact the most recent indicates that none of the goals will be universally successful across all geographic regions. Now this shouldn’t take away from the successes of the MDGs, but it demonstrates that there is still a lot of work to be done, namely with regards to maternal health (least success across the board), gender equality and the empowerment of women, and universal primary education. These goals had some of the least success (apart from equal girls’ enrolment in primary school) and in some instances actually showed a decline. In addition to this, there are worrying trends with regards to poverty and hunger and environmental sustainability as we continue to cycle through periods of extremely volatile food prices leading to higher populations that are food insecurity and with the rapid rates of population growth and urban sprawl it is incredible difficult to promote and maintain sustainable environmental practices.

All this being said, what’s going to happen in three years and sixty-six days when the MDGs expire?

There are two suggestions that have a significant amount of overlap: the Bellagio Goals and the Sustainability Goals. Now for some background information:

The Sustainability Goals suggestion came out of the UN Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20) in June, 2012 by Colombia, Guatemala and Peru. The SDGs look to combine goals on economic growth, social equality, and environmental sustainability into a concise goals and indicators for development. The SDGs have broad goals which cut across manner factors and include: poverty eradication, environmental sustainability, and sustainable consumption and production. These goals could be achieved through many dimensions, themes, approaches, and priority areas and will be threatened by many challenges. The SDGs have received criticism due to their similarities to the MDGs as many people believe that they neglect developed countries, maintain ‘donor-driven’ programs, and fail to consider actual needs of developing countries.

The Bellagio Goals came out of a post Rio+20 conference in Bellagio, Italy that discussed some of the principles from the SDGs. The Bellagio Goals are somewhat more inclusive (yet still not firmly determined) and include Inclusive Growth, Food and Water, Education and Skills, Health, Gender Equality, Environmental Sustainability, Resilient Communities, Infrastructure, Civil and Political Rights, and Global Governance. These goals would be applicable to developed and developing countries and would involve global targets, regional targets, and national targets; instead of being determined globally, national targets would be determined by the nation to which they apply based on a pre-determined minimum level. The indicators would also be determined nationally and regionally which allows for increased ownership and more applicable aims and results. These goals are intended to be multidisciplinary with actions overlapping multiple goals – this will help to distribute funding and work and develop a more sustainable approach overall.

What do you think? Are these types of goals the answer? Is it possible to develop global goals or are national approaches better? Do you agree that ‘developed’ nations should have targets and be held to a standard?

Rio+20: Suspicion or Sustainability?

After my earlier blog post, I realized that a lot of people might not really know exactly what Rio+20 is and the significance it can play for the world of international development. As you read on, think about what Rio+20 can and will bring us, think about international development and can bring about solutions, think about your opinion and if this conference shares that or contradicts it. Just think.

Rio+20 is the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development that is currently underway (June 20-22 2012) and it is taking place exactly twenty years after the Earth Summit in Rio, Brazil. The Earth Summit in 1992 was where Agenda 21 was signed and ratified, making commitments to changing the ways that economic growth, social equity, and environmental protection are approached. The Earth Summit was essentially a landmark conference in raising awareness and making commitments for sustainability, environmentalism, and equality.

This year, Rio+20 is reviewing some of those former commitments and seeing where nations need to be headed for a sustainable future without poverty. This conference has thousands of participants from governments, non-governmental organizations, private sector representatives, and even concerned citizens.

Rio+20 has two focus areas: ‘a green economy in the context of sustainable development poverty eradication’ and the ‘institutional framework for sustainable development’. The first area – green economy for sustainable development and poverty eradication – works towards having a holistic, sustainable approach to all business, government, and other decision-making. To do this, it means taking social, economic, and environmental concerns, and the ways in which they interact, into account prior to making any decision and using the most beneficial decision to those concerns. The second concern – institutional framework for sustainable development – means taking the same decision making process and ingraining into to all levels of government and governance. It recognizes that current governmental decision-making often neglects sustainability and that through ingraining sustainability into their frameworks they can have longer lasting decisions, policies, and, ideally, a more equal world.

In addition to the themes for the conference, Rio+20 has also identified seven priority areas to focus on for the conference; which include ‘decent jobs, energy, sustainable cities, food security and sustainable agriculture, water, oceans and disaster readiness’. These priorities highlight some of the biggest concerns for sustainability now and in the future and with significant progress and international cooperation on these topics the outlook for the future would be greatly improved.

Wednesday, June 20^th marked the start of Rio+20 despite protests and nations have agreed on a draft discussion. Understandably, many people and organizations are skeptical on what results Rio+20 will actually bring, but there has still been progress. United Nations Secretary-General, Ban Ki-moon, acknowledges that in the past sustainable development has not the attention or effort dedicated towards it that it deserves and needs and that they have not met their commitments or goals. While a draft document has been made and agreed upon, titled “The Future We Want,” this draft document is still vague. It holds no requirements or commitments for nations, no real forms of measurement, or targets, and fails to meet the needs or hopes of many international non-governmental organizations. While many nations agreed that between 30 and 100 billion dollars would be required for sustainability initiatives, only 30 billion dollars are drafted and required in the text, which also does not include where the funds will come from.

What was hoped for and what may still transpire are the creation of Sustainable Development Goals, which would replace the Millennium Development Goals in 2015 when they expire. Another hoped outcome of Rio+20 would be the creation of a new index to measure human development. The current model is the Human Development Index, which ranks nations with regards to the quality of life; it takes life expectancy, literacy, and GNI/GDP into account. The proposed model would be the Sustainable Human Development Index that would use the pre-existing Human Development Index but add a measure of sustainability that would have to be determined and quantified at Rio+20.

Personally, I find it most interesting that even nothing transpires directly out of Rio+20, there have still been major commitments in the public and private sector outside of government. As of 12 noon on Thursday June 21^st, there were 517 voluntary commitments to sustainability from the private and public sector, these commitments must be concrete goals, with detailed timelines, and will be subject to periodic reporting. This gives us clear goals, with measurable impacts that we can see and watch grow.

A second positive impact is the Rio for People conference that culminated on June 20^th at the same time as Rio+20 began. This conference focused on ‘strengthening people’s capacity for genuine sustainable development’ and featured 200 groups from civil society, including environmental non-governmental organizations, unions, religious parties, and representatives from indigenous populations. This conference chose to go beyond the set agenda for Rio+20 and look for sustainable, alternative options for biodiversity, poverty elimination, and climate protection. This conference was an opportunity for grassroots workers on sustainability to meet and share ideas and models, as well as to critique the larger top-down models and ideologies.

Rio for People, resulted in distrust towards the larger Rio+20 conference which can be summarized with the words of one Vietnamese activist, “We are suspicious of this talk of a green economy. It seems like another attempt by the rich powers to impose a model on poor countries.”

Which brings us back to the original questions, what will Rio+20 bring the world? Is there hope for international development? Are these conferences the answer? Or do they promote the top-down model of development? Can policy create sustainability?