Global Policy Watch
Published on Wed, 2015-04-22 12:30
The outcome of the Third International Conference on Financing for Development (FfD3) will affect the ability of states to fulfill their human rights obligations, and achieve the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and targets being set for the post-2015 agenda. Both human rights and the SDGs are similar in that they are universal, and entail individual as well as common responsibilities, taking into account varying national capacities to achieve them. The SDGs take three different forms: those of particular relevance to the internal affairs of all countries, including rich ones, requiring changes in their domestic policies; those that address the need to change domestic policies in order to reduce negative external effects beyond a country’s borders; and those that zero in on international duties and responsibilities. The last two mainly apply to wealthier countries. |
Published on Fri, 2015-04-17 09:52
Getting the right balance between public and private sector roles and responsibilities in the Financing for Development and Post-2015 process will be fundamental to prospects for sustainable, inclusive development. Yet early evidence suggests this balance is already awry, skewed far in favour of private interests. Are we seeing a process of outsourcing the international agenda? There’s no question that businesses around the world are sources of growth and employment. But they are also the source of the most serious threats to sustainable development—from pollution to illicit financial flows that undermine prospects for public resources. Can we have a transformative development agenda without the transformation of business? |
Published on Tue, 2015-04-07 09:44
The post-2015 development agenda aspires to global transformation. Its content so far, including the set of 17 sustainable development goals (SDGs) agreed in last year’s Open Working Group, affirms that aim through an unprecedented commitment to inclusion, sustainability and universality. This suggests that the world might finally move beyond current imbalanced patterns of consumption and production that have left wide swathes of human deprivation and pushed the limits of planetary boundaries. Yet the main question, after the most recent intergovernmental negotiations on the agenda in March in New York, is: will the political process live up to the agenda’s promise? |
Published on Sat, 2015-03-21 20:30
The 23-27 March session of the Post-2015 intergovernmental negotiations will focus on the Sustainable Development Goals and Targets. The choice of indicators for the SDGs is a major policy decision with long-term consequences -- nationally and globally. This has sparked ongoing discussion over whether the indicators should be technical or politically negotiated (or a combination). |
Published on Thu, 2015-03-05 19:54
The most recent step in the post-2015 negotiations was the 17-20 February debate in New York on the Declaration, meant to be the framework political statement. Despite strong emphasis on transformation and high aspiration, traditional lines were drawn between (mostly) Northern and Southern positions. At the same time, the debate was rich and nuanced, reflecting the increasing diversity of developing country concerns and their willingness to engage substantively on issues that will be critical to transformation. The process continues to suggest there is historic potential for redressing some of the longstanding imbalances driving deep social and economic disparities, and the impending collision with planetary boundaries. The notion that post-2015 is supposed to universally apply to every country and person in the world is unprecedented—never before has there been a development agenda this broad in scope. |
Published on Tue, 2015-03-03 18:59
Over the past twenty years we have heard constantly that the world has the resources to address global development challenges such as poverty, environmental degradation, diseases and inequalities. However, despite the resources “being there” human development plans have been consistently underfunded. Clearly, existing “trickle-down” and redistribution mechanisms are not being effective and will be woefully inadequate to fund the implementation of the universal SDGs agenda. |
Published on Tue, 2015-03-03 13:55
The Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) of the United Nations discussed on 23-25 February the Secretary General report on the implementation of the Quadrennial Comprehensive Policy Review requested by the General Assembly. Under a cryptic title, the meeting addressed core issues, such as the UN development system’s role (and its relevance) in the post 2015 agenda. When it comes to the UN’s role in development, there is a broad consensus on the unique value the UN brings to the table because of its history, neutrality, convening power and universal representation. However, it is important to underline that the development ecosystem is being populated in recent years by emerging economic powers and new actors such as philanthropic organizations, large INGOs, regional institutions and development banks. Moreover, the UN is no longer the biggest funder of development activities, as it is now finds itself in second position, behind the European Commission. |
Published on Tue, 2015-02-24 10:17
The change in the current development paradigm that the leaders of the world are going to approve next September will require bold reforms and policy shifts. Can they be accomplished without involving the Finance Ministers? |
Published on Tue, 2015-02-24 09:59
The concept of Total Official Support for Sustainable Development (TOSD) is being promoted as an alternative to the current Official Development Assistance (ODA). Is this going to put more money on the table or just a “creative accounting” way to meet the commitments made by developed countries without paying? |
Published on Mon, 2015-02-09 20:07
2015 is a pivotal year. The post-2015 sustainable development agenda currently being drafted is premised on the reality that the present model of development is not working, given worsening inequalities and straining planetary boundaries. All countries and peoples—and the planet on which we depend–have the right to live with a better model, one that is inclusive and sustainable. |
