The post-2015 Panel: An unenviable task

2nd February, 2013 3:00 pm

The 27 eminent persons gathering in Monrovia this week to discuss what should replace the current set of Millennium Development Goals have a prodigiously difficult task ahead of them. The process to agree the original MDGs was contentious enough, but the ‘High Level Panel’ of world leaders selected by Ban Ki-Moon to help set new goals when the current ones expire in 2015 face a host of additional challenges.

Firstly, the panel suffer from the benefit of hindsight. The MDGs have been a victim of their own success; dominating global development efforts since their adoption in 2000, they have been criticised in equal measure. Despite being ground-breaking in many ways (a single set of agreed development priorities, an emphasis on transparently measuring progress over time), the MDGs’ most innovative features have also proved their most controversial. As with all prioritisation exercises, the MDGs necessarily de-prioritised a range of other issues which have subsequently come to be seen as glaring omissions: Climate change, conflict and security, jobs. By focusing on a single set of targets baselined to 1990, when many countries – particularly in Africa – were entering a period of unusual turbulence caused by the end of the Cold War, real progress in the past decade has often gone unacknowledged. And by focusing almost exclusively on quantifiable end goals (numbers in school, poverty levels) the MDGs engendered a results culture that detractors argue has been to the detriment of quality, sustainability and equity.

Secondly, unlike in 2000 the panel has been asked to develop goals that are universal in their relevance. The current MDGs only work as priorities for certain types of country. They provide a decent set of ambitions for a low income but peaceful and developmental state. But maternal mortality and malnutrition are not the issues keeping the leaders of most industrialised nations awake at night. This has meant that the MDGs have been tarnished with an unhelpful ‘them and us’ North-South dynamic. Neither have the MDGs worked particularly well for fragile or conflict-affected states, which lack many of the basic foundations (capable state institutions, peace and security) necessary for development. In these countries the MDGs have been criticised for channelling resources away from these key areas. But it remains to be seen whether the Panel can find new goals that are relevant to all countries everywhere, regardless of their stage of development.

Thirdly, the world has changed dramatically since the Millennium Declaration was signed. Then, the task of agreeing global goals was made easier by the very lack of consultation that has since become the goals’ Achilles heel. Today a far wider set of actors – emerging economies, civil society organisations, citizens themselves – rightly expect to have their say. Unsurprisingly, the subsequent proliferation of agendas, demands, draft goals, summits and reports has created an intellectual cacophony over which the High Level Panel is expected to preside.

Despite all this, there are a few encouraging signs for social progressives the world over. Out of the din of competing voices, some of the emerging leitmotifs from discussions so far include access to employment – recognising work as the most sustainable and dignified route out of poverty; equality – making sure that headline progress isn’t at the expense of social justice; and governance – building the ability of a state to collect taxes and provide core services to its citizens. At the Labour Campaign for International Development these areas correspond to three out of four of our policy themes for 2013, and represent a welcome move away from the ‘development as charity done by others’ narrative that has for too long dominated the debate. Instead, the new goals may – fingers crossed – challenge all countries to build societies and economies that are fairer, more inclusive and more progressive.

Claire Leigh is co-Chair of the Labour Campaign for International Development. This post is part of International Development weekend on LabourList – you can join the debate on these issues at YourBritain

Latest

  • Comment Europe Featured Why is the EU the only area on which no alternative is being offered in the leadership race?

    Why is the EU the only area on which no alternative is being offered in the leadership race?

    Like many, I was disappointed to read this week that Jeremy Corbyn has announced that he will be supporting an “In” vote when we come to the referendum on our EU membership by the end of 2017. Whether you agree with him or not, it is undeniable that Jeremy has widened the debate on so many policy areas in this leadership election, and has given a voice to parts of the party that have been ignored for decades. Why then, […]

    Read more →
  • News Would George Galloway really be allowed to rejoin Labour?

    Would George Galloway really be allowed to rejoin Labour?

    George Galloway intends to rejoin the Labour Party if Jeremy Corbyn wins the leadership election, 12 years after being expelled. However, it is far from certain that he would be allowed to do so. Speaking on LBC Radio, Galloway told Iain Dale that he would “definitely” join Labour “pretty damn quick” if Corbyn became leader – but the leadership candidate has been less than complimentary about the former Glasgow, Bethnal Green and Bradford MP. In an interview with the New […]

    Read more →
  • News Sizeable number of LabourList readers concerned about entryism and a Labour split

    Sizeable number of LabourList readers concerned about entryism and a Labour split

    Some Labour MPs and commentators expressed concern over the week that people who do not share Labour’s values might vote in the leadership election. Just this week MP John Mann wrote a piece for LabourList outlining why he thought this might be a problem. LabourList columnist Luke Akehurst has also argued that there is not large scale entryism. As of the weekend, Labour had only rejected around 30 new members and supporters. What do LabourList readers think? Of those who took […]

    Read more →
  • News Corbyn campaign unhappy over Diane Abbott text row

    Corbyn campaign unhappy over Diane Abbott text row

    Yesterday, Labour members and registered supporters in London received a text from “Jeremy”, endorsing Diane Abbott in the race to become the candidate for London Mayor. For smartphone users, the name at the top appeared as “J Corbyn”: Always assumed @jeremycorbyn supported @HackneyAbbott for Mayor but this text to party members has made if formal pic.twitter.com/6i2yRshzEi — Andy Goss (@andygoss) July 29, 2015 However, LabourList now understands that not only was the text not agreed with the Jeremy Corbyn campaign, […]

    Read more →
  • News Yvette Cooper calls for Government to put “maximum diplomatic pressure” on France over Calais crisis

    Yvette Cooper calls for Government to put “maximum diplomatic pressure” on France over Calais crisis

    Yvette Cooper has called for the Government to put “maximum diplomatic pressure” on France over the refugee crisis in Calais. The shadow Home Secretary has argued that as the crisis worsens “the diplomacy with the French government isn’t working to get a sustainable solution.” She has called for “sufficient border staff” in Calais to ” to maintain order with the French Government and prevent people losing their lives.” Over 3,000 people – many of whom are thought to be refugees – are living […]

    Read more →
Share with your friends










Submit