After years of work, the UN Summit has passed the new Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The trip to New York and the week spent there provided attendees an ample amount of time to reflect on the journey from the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) to the SDGs and what it needs to make the agreement worth more than warm words. Here are some reflections on what needs to happen, on how to get from the M to S, from millennial to sustainable.
METRICS
When the idea of having a small number of objective targets to guide (falling) donor funding was first floated in the late 1990s, it was widely criticized for being overly reductionist. Nevertheless, the MDGs emerged as way of attaching some hard metrics to the commitments made by the leaders in the Millennium Declaration.
While the MDGs were narrow in their focus (poverty) and aimed primarily at what donors could do, and while they are hardly known outside international development circles, they have achieved something remarkable in the development community — entrenching the idea of measuring progress through robust metrics, not just so that people can measure effectiveness for donors, but, more importantly, in order to promote accountability.
Indeed, one of the most exciting aspects of the SDG era is the focus on the so-called “data revolution” for development. With it has come attention and investment in the capacity of all development actors to generate, use and curate data.
Although it might not attract much attention, one of the most important events last week was the launch of a new Global Partnership for Sustainable Development Data. Only if the public get the metrics right they might have a chance of holding their leaders to account.
NEXUS
The SDGs have a broader focus on “sustainable development.” And while climate campaigners have been critical of the fact that the SDG agreement is not legally binding and instead focused on the upcoming climate negotiations in Paris, the SDGs still present the best opportunity to create a broad platform that builds upon issue-specific commitments.
Bold and binding targets for reducing emissions are needed, but also needed is a comprehensive roadmap for achieving a number of interconnected global public goods: ending poverty, providing humanitarian relief, reducing inequality and fighting climate change.
OWNERSHIP
If the SDGs are to have any chance of being achieved they need to involve all stakeholders. Governments — in rich and in poor countries — need to significantly change their behaviors if even a fraction of this ambitious vision is to be achieved. The private sector must contribute by adapting the way they consume and produce, by creating new technologies and by providing essential services. Civil society organizations need to look up from their specialist focus areas to the big, systemic changes required to achieve the SDGs’ vision.
Most importantly, the SDGs are intended to be owned by people. This is why the efforts by filmmaker Richard Curtis and his Project Everyone team to share the Global Goals with 7 billion people in seven days have been so important. The SDGs need to become the people’s agenda and only then will they have a chance of changing the behaviors they need, from individuals reducing their consumption to governments fearing the political price for not meeting their commitments.
POWER
If they are taken seriously enough, the SDGs can become a useful universal tool to be used to hold businesses, governments and civil society organizations to account; a tool to empower people all over the world to question what progress their governments have made toward these commitments.
The SDGs are also a manifestation of another, more global power shift as well. The goals are not about the world’s rich countries promising to fix the problems of the world’s poorest. They are about what everyone needs to do to achieve the needs of people and the planet. So the true test of their success is how the US or Europe changes its own policies and practices to achieve the vision the SDGs lay out.
From the point of citizen action, the universality of the SDGs also creates opportunities to disrupt. It is hoped that they would provide the basis for Ugandans to run campaigns on reducing consumption in the US, for Rwandans, who enjoy some of the highest rates of gender equality in the world, to intervene on gender rights in Saudi Arabia. These goals are about encouraging mutual accountability.
QUALITY OF LIFE
The SDGs are also an attempt to envision what quality of life every human being should enjoy by 2030. They should pave the way for enshrining the right to a minimum standard of living, a global social floor that no one should fall below. No matter where in the world, these goals offer the right to be protected from extreme poverty, the right to food and water, the right to education, the right to be protected from the effects of environmental degradation.
At their Utopic extreme, the SDGs represent a collective global vision of what a good quality life for people and planet looks like, a radical departure from individualistic, nation-based strategies to something more universal and in harmony with the Earth’s needs.
RESOURCES
Perhaps the most obvious flaw in the SDGs was what bedeviled the MDGs in the first place — how to find the resources to back the warm words. If the resourcing challenges around the MDGs were huge (and eventually unachievable), the sorts of financial resources and structural changes needed to achieve the SDGs are eye-watering. And the new set of promises come at a time when states are broke or have sold off so many of the levers and resources they once had.
So, amid the congratulatory speeches in New York, the key test is how many feature details of what new resources — public and private — are available to deliver on the vision.
SDGS
For better or worse, the SDGs will be around for the next 15 years. By moving beyond poverty, beyond aid, beyond what rich countries need to do and beyond a few development geeks, the SDGs are a huge step forward, but without implementation, this new global roadmap might not transport the global community very far from where the MDGs have dropped them off.
Dhananjayan Sriskandarajah is the secretary-general of Civicus.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry