P. 1
Post2015 Aus Final Aug 28

Post2015 Aus Final Aug 28

|Views: 308|Likes:
Published by lawrencehaddad

More info:

Published by: lawrencehaddad on Aug 31, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PPT, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less





“Post-2015” Fever Heat? Yes. Light? No.

Lawrence Haddad Institute of Development Studies UK Seminar at AusAID August 2012

“Post-2015” Fever
Number of items listed under “post2015” on google by year (thousands)
19 40

9 5
0.7 2005 0.5 2006


2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 to August

• What development are we trying to achieve as a global community? Who are we? • Brief survey of global changes since late 20th century • Could goals support any part of what we are trying to achieve? • Features of New Goals? • What might happen? • How will we get the New Goals? • Implications for AusAID?

What should the global community be trying to achieve?

Global Public Goods

MDG agenda

Short run national interests

What should the global community be trying to achieve?


Politics is central: between countries

Preservation G8 Aspiration G20, G77

Back in the real world

The bad news
1995-2000 • Need for multilateralism strong • Ability to deliver it moderate • Belief in it is medium Global power more concentrated 2012-2015 • Need for multilateralism stronger than ever • Ability to deliver it is weaker • Belief in it is at a low • With global power more multicited, diverse and G20 evolving, no obvious coalition for DGs Austerity in rich countries

Strong economic performance in rich countries Climate and environment lower Climate and environment higher on on rich country agendas some rich country agendas, but waning Pre 911 Post 911, focus on fragility, 3D’s Shocks the exception Shocks the new normal (sort of)

Muted Multilateralism
Bruntland Report vs GSP Report • Bruntland strong on international cooperation • UN Global Sustainability Panel report – proclaims new approach to political economy, but silent on
– Respect of 9 planetary boundaries requires internationacooperation – Pricing externalities requires broad international agreement – What reimbursement do developing countries receive for meeting the costs of reducing global bads?

Robin Davies. 2012 “Global sustainability: the sequel”, Development Policy Centre Discussion Paper 19, Crawford School of Public Policy, ANU.

ODA has held steady since 2008, but for how long?

Impact of Banking Crises on Net Disbursed Aid Provided by Crisis-Affected Donors, 19772007

Policy Research Working Paper 5162. International Aid and Financial Crises in Donor Countries. Hai-Anh Dang Steve Knack, Halsey Rogers. 2009.

Source: Authors’ calculations using LV data, as described in the text. Note: The figure shows the coefficient on the individual‐year counter dummy for years after crisis, as estimated in regressions controlling for donor‐country per‐capita income and population, as well as country fixed effects and year dummies across all donors. Year t=1 corresponds to the first year of the crisis.

Waning support for dealing with global warming

Lowy Institute Poll. Australia and New Zealand in the World Public Opinion and Foreign Policy. Fergus Hanson. 2012.

The good news
1995-2000 Except for China, lower growth outside OECD “Era of big government is over” Inequality below the surface Sustainability without resilience Development finance=ODA (sort of) ICTs a rich country phenomenon No consensus on whether development goals are worth it Measurement: material & impact is nice 75% of poverty in low income countries 2012-2015 Growth outside of the OECD

Calls for moral capitalism Inequality surfaced (kind of) Sustainability with resilience (sort of)
Development finance=taxes, remittances, FDI, philanthropy, ODA ICTs have global penetration We think goals can add value

Measurement: beyond material & impact essential 75% of poverty in middle income countries

Biggest economies in 1998 and 2008 by GDP (PPP)
Rank 1998 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Country

USA Japan China Germany France UK India Italy Brazil Russia Mexico Spain Canada Korea Turkey Australia Indonesia Netherlands

Rank 2008 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18


USA China Japan India Germany Russia UK France Brazil Italy Mexico Spain Korea Canada Turkey Indonesia Iran Australia

THE G-20: A PATHWAY TO EFFECTIVE MULTILATERALISM? Juha Jokela. Institute for security Studies European Union Paris. 2011.

More Diverse (fragmented?) set of resources for development

Tax revenue in Africa is rising

Domestic Resource Mobilisation across Africa. AfDB. Alex Mubiru Committee of Ten Policy Brief. 2010.

Global Inequality,1988-2005, is fairly flat

On a sub-national per person basis, not on an average per capita basis

Inequality is falling in more countries than it is rising in

But need to monitor inequality in big emerging countries, especially in Asia

Movement of poverty to: middle income, fragile, urban sub Saharan Africa

Trends in number of LIC and MIC countries

Where Do The World’s Poor Live? A New Update Andy Sumner. June 2012. IDS WP 393

IDA Country concentratingComparison, 2010 and 2025 IDA clients Client Base in sub-Saharan Africa and Fragile and Conflict Affected States

Todd Moss and Benjamin Leo. 2011. “IDA at 65: Heading Toward Retirement or a. Fragile Lease on Life?” CGD Working Paper 246.

Location of people living below $1.25 a day

Where Do The World’s Poor Live? A New Update Andy Sumner. June 2012. IDS WP 393

Implications? • Resilience • Inequality • Using aid to leverage wide range of instruments,

Poverty is urbanising
Urban poverty as a % of total poverty

IFAD 2011

Have the MDGs changed anything?

What have the MDGs achieved?
(Manning 2010)

• On Donors:
– Strengthening view that if support for aid is to be sustained, measurable progress must be shown in areas that the public in donor countries view as desirable

• On developing countries:
– the MDGs have so far had more influence on political discourse than on resource allocation
Richard Manning. 2010. The Impact and Design of the MDGs: Some Reflections. IDS Bulletin 41.1

What have the MDGs achieved?
(Kenny and Sumner 2011) • “It is a lot to ask of one legally toothless document, silent on the necessary steps to achieve its declared goals, to dramatically and observably change the course of global development -- however grand the signatories” • “It is impossible to say with any certainty what was the impact of the MDGs” • May well have played a role in increasing aid flows • Weak available evidence, limited impact on policies in developing countries

More Money or More Development: What Have the MDGs Achieved? Charles Kenny and Andy Sumner. CGD Working Paper 278 December 2011

Figure 4

MDG contribution?
Total ODA Per Capita to Low and Middle Income Countries, 1990-2009
50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0

Total aid per capita (constant 2009 US$)

ODA per capita Low Income

ODA per capita Middle Income

Source: OECD, 2011 & World Bank, 2011

More Money or More Development: What Have the MDGs Achieved? Charles Kenny and Andy Sumner. CGD Working Paper26 December 2011 278

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Figure 5

MDG contribution?
Percent of Total ODA Received by Sub-Saharan Africa, 1990-2009
40% 35% 30% 25%

% of Total ODA

20% 15% 10% 5% 0%

Source: OECD 2011

More Money or More Development: What Have the MDGs Achieved? Charles Kenny and Andy Sumner. CGD Working Paper 278 December 2011

Figure 6

New Goals: Listmania


More on equity, refine the hunger metrics, sort out the environment Goal etc.

MDG 2.0

Contribution from CIGI

Post-2015 Goals, Targets, and Indicators Background Paper Paris, April 9-11, 2012 Barry Carin and Nicole Bates-Eamer. CIGI.

Contribution from Karver, Kenny and Sumner 2012
2010-2030 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Poverty: $2/day, malnutrition Health: Life expectancy, child mortality Education: Literacy, secondary education Gender: Population disparity under the age of five Sustainable Development: Forest area; alternative energy as a percentage of total, GHG emissions, species extinction 6. Peace: Military expenditure as % GDP 7. Infrastructure: Access to mobile signal, access to improved energy sources 8. Development: Duty Free Access, Aid 0.7%
MDGs 2.0: What Goals, Targets and Timeframe? Jonathan Karver, Charles Kenny, and Andy Sumner July 2012 . IDS Working paper. 398


Suggestions for Sustainable Development Goals

Rio 2012 Issues Briefs Produced by the UNCSD Secretariat No. 6

25 CSOs (10 N, 15 S), supported by 1400 CSOs


Contribution from Oxfam: “The Doughnut”

Source: Oxfam. The 11 dimensions of the social foundation are illustrative and are based on governments’ priorities for Rio+20. The nine dimensions of the environmental ceiling are based on the planetary boundaries set out by Rockström et al (2009b)

(Global Development Goals)

Global Development Dashboard: based on a theory of change
Policy Instruments Aid, Trade, Technology, Migration, Environment, Security, Investments Commitments Spending and Policies, incentivised Human wellbeing outcomes Health, Zero Hunger, Water, Rights, Peace Gender dimensions Horizontal Inequalities Enablers Income (level and distribution) , Education, Risk Reduction, Resilience Connectors Energy, ICTs, Sanitation, Shelter, Transport infrastructure, Justice Sustainers Intensity of resource use in production and consumption, emission of pollutants and GHGs consistent with future wellbeing All countries Differentiated responsibilities

Haddad, 2012

Features of New Goals
Primary questions
• Full set of GPGs or mainly Poverty? • Co-habitation or Integration?
Feasibility (technical, administrative, political) MDG+ SDG only MDG 2.0 SDG+MDG 2.0 Cohabitation/ hybrid GDG (Integration of MDG & SDG within ToC)


What should the global community be trying to achieve?

Global Public Goods

MDG agenda

Short run national interests

Secondary features of New Goals
• Dependent on answer to first set of questions
– What are the supporting instruments and institutions? – All countries? What compensation mechanisms What scope for differentiated responsibilities? – Levels of application-global, regional, national – Number of goals, targets, indicators – What are the specific indicators for each goal and target?

• Independent of answer to first set of questions
– They have to capture people’s imagination, generate stretch, but be within bounds of possibility – What combination of outcomes today, predictions of future outcomes and current commitments to both? – Duration – Indicators to use data or stimulate collection? – Process for listening, contestation and negotiation – Communication plan – What is the M&E plan?

What will happen? Possibilities
Evans and Steven (2012)
• • • • • Full SDGs –ambitious, not people focused enough—a costly distraction? SGD lite – no-one gets what they want, disillusionment MDG 2.0 – add sustainability indicators in an evolutionary way Hybrids – ceiling/floor Car crash

Lingan et. al. (BOND, 2012)
• Twin track, SDGs separate from post-2015 • SDGs incorporate social • MDGs incorporate sustainable

Beyond the Millennium Development Goals Agreeing to a Post-2015 Development Framework An MGO Working Paper, Alex Evans and David Steven 24 April 2012> Brookings.

Sustainable Development Goals:building The Foundations For An Inclusive Process Jeannet Lingán, Jack Cornforth and Robert Pollard, Stakeholder Forum . 3 May, 2012 > BOND.

How will we get towards a set of goals?
• The process needs to be inclusive (Voices of the Poor 2.0?), but there’s very little time
– September 2013 Review Summit is key (although there is no clear post-2015 deadline!)

• The process is very political, but there is no institutionalised leadership to take it forward and fight the hard battles (unlike last time with the DAC)
– – – – G20? High Level Panel? G77? Model like IPCC?

• Do we need a transition period? Or is that a cop out? • Need a theory of change and an evaluation plan • Real lack of leadership at the highest levels

Opportunities for AusAID?
1. Global level – use the G20 Troika (Russia, Australia, Turkey) to support global leadership on post-2015 2. Lead G20 on development, but not as an add-on, but rather through G20 “whole of government” basics: financial regulation, price volatility, land grabs etc. 3. Become a global leader in development assistance to middle income countries (Indonesia, India, China, Philippines, PNG)— others will need to follow 4. Become a global leader in development assistance that advances development in urban areas—again, others will follow 5. Promote lesson learning within SE Asia — e.g. what can we learn from China and is what can China learn from others? 6. Harder they fall.. prepare the region for economic and political fall-out from any Chinese internal friction  resilience

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->