image
Recently I participated in a global think tank session with presentations and discussions about what the Future of our United Nations Millennium Goals will be after we reach the year 2015.
 
There is no doubt that these goals have been beneficial overall, but the question is: Should the UN stick with the existing goals and recalibrate them to continue or should they be more ambitious with new objectives and to try fix some gaps that have become apparent?"

The United Nations (UN) Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) are a set of eight targets, established in 2000, to mobilize national and collective efforts on critical development issues by 2015. Post-2015 goals will determine priorities, motivate action and influence spending for development.  Extensive worldwide consultations have elicited dozens of suggestions which were the topic of this session I am reporting on.

While the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) have been successful, focusing attention and mobilizing resources, more needs to be done. An innovative project, co-hosted by CIGI (Centre for International Governance Innovation) and the Korea Development Institute, has examined what goals should succeed the MDGs.

Experts argue that in response to emerging global and national challenges, the post-2015 development agenda should be based on a comprehensive and holistic notion of development. Future goals must become sustainable one-world goals that apply to poor and rich countries alike.

It was stated that by the year 2045 there may be no fish in our oceans, so there is a need to address the environment and fisheries.  Others say "What about terrorism and violence", which should be included in addressing future concerns.

Others feel gender equality is another big issue being discussed, which is getting more prominence on the world stage than before.  There is a feeling that the current MDGs include this item but may have an inappropriate reflection, mainly focused on education, politics and employment.

In trying to look at what future items to focus on it is hard to set up priorities for the world after 2015.  Mongolia has big problems with corruption, Cambodia's priority is to assist victims of land mines and China is not interested in people's rights.  While health issues are a bit more common, many countries have differing views on what their needs and priorities are.

So it is a complex issue with many needs and goals being suggested.  Most world leaders agree there needs to be 8 or 10 MDGs positioned as a global priority to help the UN align resources with policies in a visionary new agenda.  

It will be impossible to capture everything and it will be difficult to prioritize throughout the world in a global agenda.  However it is imperative to work on and important to include the interaction of everyone in the process.

Even after the next phase MDGs goals are determined, the complexity of the issue continues with finding acceptable and reliable indicators to serve as a concrete way to measure progress. What data will be used and what type of surveys can be simple and effective to determine results?

There is a need for equitable international rules which are seen as fair to all.  It has been hard in past to get consensus on what the term "equitable" means.  It has also been hard to find accepted indicators for good global governance with clarity of terminology so everyone is on the same page.  Some see goals as destinations we wish to achieve.  Targets may be levels of ambition or rate of achievement along the way to reaching the destination.

The MDG process has aroused controversy to find indicators that can compare issues in different regions of the world, so the choice of indicators very important.  All governments are not progressive minded . . and come with challenges in transition or development.  So there needs to be a way to go beyond incapable governments and still help the citizens of these countries track their progress

Health indicators are easier to determine, with measurement of child mortality, body temperature or other medical tests to indicate health.  Lots of investment has gone into collecting data and investigation into factors to measure results.  Scientists go for hard data and numbers, Social and Communication Sciences allow for more sampling to assess progress.

Trying to have flexible categories of indicators is the goal, where countries can choose how to measure their progress and thus track the trends in each country.  In this way they can measure against their own progress rather than other countries on a different level.

So what can ordinary people do?  Nothing will happen until 2015 but it is good to be talking now.  According to the UN speaker, what will change the conversation will be input from citizens and the active participation of people with ideas to improve our world.

Trying to develop liberating and engaging ideas is a more bottom up than top down process.  So we need to ensure we accept and encourage participation, and be diligent to not give up. All of this highlights a need for governance and participation of citizens in every country.

It is encouraging that there is an aspiration in youth and students who seem to be taking an interest in such issues and want to become involved in making a difference for a better world.

The process of consultation is important and people need to input their thoughts on "What is the future world we want?" and suggest ideas on how will we can get there.

So I encourage you to go to www.myworld2015.org and enter the forum discussions to share your ideas for a next generation world future.  

With best regards,
Doug V