The future framework must aim to create a just and sustainable world in which every human being can realise their rights and live free from poverty.
GEOGRAPHIC AND THEMATIC SCOPE OF THE FRAMEWORK
In times of globalisation and growing global interrelationships between economies and people, a growing number of issues require international cooperation, cross-border action and policy coordination. If the post-2015 framework is to truly address the global challenges faced by people in low, middle and high income countries, that framework must be global. Accountability is key and should start first of all at the national and sub-national level, incorporating the international level as appropriate and depending on the issue.
At the same time, implementing the MDGs have taught us that development outcomes last longer when planning and implementation are locally owned. This calls for a framework that allows for priority-setting and implementation at the national or sub-national level as appropriate.
Thus, by a “global” future framework, Beyond 2015 ETF means a framework in which all countries commit to contributing to the achievement of the goals which are agreed at global (UN) level, and that the goals apply to all countries in line with the principle of common-but-differentiated responsibility (eg. governments contextualise the global goals at sub-levels, such as targets, to ensure ownership and relevance. One example might be in order to take account of a country’s per capita consumption/waste production, its GDP etc.). Every country will therefore have a series of obligations for which they will be held accountable, but those obligations may differ to reflect the country context and the nature of what is being achieved.
A global framework will enjoy greater legitimacy and acceptance than one which is not. It would ensure global recognition of global responsibilities, and contribute to ending the antiquated ‘North-South dichotomy’.
As regards the thematic scope of the future framework, it is widely recognised that the MDGs overlooked many important issues, such as equality, peace and security, governance and anti-corruption, decent work and social protection, environmental sustainability, disaster risk reduction etc.Beyond 2015 ETF therefore supports a more comprehensive post-2015 framework which will include other policy areas which impact significantly on the achievement of development objectives, which will capitalise on the links and synergies which exist between policy areas and which will build on the key principles of human rights, sustainability and policy coherence for development (see below).
A Human Rights-Based Approach (HRBA) & Equality
The human rights-based approach to development (HRBA) of the Millennium Declaration was to a large extent lost in the formulation of the MDGs. Instead, the MDG framework fostered an approach to development which focused on the volume of financial aid, while sidelining fundamental reforms needed to realise people’s rights. The ETF adheres to the principle that the post-2015 framework must prioritise the progressive realisation of people’s rights and that the key human rights-based principles must underpin it, including participation, non-discrimination and equality, empowerment and accountability.
The notion of equality – or addressing inequality – will be crucial in the future framework. The way the MDG framework was conceived led to countries pursuing ‘low-hanging fruit’ – that is, achieving progress for those who were the easiest to reach. The benefits of MDG progress accrued least to those who are poorest and
most marginalised and especially those who suffer multiple forms of discrimination. Gender equality is one of the key forms of equality which will need to be more comprehensively addressed in the future framework, not least because gender inequality exacerbates all other forms of inequality. The complex interplay of various forms of inequality will have to be comprehensively addressed. In practical terms, addressing inequality requires that each goal in the post-2015 framework should be applicable to the entire population, including non-citizens, and be measured using disaggregated data.
Sustainability – the ETF considers that the three pillars of sustainability must be addressed as a cross-cutting issue throughout the framework, and that sustainability concerns must underpin its construct. This is fundamental if people’s well-being and resilience are to be improved.
- Economic sustainability – the world currently operates on an unsustainable growth model and the key metric by which countries are judged is their macro-economic growth. Securing a sustainable economic model that takes cognisance of planetary boundaries and resource constraints, and serves a rights-based social model would be an important outcome of the post-2015 framework.
- Environmental sustainability – currently, global consumption of natural resources overshoots planetary capacity by 1.5 times. It is essential to address issues of access to natural resources, equity and participation in the governance of natural resources as well as the impacts of climate change now and for the development opportunities of future generations.
- Social sustainability–a less explored area with no one single definition, social sustainability encompasses traditional human development areas, and issues such as participation, governance, well-being and identity. It is crucial to address this since it incorporates many of the underlying causes of conflict, as well as being key to human progress.
Policy Coherence for Development,or PCD,is fundamental to the success of any development framework. PCD potentially addresses the global “accountability gap” more than any other policy instrument by stressing that all decision-making processes by all actors –in both the North and South – must be responsive to the needs and aspirations of the world’s poorest people and must ‘do no harm’ to their human rights and development perspectives. Mechanisms will need to be established to make a reality of PCD, including a monitoring mechanism and a means for redress. Some of these mechanisms should be global, while others may be national or local.
Important policy areas to be made ‘coherent’ with development goals include: climate change; trade, investment and finance; agriculture; energy; food security; migration; and conflict, fragility and security policies. Binding regulation should be envisaged for major actors in the global economy and international policy.
THEMATIC AREAS TO BE INCLUDED
The sections below attempt to highlight some of the key issues per thematic area that the ETF has identified over the course of our discussions. It does not, however, indicate that we think that each and every one of these points should be incorporated into the future framework. We will begin work on developing proposals for global goals and potential targets, based on the campaign’s criteria for choosing goals, in the very near future. We will also attempt to identify those issues that offer the maximum possibility for building on synergies between areas.
Human development based on the social sectors
- Food security and nutrition
- Social protection
- Decent livelihoods (and better connecting education to employment)
- Clean water and sanitation
- Poverty eradication
Mobility and migration
- Access to market
- Access to land
- Access to information
- Access to technology and technological advances
- Access to banking
- Access to communications
- Freedom of movement, mobility rights and international and national law regulating the transport of people and goods
- Road network
- (links to governance, economic policy, social sectors)
Economy, consumption and production; trade and finance
- Growth models – while currently based on GDP, we should consider moving towards a basket of indicators including the GINI Coefficient and Human Development Index, imperfect though these may be. Growth must lead to poverty reduction and a fair distribution of the benefits of growth, however that growth may be measured in the future. And growth must be environmentally sustainable.
- (Financial) Market speculation
- Consumption and production
- Re-pricing of goods and services in order to internalise ecological and social costs
- Waste management and disposal (also an environmental issue)
- Consumer credit levels
- Tax – illicit tax flows, tax havens, domestic tax revenues (and progressive tax systems)
- Global financial system reform
- Sovereign debt
- Trade governance
- Environmental degradation and natural resource limits
- Biodiversity, freshwater, oceans, forests
- Climate change
- Sustainable Energy
- Land Use
Poverty and inequality are not accidents of fate. They are the results of specific power relations and policy decisions which are discriminatory, exclusionary and unjust.Governance, as it relates to discussions on a post-2015 framework, should be considered from both the global and the national levels and should focus on both governance structures and processes.When looking at governance one will need to look at:
- Freedom of association and assembly
- Legal recognition facilitating the work of CSOs, including women’s rights organisations
- Freedom of expression
- Right to information/transparency
- Public procurement policies (& respect for environmental, social, cultural and other HR standards)
- Role of the private sector (eg. in the provision of public goods, health, education, security etc.)
- Accountability from local to national to international levels
After some discussion, it was felt that it might be possible to address the key root causes of conflict and fragility through these five areas. However, we may review both this and the importance of addressing natural disasters specifically and their impacts on resilience, well-being and development.
This briefing focuses exclusively on the possible content of a post-2015 framework. Our positions regarding the processes surrounding the development of the successor framework to the MDGs are set out in the Essential Must Haves, available on Beyond 2015’s website: www.beyond2015.org. This briefing does not cover the criteria to determine whether a particular issueshould be in or out of the framework. These are being developed separately by the campaign.