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.
Read more at Labour List beta
