Bellagio GoalsHow we got there and where

we’re headingBarry Carin, CIGIJune13, 2012June13, 2012

Storyline

•In the beginning…•The good, the bad, the ugly (Geneva)•Potential post-2015 goals (Bellagio)•Measurement and post-2015 (Paris)•Future plans

In the beginning…

• Assess original MDGs strengths and weaknesses

• Integrate the voices of the poor into the post-2015 development paradigmpost-2015 development paradigm

• Expert meetings to produce a framework• Use e-platform, technology, and IFRC

Nat’l societies for consultations• Deliver findings to decision-makers

Current MDGs: The Good

• Raised priority of development• Accelerated global poverty reduction • Generated popular support, political buy-in • Increased investments and progress in

specific development area• “Social focus”; health and education• Improved data on poverty

Current MDGs: The Bad• Lack equity considerations – rising inequality• One size fits all• Left out growth, infrastructure, failed states

good governance, job creation, security…good governance, job creation, security…• Restricted vision of fundamental values

(definitions of “development” and “poverty”• Lack of accountability• Too few outcome targets and indicators

Current MDGs: The Ugly

• Major problems with data availability, reliability

• Design, measurement, coverage problems• No local ownership• No local ownership• Driven by donor-led reductionist agenda• Ignored inter-linkages between goals

Initial Principles / Criteria• Global outcome targets – nationally set• Limited number of goals• Measurable• Integrate equity• Integrate equity• Generate incentive structure and

accountability • Highlight inequality - targets for lowest

quintile• Gender? Timeframe?

Geneva Conclusions

• Global goals with regional/local level targets• Delink development from aid• Define in enabling terms – freedoms & rights• 10 or fewer goals – no more than 20 targets• 10 or fewer goals – no more than 20 targets• Include goals on food security, sustainability,

empowerment, accountability, connectivity & gender

• Confirmed need to focus on outcomes

Background Paper for Bellagio

MDGs 2.0: Wonhyuk Lim’s Critical Review Missing Goals-Gender Equality: Incorporated into other goals?Subsumed under Empowerment?-Global Partnership: No more commitment andbargain on ODA/GNI, Doha Dev. Round, andother global enabling factors (e.g., IPR)?

Methodological Issues-Apply equally to dev. and adv. countries?-Aggregate from national to global numbers?

1. Poverty reduction not ambitious enough (need broad-based development).2. Literacy encompasses reading, math, science, and job skills (G20 DP2).3. Disability Adjusted Life Years (DALYs) - comprehensive measure for health.4. Climate change too narrow for environmental sustainability.5. Human security (defined as freedom from violence?). Is R2P acceptable?6. Connectivity - improve sustainability and equity.7. Empowerment - participation, accountability, transparency, and

state capacity.

-Develop appropriate indicators?

Bellagio Consensus• Redefine development - enabling conditions to

enhance:-Individual capabilities and freedoms-Sustainability of economic and social activities (minimize impact on ecosystems and climate change)

-Provision of public goods (focus on institutions) • Emphasize distribution.• Disaggregate Indicators.• Separate goal for gender.

Bellagio Conclusion

Post-Bellagio Considerations

• Equitable growth – growth of all quintiles• “Development” – freedom and justice• Enabling conditions, i.e. ingredients for

developmentdevelopment• Global goals, nationally set targets• Minimum global benchmarks – i.e. income

growth of bottom quintile• Employment!

Criteria: A Fine Balance

AspirationalComprehensiveness

Complexity

MeasurableConciseness

SimplicityComplexityUniversality

Ends

SimplicityCountry-specificity

Means

Background Paper for Paris

• Express many dimensions of wellbeing, but limit # of targets

• Targets should combine:-Comprehensiveness with conciseness-Comprehensiveness with conciseness-Complexity with simplicity-Principles with measurability-Universality with country-specificity-Ends with means-Ambition and achievability

Challenges re Indicators• Be accessible to lay reader• Measure outputs, not inputs• Summative reflecting whole sector

outcomes• Sensitive to potential behaviour response• Sensitive to potential behaviour response• Direct measures, not indices• Avoid perception-based measures• Beware of process indicators• Info on disaggregation & distribution

People reach different conclusions from the same facts

Paris Conclusions April 2012

• Refined thinking & indicator menu• Input to large debate on post-2015 -

Beyond 2015 and UN conducting consultationsconsultations

• Focus on: targets, indicators, and measurement issues

"Not everything that counts can be counted; not everything that can be counted counts".

Future PlansGain regional perspectives; refine menus• Pretoria, July • Mumbai, August• Rio de Janeiro, September• Briefing of UN officials, OctoberStock taking - Bellagio, February 2013

Conclusions

• Incredibly complex & highly political: easy to criticize the original MDGs, but difficult to improve

• Tradeoffs – measureable vs aspirational, • Tradeoffs – measureable vs aspirational, input/output/outcome indicators

• Our role: technocratic, early-thinking on indicators, increase awareness