We need to be the change we want to see in governance and institution building!

Comment

Comment by Roland Ritter on March 29, 2013 at 4:03am

Ulrich seems to be an Insider without bue eyes, suspicious and operations concious. I agree with a lot of Your Statements, but I foresee that not anyone is able to foresee every step. Steps taken within governments always bear authority and execution of power. All eyes are at first glance directed to comment on legal principles and being right in Systems preservation. Put the "bar" much lower. May be there is no bar? To grasp an idea, we like to apply our definition and experience and bündle it for simplification to talk it over. This kind of reality seems self-fulfilling, set and done. I would rather start to find common grounds, e.g. how do You do? Fire fighters are positive, because it does not matter whose house is burning. Common sense is to get the fire extinguished. Past 2015 has to find experiences in the world of that kind to Progress. Read me?

Comment by Ulrich Graute on January 30, 2013 at 3:36pm

Adrian and Patrick brought up a number of important points. Yes, we don’t have to begin from scratch. The MDG process and related experience are a treasure for the future agenda. I also share that governments and citizens have to play a major role in developing and implementing current and future goals.

Where we might disagree is the perception of the challenge. I think the bar is put up very high. Reading official documents on the new development agenda is for me like reading about the launch of the US Apollo-programme to fly to the moon in the 1960s or about the not so successful search for a theory of everything.

Translating all major economic, social and environmental challenges of the world into one single set of goals and to strive for its implementation in an agreed timeframe is un-heard off! But world leaders seem to agree that in case of failure life of on earth may soon become unsustainable. And that would be really difficult to explain to citizens at home.

In sum: Yes, let’s build on the experience and achievements of the MDG and Rio process but the challenge is not to merely draft an MDG II. Instead, let’s look and test what can be done to prevent the worst case scenario from becoming reality. What would you do to get ready?

Imagine, by tomorrow the UN General Assembly would entitle you as programme manager to prepare the implementation (!!) of the new development agenda which is scheduled to begin on 1 January 2016 (your D-Day). Of course, details about the agenda and precise targets of your interventions won’t be available before 2014 or 2015. You just know that your troops (UN governance and management experts) will have to manage a complex, global, cross-sector, multi level and multi stakeholder setting according to a single set of sustainable development goals.

Would you just wait for proper marching orders based on the final agenda? Or what could you do? What kind of preparation including simulations, trainings, larger and smaller scale maneuvers could you carry out with your troops (UN staff members working on governance processes) to get ready before your D-Day?

I am looking forward to your ideas and proposals :)

Ulrich

Comment by Patrick Magnotta on January 30, 2013 at 12:44am

Adrian brings up an excellent point regarding Dr. Graute's comments on how a visionary and wide-ranging development agenda can outpace the capacity of institutions and personnel that would ultimately be responsible for implementing it. 

The MDGs are a framework that attempted to categorize the major development challenges at the time of their creation.  Since many of the targets and priorities in the MDGs will remain into perpetuity, it seems like they can provide a set of building blocks for the future development agenda. 

For example, it is reasonable for Member States to remain committed to eradicating poverty until every person in the world has a high quality of life.  There are several other priorities that are "universal" in scope; that is, applying to everyone in every Member State.  Given that some of the universal challenges have already been acknowledged by all Member States (through the MDGs), we already have an effective foundation to build upon when thinking about future priorities. 

However, though the MDGs are an effective foundation, there are also new challenges which could not have been foreseen when the goals were established.  Citizen engagement is an important topic Adrian mentioned.  This has certainly been a long standing challenge.  But it is receiving increased focus, particularly as ICTs have enabled the individual to become more informed.  How should effective citizen engagement "look" in our time?   If we can answer that question, perhaps we'll identify new goals that will become a focus post-2015.     

New technologies is a topic that can be discussed at length.  The MDGs acknowledged the role new technologies can have in improving quality of life.  But their variety and potential applications have increased substantially since that time.  For example, post-Millenial ICTs have revolutionized the way we share information.  In addition to improving QOL, their applications can effect several other objectives - such as improving the transparency of public institutions and improving citizen engagement.  Focusing on the potential applications of new technologies seems like a good way to "reframe" and elaborate upon a single MDG target that, like the newest technologies, is becoming increasingly complex over time. 

Perhaps the most fruitful post-2015 agenda is one that will, like the MDGs, simply reflect the priorities and challenges of "our time," with a humble understanding that we cannot possibly conceive of every possible long-term challenge or every possible new technology.  If this sort of pragmatic approach is maintained, perhaps we achieve the development goals of our time while avoiding the potential for "outpacing" institutions that Dr. Graute wrote about.

Comment by Adrian Moreira on January 29, 2013 at 11:38am

As Dr. Graute is stating, all institutions struggle to work as one, which I believe that it is a very valid argument for most of organisations. In the case of the UN this could even be more difficult given its size and complexity, which could make each department and member state have different priorities. However, when building the goals for the future there are shared views from many of the UN units within the organisation.

 

Post 2015 initiatives should continue to reinforce the MDG. While there has been much progress there is still a lot of work to do with the eight goals that are already established. The question for post 2015 is how could the UN and the member states be more efficient when tackling these goals.

 

The answer could be on the citizens and the measure on which the government manages to involve them in the decision-making, nonetheless there are many barriers for doing this efficiently. Consequently this practice is yet to be developed in most countries, but I’m certain that with the support of the UN and the commitment of the member states we will be witnessing relevant changes in the following years.