Global #inequalities2015 report launch

This ProgBlog article written by Alex Cobham of Save the Children, is part of the Wikiprogress post-2015 series. 

The global post-2015 consultation on inequality, led by UNICEF and UNWomen, delivered its report to the co-sponsors, Ghana and Denmark, in Copenhagen.

The meeting covered two days. The first included a livestreamed presentation of the report and a series of panels with the advisory group taking questions from the room and from around the world, on a series of panels which are being livestreamed – the opening presentations and the first panel can be accessed here.

Some highlights:

• There is broad support for a goal on inequality (including gender as well as economic inequality), and it is crucial that each goal contains disaggregated indicators and targets to capture the major dimensions of inequality also affecting ethnoliguistic groups, spatial groups and persons with disabilities.
• This demands a major investment in data, and an absolute end to the kind of approach that has seen some major households surveys exclude groups that are difficult to reach, or to reach with sufficient statistical rigor (persons with disabilities in particular).
• We should not, as Richard Morgan of UNICEF made very clear, get too hung up on goals, targets and indicators. The framework is not these – it is the Millennium Declaration. The importance of what we are now, globally, engaged in is that it will establish norms – goals etc can help with this, but are not the only components that matter.
• There is again, broad agreement, that the framework directly address the structural causes of inequalities – not least, globally, the transparency obstacles that facilitate the illicit financial flows that undermine both political governance and economic growth, and also prevent progressive distribution of the benefits of growth. (Which reminds me – here’s a handy new brief from TJN Germany on the importance of taxes for human rights.)
• Gender inequality is an absolute priority (there was a particularly powerful contribution from Kate McInturff on gender-based violence as ever-present, from the home to school or workplace and on the way, and a barrier to all other goals – from universal education to decent work, and so on).

The second day was the Leadership Meeting. Co-chaired by Michelle Bachelet of UNWomen, Tony Lake of UNICEF, Christian Friis Bach for Denmark and Paul Victor Obeng for Ghana, this brought together high-level participants from around the world, including ministers from Burkina Faso, Colombia, Finland, the Netherlands, Sweden, Tanzania and Uganda, a number of members of the High Level Panel on post-2015, and many international and development organisations from FAO to USAID.

After initial statements and the presentation of the consultation report by advisory group members, Sarah Cook of UNRISD and Jayati Ghosh of Jawaharlal Nehru University. In the discussion of the report that followed, there were a number of extremely powerful contributions that I can’t tell you too much about because this session was under Chatham House rules. However… there were a few striking features:

• Effectively no dissent from the proposal for a free-standing goal on inequality (except for the proposal that there be two!);
• Strong confirmation of the need for disaggregated targets and indicators across all other goals;
• Recognition of the need to invest in high-quality, consistently disaggregated data to make this work and to ensure accountability at local and national levels;
• Broad recognition of the importance of taxation, including from some of the more conservative as well as the more progressive discussants; and
• A clear demand for more research findings about success stories: the policies that have driven progress against inequality.

Finally, the co-chairs released their statement summarising their view on the discussion. It’s short, and well worth reading, so do! But here are some highlights (my emphasis):

Inequalities need to be tackled systematically and coherently, by addressing their structural causes, and through a new common and holistic development framework that is global in character and relevant to all countries…

In a new development framework, participants suggested that a self-standing goal to reduce inequalities could help ensure the political will necessary to do this. Targets aimed at universal access to basic services and resources, and ‘getting to zero’ – such as eradicating extreme poverty, hunger and preventable child and maternal deaths – are necessary to ensure that no one is left behind. Such targets could be reinforced by indicators that specifically measure progress in reducing disparities and that specifically track progress among the most impoverished, marginalised and excluded groups and individuals.

Inequalities are not a necessary consequence of, nor a precondition for economic growth, but a result of particular policies and structural conditions. Inequalities can therefore be reduced through targeted and transformative policies and actions, including the promotion of inclusive and intergenerational growth and decent work while simultaneously addressing the priority needs and rights of poor, vulnerable and marginalised people. Striving to reduce inequalities is not only right in principle; it is also right in practice.

The empowerment and advancement of women and girls is crucial… A new Post-2015 Development Agenda should therefore include not only a universal goal for gender equality and the empowerment and advancement of women and girls, but also ensure that gender and other dominant inequalities are mainstreamed in all relevant areas through disaggregated targets and indicators.

Promoting greater equality across sectors and policies, within countries and between countries must be an integral part of a future set of international development goals. Addressing inequalities both within and between countries will require fair and just rules and practices in international relations in areas including trade, finance, investment, taxation and corporate accountability.

Jayati has posted her thoughts on Guardian Development, and covers many important areas of the discussion and the future agenda.

I would only add that my immediate reflection on the inequalities consultation is optimistic. When the consultation started, I think there was quite a widely held view that a freestanding goal on inequality was politically impossible. (There’s a separate discussion to be had about whether a separate goal is needed, at least technically, if you have appropriate disaggregation throughout the framework; but for me, the importance of a goal lies above all in setting or confirming the norm that inequality is an obstacle to human development and to the achievement of rights.) Save the Children’s own ‘first draft’ proposal certainly reflected that calculation.

Now, however, it feels very much that things may have changed. As I argued in my remarks, the report didn’t only bring together important research but more importantly it reflected the results of participation and showed a clear political position.

For what it’s worth, my feeling now is that it would be very difficult for the High Level Panel to seek to exclude the idea of a free-standing inequality goal (and I’m delighted that Save UK has called on David Cameron to support this). Of course, the HLP is only one contribution to the process, and the subsequent intergovernmental negotiations are where things will stand or fall; but the HLP’s credibility as a reflection of the broad consultation would be seriously damaged now were it not to reflect the emerged consensus. It will also be interesting to see how structural, global policy issues are dealt with – above all, perhaps, around taxation.

In any case, there is now a powerful basis for civil society and others globally to mobilise around the treatment of inequality in the eventual post-2015 framework. (Can I mention that I feel quite proud of Save the Children for its contribution? Only one among many, but the organisation has really made great strides in developing its position over the last year, as seen in the Born Equal report which supports much of the consultation report.)

Last word on this: the consultation owes its success in very great part to the outstanding joint leadership of Saraswathi Menon of UNWomen and Richard Morgan of UNICEF, and they deserve enormous praise. Thank you both!

Alex Cobham

This article was first published on Uncounted, 18 February 2013 - This blog is about inequality and development and those who are uncounted. It is written and maintained by Alex Cobham, Save the Children's Head of Research. Uncounted aims to stimulate debate but is not a reflection of official Save the Children policy

The OECD Global Forum on Development (GFD) is currently running an online consultation* entitled “Reducing poverty is achievable: Finding those who are hidden by inequalities” on the Wikiprogress platform. You can post a comment in a few clicks by going to the “Contribute!” section of the online consultation page, make sure your voice is heard. 

@Wikiprogress @Wikigender @Wiki_child

Post-2015: Aim here

You’d be pretty foolish to propose a complete post-2015 development framework right now, wouldn’t you? What with the High Level Panel still to have their second substantive meeting (in Monrovia, following London last November and with the Indonesian fixture to follow), and the global consultations still running… You’d pretty much be putting up a target and inviting attack, wouldn’t you? Still, hard hats on, here goes!

Save the Children today publishes the modestly titled Ending Poverty in our Generation, which sets out a vision of how the successor to the Millennium Development Goals could look. Rather than try to summarise it here, I’ll suggest reading it instead – but you can get the gist of it from the contents page, which is reproduced at the bottom of this post. And Mark Tran at the Guardian has a very good (and kind!) piece up already.

The central points, to my mind at least, are these:

• to continue the MDG structure of a limited number of goals with specific targets and indicators;
• to address inequalities in various dimensions across every thematic area;
• to prioritise the achievement of universal (or ‘zero’) goals, from e.g. universal healthcare to the eradication of hunger and absolute income poverty;
• to ensure sustainability of development progress is given much greater priority; and
• to radically improve accountability, including through prioritisation of domestic taxation as the source of finance, and with substantial investment in the availability of data

You could summarise this as ‘MDGs+ with our priorities rather than yours’, but I hope you won’t. The intention is not to make the case for this specific proposed framework, and we won’t be lobbying for this as a complete set against any other alternative.

Instead, we’re publishing this because we hope it can be useful, in two particular ways.

The first reflects that we’ve been a little worried about the need to bring the conversation on post-2015 around to specifics. For example, there is in the technical discussions, and increasingly in the political ones also, what feels like an overwhelming consensus on inequality. However, it’s much easier to have a consensus on the importance of an abstract concept than on the actual policy implications thereof. Does that consensus translate, for example, into support for a global goal on income inequality? Or for targets on the ratio of progress between the most and least favoured groups (say by gender, or ethnolinguistic group) in each and every goal? While we recognise there is a long way to go, and that many voices are still to be heard, we hope that putting up a specific proposal may help crystallise some views – even if it’s in fierce opposition to our suggestions!

The second way in which we hope this might be useful is from our own learning. Save The Children is a large and complex organisation, and the process of engaging all the internal stakeholders to reach agreement has been an eye-opening one.  We had (repeatedly!) the kinds of discussions you might expect about how progressive or conservative a position to take in particular areas, and about how much we should be setting a utopian goal, or a politically feasible one. We also had surprisingly creative and good-tempered discussions about the importance of different thematic areas, and how some could be combined rather than excluded, and on where draconian decisions were really needed in order to maintain the clarity and simplicity of the MDG structure.

Of course, that last point  is one that took a good deal of discussion: just how much should we see the MDGs’ simplicity and clarity as an ideal, or at least as necessary to their political traction? You might well take a different view, which could lead to a quiet different structure (or indeed to the absence of one; I confess I’m still attracted to the idea of much broader, and non-exclusive menus of targets and indicators from which nationally-representative processes could prioritise…).

There’s a long way to go. As the UN consultations begin to report back (you can comment on the inequalities draft report here – please do!), and the High Level Panel will start to crystallise some of their thinking, there is still prolonged technical and then political discussion to be had – not least bringing together more completely the thinking and the talking on post-2015 and Sustainable Development Goals.

With a bit of luck, Ending Poverty in our Generation can be of some use in moving these discussions along. Even if it’s just as a target for criticism. Please do share your responses with us, whether in comments below or directly etc. In the end it’s only useful if we learn more publishing it about where post-2015 is going.

Introduction

Building on the strengths of the MDGs

Finishing the job

Addressing the MDGs’ limitations

Responding to changes and new challenges

1) Finishing the job: better outcomes, faster progress

1 Reducing inequalities

2 Increasing transparency and accountability

3 Synergies and systems

4 Ensuring access is not at the expense of outcomes

5 Environmental sustainability

2) Putting in place the foundations of human development

Goal 1: By 2030 we will eradicate extreme poverty and reduce relative poverty through inclusive growth and decent work

Goal 2: By 2030 we will eradicate hunger, halve stunting, and ensure universal access to sustainable food, water and sanitation

Goal 3: By 2030 we will end preventable child and maternal mortality and provide healthcare for all

Goal 4: By 2030 we will ensure all children receive a good-quality education and have good learning outcomes

Goal 5: By 2030 we will ensure all children live a life free from all forms of violence, are protected in conflict and thrive in a safe family environment

Goal 6: By 2030 governance will be more open, accountable and inclusive

  

3) Creating supportive and sustainable environments

Goal 7: By 2030 we will have robust global partnerships for more and effective use of financial resources

Goal 8: By 2030 we will build disaster-resilient societies

Goal 9: By 2030 we will have a sustainable, healthy and resilient environment for all

Goal 10: By 2030 we will deliver sustainable energy to all

4) Institutional support and enabling mechanisms

Financing and policy coherence for development

Accountability

Data availability

5) Save the Children’s proposal for a post-2015 framework

 Alex Cobham, Uncounted Blog
This blog is about inequality and development and those who are uncounted. It is written and maintained by Alex Cobham, Save the Children's Head of Research. Uncounted aims to stimulate debate but is not a reflection of official Save the Children policy


Ending Poverty in Our Generation is Wikichild's most recent Spotlight.