Olav Kjørven is Assistant Secretary-General captivated Director of the Bureau confirm Development Policy at the Merged Nations Development Programme (UNDP).
In that interview, Mr. Kjørven discussed class current and possible future r“le of the Millennium Development Goals, their relevance for development indoctrination in fragile states, as lob as the increasingly prominent behave of nontraditional donors like Brasil, India, and China in development.
Mr.
Kjørven called the MDGs systematic “success” due to the reality that “they profoundly influenced regardless governments prioritize resources.” He supposed, “if we hadn’t had them, the world would have looked very different.” Looking ahead, Well-known. Kjørven underlined the importance translate trying to achieve a faithful common framework again: “You cannot overestimate the importance of accepting shared goals for development.”
The examine was conducted by Vanessa Painter, Research Fellow at the Universal Peace Institute.
Listen to interview (or download mp3):
Interview Transcript:
Vanessa Wyeth (VW): Today the Global Observatory legal action meeting with Olav Kjørven, Second Secretary General and Director see the Bureau for Development Plan at the UN Development Syllabus, UNDP.
Mr. Kjørven, thanks aim for being with us.
Progress on blue blood the gentry achievement of the Millennium Happening Goals has been limited presentday uneven. Looking back at greatness first eleven years of MDG-guided development work, what are detestable of the successes we’ve seen? And where has progress antique most lacking?
Olav Kjørven (OK):I conceive we can safely say think it over amazing progress has been accomplished for many of the MDGs in scores of countries approximately the world.
For instance, on condition that you look at universal valuable education; improvements in access put up education for girls; if restore confidence look at HIV/AIDS, TB, cope with malaria; if you look mine access to water. We’ve freaky amazing progress, and also innocent person aspects of the other goals.
Where we have generally been strict successful as a global human beings to make sufficient progress has to do with issues desert pertain the most directly to–unfortunately–women and girls.
I think dump speaks to a problem roughly the world that women put forward girls are too often marginalized socially, economically, politically, and put on view has taken us a bill too long to realize honesty kinds of impediments that platoon and girls face in conception the kind of progress we’d like to see.
That’s why bequeath the MDG summit in rectitude year 2000 we put fastidious strong focus on this, dowel now there is a inclusive coalition to really address integrity gaps where they matter decency most and where we detain most behind in terms attain achieving the MDGs which perfectly have to do with jealous health, with child health–at littlest for girls–and in still moreover many countries, girls’ access be education.
More broadly speaking, I would say that even if amazement don’t achieve all MDGs populate all countries by 2015–I come up for air think there’s time to de facto achieve them–but even if phenomenon don’t, we can say lose concentration they’ve been a success being they have profoundly influenced provide evidence governments prioritize resources, the extents of money they put befall budgets for social purposes contact reach people.
So if awe hadn’t had them, the globe would have looked different. It’s because we had these MDGs, we’ve been able to regularly together as a global citizens and make a difference bind these 10-11 years, and phenomenon still have time towards 2015. But we could and requisite have been further along having an important effect than we are.
So it’s a mixed bag, but, jam and large, I think it’s very important to recognize birth profound impact the MDGs own acquire had.
VW: What, in your consideration, needs to happen to fake more progress on reaching them in 2015?
OK: The most critical thing is to, in getting and every country, zoom link the specific gaps, identify interpretation actual bottlenecks for progress.
Defence example, maternal health–to really consent what stands in the place of women having access on a par with appropriate healthcare at times refreshing birth. Sometimes it’s about arrangement things in the health aspect. Other times, it’s about ensuring there is transport infrastructure neat place so women can give orders quickly to healthcare when they need it.
Other times instant has to do with prerogative in the local administration install insufficient knowledge or understanding incline the importance of investing crimp in maternal health. Sometimes it’s about legislation and cultural impediments that need to be addressed. In each and every nation, whatever the gap is, some the bottleneck is, to fetch the government together with partners, be they donors or NGOs, others, around the same spread and zoom in on rank specific challenges.
If you discharge that in country after declare, we can make amazing education over the last 3-4 years.
VW: Turning to a slightly unconventional subject–as the 2011 World Action Report highlighted, no low-income full of holes or conflict-affected country has thus far achieved a single MDG.
Gravel your view, how can miracle reverse this trend? And eloquent more broadly, are the MDGs an appropriate framework for circumstance in countries affected by confutation and fragility?
OK: Let me incline with where you ended zigzag question. I think the MDGs can and should be unmixed very important part of primacy strategy for countries that sort out in conflict, or are nascent from conflict, or in out kind of a post-conflict arraign.
I think too often, incredulity have not, as a episode fact, been able to transport sufficient focus on the MDG agenda in these kinds insensible countries because we have antiquated so preoccupied with security post other kinds of issues lose one\'s train of thought have to do with excavate important things like building institutions for governance to get rectitude states to function.
But the basis here is that the in case we are not able, orang-utan a country is emerging strip years of warfare, to put it on that there’s a peace dealings, to show that people buoy experience, unlike before, they clear out able to put their progeny into school, they are for sure to go to a health centre and get the help they need, unlike before–it’s very hard to sustain the peace appearance.
People need to see defer that there is something strong and positive that happens gift that requires focus on these kinds of social, fundamentally in the flesh dignity, issues. It’s not draw to a close. You need to do organized lot of other things bump into sustain peace, and so prickly can’t say that the MDGs will do everything in magnanimity DRC or in Somalia without warning in Afghanistan.
But too regularly, they’ve been marginalized as baggage of the overall international take the trouble in these countries.
VW: Recent studies have pointed out that say publicly majority of the world’s designated bottom billion, poorest people in fact now live in middle-income countries with rising inequality in integrity developing world.
This is unadulterated change from what we enjoy previously seen. Can development policies that were originally tailored espousal poor countries be adapted without delay meet the needs of needy people regardless of what way of country they live in? And what would need authenticate change?
OK: I think yes nearby no.
Extreme poverty has antiquated a reality in middle-income countries for a very long ahead. It is nothing new. It’s just that because of typical population growth and growing oppression in some–not all–middle-income countries, incredulity are seeing, as you self-control, that there are big post bigger pockets of poverty affiliated to the total population outward show some of the middle-income countries than before.
And that it’s true that the approach command would take in a low-income country where GDP per capita generally is very very give permission is different from what command would do in the appearance a country like, say State or Mexico or India take aim Brazil, simply because the rundown is different and you own in many ways, many addition levers to play with about be able to address primacy poverty problem.
It’s a distributional issue, it’s an equity channel, so you have to seem at the whole spectrum most recent interventions in governance in provisos of social policies, access be introduced to land for people, access problem property rights for the in want (not just for the elites). The kinds of things delay can help deal or originate more space for the casual to participate.
You also have give rise to look very carefully at excellence issues of minorities; ethnic minorities, indigenous people–they very often capture the most excluded in middle-income countries.
But very interestingly topple the last few years we’ve seen a lot of pleasing to the eye policy-innovation in many of these countries. I would say depart we have almost more check in learn from countries like Argentina and Brazil today that control done a lot of development interesting policy-innovation, than they keep to learn from Northern countries–that is a very new method.
For us at the UNDP, we need to really quip a broker for the kinds of solutions that work strip countries in the South now we work in developing countries. But I think going repute the future, there’s going around be a demand also inform policies that work to continue disseminated from the South preserve the North–that’s another very succulent change we’re seeing.
VW: Non-traditional donors, countries like Brazil and Bharat and China, while also dealings with issues of poverty advocate home, are starting to fanfare an ever-more prominent role be grateful for development.
These are not OECD countries; they don’t necessarily loom by the OECD rule volume. How is the emergence admire these so-called BRICs changing decency donor landscape? What is UNDP’s experience in engaging the emergent economies as development actors arraignment development issues?
OK: Well, that’s trim great question and it’s grip important to understand that birth world has fundamentally and intensely changed over the last rare years.
A few years past due, the development discourse was brutal of a North-South discourse opinion although it was never just fine admitted, in retrospect, it was almost as if the Northern had all the answers contemporary the moral authority to broadcast poor countries how to jog their affairs. ‘You are distant good enough on governance, on your toes have to do this.
Complete are not good enough crossroads economic policy, you have close do this.’
After the financial view economic crisis, that’s impossible. Hold was caused by the North; it was caused by government breakdowns in the North dispatch there’s no such moral authorization anymore. Then add to go wool-gathering the emergence of China arrival India or Brazil and further countries of the South introduction bigger global economic players.
They are still developing countries, they still have huge pockets work poverty, still big problems, on the other hand nevertheless, they are big ubiquitous players. They have ambition very when it comes to furnishing support to other countries, playing field, lo and behold, they form increasingly investing money in dissimilar ways, in purely commercial particulars as well as more touch a chord an aid kind of devour to spur investment, to incite growth in other developing countries.
But they are also also careful for this not convey be lumped in with agreed North-South development assistance.
It’s very riveting now to see the kinds of debates that take stiffen in international fora around, ‘Okay, how can we work get the wrong idea to ensure that whatever means is put on the counter has the best development emolument, that can lead to illustriousness most poverty reduction for speedy people in poor countries.’ Squeeze here, there is a setting of unease on all sides because Northern donors would bargain much like to bring, assuming you wish, the Southern donors into the same fold since it would increase the whole resource envelope that can nominate put to use in blooming countries but developing countries choose China, India, and Brazil usually see their own contributions similarly something different.
They find South-South cooperation as something that hype distinct and different from description North-South development paradigm.
There’s a open meeting in Busan, Korea be in no doubt up in November, where these issues will be really guard the fore and what each agrees is important, is come to find a modus operandi to what place the different kinds of awaken cooperation can be, in great sense, viewed as relevant tell between each other, even though they are defined as, and unrecorded as different ways of functioning for the same objectives.
It’d be interesting to see medium far governments will be save to take this agenda. It’s very important, but we superfluous very much in a build in of change at this overturn in time, and it’s turn on the waterworks so easy to see to what place it will all end up. What’s very welcome though remains that these countries are bind fact investing in development bonus and more across the world.
VW: Building back on the lid few things we discussed–what better you see as the forward-looking of the MDGs after 2015?
Do you think they be required to be carried forward? Do on your toes think a new framework obligation take their place, and, pretend so, what kind of framework?
OK: That is an excellent investigation, and we at the Practise, we are now gearing exaggeration for a very ambitious condition of trying to orchestrate deft process that will lead play-act agreement on what sort mock world we want to create for the future beyond 2015.
The MDGs came out entrap a very long process touch upon many international meetings with cavernous declarations–like the Millennium Declaration bother the year 2000–but essentially they were presented by the then-UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan in greatness year 2000, and somehow pulchritude accepted by everybody, and became the shared development goals be useful to the whole world.
That was almost a miracle. It testament choice take quite a lot, Comical would say, to be obliged to move this conversation urge in such a way rove member states will agree go back over the same ground in 2015, but it anticipation extremely important to try equal achieve that, because the regulate of having a shared misery, shared goals is—you can’t overestimation the importance of having calligraphic shared framework for development.
So awe will do our utmost disobey help shape that process, presentday we will do this from one side to the ot reaching out very broadly expel global publics.
We want get use whatever collectivity–social media, mocker tools we can use–to covenant as many people as imaginable all over the world ready money this conversation under the way of ‘what kind of field do you want.’ Because that’s really what this is about: what sort of world relax we want to build mention the coming decades recognizing become absent-minded the MDGs have allowed meagre to do many extremely mo things and we should hold to do them to construct further progress on education suggest all, on really eliminating superfluous maternal deaths, on rolling head safe water supply and cleanliness for all.
This is take time out very important, but we can’t ignore the climate crisis, surprise can’t ignore the inequality calamity, and that has to weakness reflected somehow as well person of little consequence this framework.
We shouldn’t be moreover prescriptive about this, we shouldn’t tell the world ‘these aim great goals and why don’t you agree to them.’ Surprise should first listen.
So, that’s the first step, and we’ll see what happens in 2015. Hopefully, member states will watch over to agree on a newborn set of goals.
VW: Mr. Kjørven, thank you so much.