Post-2015 Update – March 2014

The March OWG session provided member states an opportunity to provide initial comments on the first draft of a “focus areas” document. In the April session, member states will work through the 19 focus areas, broken down into 8 clusters. We suspect the areas that are the least controversial will be addressed first. For that session (March 31-April 4), the co-chairs have circulated four documents:

1.       A slightly modified focus areas document – no drastic changes expected.

2.       An inter-linkages mapping document – focusing on the highest impact links across goals—as many governments indicated they would like to see how the various inter-linkages fit together;

3.       A two pager on how goals could be technically structured for discussion; and

4.       A compendium of existing targets that speak to potential goal areas, to ensure that the OWG is accounting for already agreed upon commitments and not duplicating work (i.e. UNFCCC).

[The latter two documents have not yet been made available].

By the end of the April session, the co-chairs expect the OWG to have a better sense of proposed goals or targets, and we suspect the OWG is unlikely to discuss specific indicators. The program of work for April can be found here, as well as the co-chairs’ letter encouraging member states to begin consolidating and clustering the focus areas.

OWG meets on “Focus Areas Document”

The February 19 focus areas document was discussed March 3-5, and a few potential “redlines” emerged. Several member states raised concerns about including sexual and reproductive rights and indicated sexual rights would be a redline; others questioned whether peace and stability as well as governance should be treated as a core goal or as an enabler for development. Other concerns were expressed about how to address the concept of Common but Differentiated Responsibilities (CBDR) within a universal agenda and the means of implementation for making sure the goals are met – including ODA and financing, but also technology transfer, capacity-building, and other non-financial means. One proposal that had a traction among developing countries was to build a means of implementation strategy around each goal area, as many indicated that this would give more “teeth” to the agenda and make governments more likely to follow through on commitments.

Joint meeting of the Expert Committee on Financing and OWG

For the first time, the OWG and the Intergovernmental Committee of Experts on Sustainable Development Financing (ICESDF) held a joint meeting, in which the co-chairs of both groups briefed on their work, and member states were able to ask questions and provide suggestions for the way forward. The most common question was how the groups’ mandates fit together. The co-chairs explained that the two groups represent mutually reinforcing processes working towards the same overall objective of sustainable development. While the OWG’s mandate is goal-setting and the Expert Committee’s is setting a financing strategy, both have development at the core and are synchronized in timing. Each of the reports are due by September 2014 and will serve as inputs in the SG’s synthesis report.

Another question was raised regarding how the Expert Committee’s mandate overlaps with other processes, like Monterrey and Doha. The response was that while those are intergovernmental processes, the expert committee, as mandated by the Rio +20 Outcome document, is an independent group to provide technical recommendations, whereas governments together will determine the political outcome, defining specific policies and allocating funds depending on national circumstances. The co-chairs noted, however, that all of these processes are closely related, and that preparatory work for a follow up to the Monterrey conference would begin this fall, though it is unclear whether that conference will take place before or after the September 2015 summit.

ICESDF co-chairs asked the OWG about what would be the financing committee’s most useful contribution. Several member states said they would like to have a greater understanding of the full range of financial flows available, what is required to unlock them, and what kinds of flows are best suited to what types of objectives.

Other key questions and comments included:

         How climate finance and the UNFCCC will factor in, and whether climate commitments should be considered new and additional or as part of the same “pot” of development funds. Experts seemed to agree that their work should consider the urgent needs related to climate finance but the “nitty-gritty” should be handled in the UNFCCC.

         Reassurance to LDCs and countries in vulnerable situations that ODA will not disappear; the financing committee clarified that it does not seek to eliminate ODA but to identify sources that could supplement it, given that the challenges we face now are much greater than 20 years ago.

         Rule of law and an enabling environment as essential to attracting private sector investment. Several countries felt that governments should not rely too heavily on the private sector, thereby letting the public sector “off the hook.”  The committee clarified that private investment does not replace public commitments, and that all available flows must be on the table. Harnessing funds from illicit financial flows and tax havens must also be considered as sources of development finance.

         A recurring call for building the means of implementation around each goal/target and CBDR as a guiding principle for the framework. Some developing countries said that in addition to identifying financing for each goal, other means such as technology transfer, capacity building, and trade relations should also be included.

         The Committee pointed out that they are “not in the business of budgeting the focus areas” or making policy recommendations; rather, they are focused on crafting a more holistic vision for tackling sustainable development – ideally, through an integrated development agenda with a financial strategy in place to meet whatever collective ambition is set beyond 2015.

PGA High-Level Event on Women, Youth & Civil Society

On March 6-7, the President of the General Assembly (PGA) convened a High-Level Event on the Contributions of Women, the Young and Civil Society to the Post-2015 Development Agenda. The objective was to build upon the work of the OWG, addressing key cross-cutting issues such as inequalities, social protection, economic inclusion, and access to quality education and skills. The need for transparency and accountability mechanisms was also highlighted, so as to ensure that civil society has the space to actively engage in implementing and monitoring the post-2015 agenda. The program of speakers can be found here.

Must Reads

         The SDSN’s preliminary draft report of indicators for sustainable development goals is open for public consultation and comments through March 28, 2014.

         Paying for Zero: Global Development Finance and the Post-2015 Agenda, by members of the WEF’s Global Agenda Council on Poverty and Sustainable Development, argues that a complementary mix of public, private and “blended” finance, both domestically and internationally, as well as greater ambition and innovation in development finance, will be required to pay for post-2015 goals that can eliminate extreme poverty, pernicious inequality, and environmentally unsustainable economic activity.

         Independent Research Forum 2015’s piece “Connecting the dots: Can a ‘nexus’ approach help produce better SDGs?” suggests that a “nexus” approach to addressing water, energy and food security may prove to be a useful model for developing the SDGs.

         This Data and Development blog from the World Bank says that increasing the quantity, quality, availability, and usability of data for development requires addressing the market failures that lead to data gaps in developing countries, and requires cooperation among governments, national statistics offices, donor agencies, NGOs, academics, private sector and others.

         This OECD policy brief,  “Financing the Unfinished Business of Gender Equality and Women’s Rights” analyzes donor investments and outlines six policy areas that are priorities for the post-2015 agenda because of their catalytic impact on achieving gender equality and women’s rights: girls’ education; SRHR; women’s economic empowerment; women, peace and security; women’s participation and leadership; and, violence against women and girls.

         The IISD’s summary report and brief analysis of OWG 9 provides a recap of member state views in the OWG’s March meeting.

1,194 total views, 1 views today