Post 2015: Global Action for an Inclusive and Sustainable Future

egimes, and donor-driven aid conditionality to
encourage domestic economic and governance
reforms in developing countries. this postcolonial
development model, with its cold War
origins, its attendant good intentions and its
inherent contradictions, is becoming a thing of
the past. Incentives for new forms of development
cooperation are being driven partly by the marked
increase in ‘South–South’ cooperation (SSc) as
emerging powers look for markets and resources,
and as poorer countries look for options other than
traditional oDa for supporting their development
goals. the case of côte d’Ivoire illustrates that
emerging South–South partnerships, such as
those with china, that include various grants and
cooperation agreements, as well as the building
of hospitals, agricultural projects, a conference
centre and support to build the Grand-bassam
highway and the Soubré hydro-electric dam, were
widely welcomed as these were seen to represent
cooperation among ‘equals’.
It is increasingly apparent that global development
challenges require new forms of institutionalised
international cooperation in a variety of sectors.
Developing countries expect to be fully involved
in decisions about such institutions and the
commitments that participation entails. any global
post-2015 institutional framework for development
will need to reflect the agreement of traditional
donor countries and organisations, emerging SSc
providers and also recipient countries (Fues et al.,
2012: 243). South–South cooperation is starting
to affect formal institutions, as is evident from the
SSc providers engagement with the international
process on aid and development effectiveness at
the busan High-level Forum (HlF) in late 2011.
the fractious post-busan discussions on a set of
indicators for monitoring the busan partnership for
Effective Development co-operation suggest that
disagreements about transparency and the untying
of aid will be hard to resolve, even though lessdeveloped
countries want new donors to improve
in these areas (tran, 2012). the rwanda case study
(abbott et al., 2012), for example, makes the case
for enhanced transparency for all donors, including
providers of SSc, as well as for greater integration
of the principles of aid effectiveness by these new
donors. nevertheless, although the commitment of
brazil, china and India to the busan partnership
is voluntary, non-binding, and yet to be tested in
practice, the fact that they are engaging indicates a
degree of willingness and interest.
at the same time, the growing importance of
fragile and conflict-affected states as one focus
of global poverty also demands changes in the
approaches used in international development
cooperation. First, conflict prevention will need
to become more actively mainstreamed through
development cooperation and beyond, ensuring that
external action will at minimum not exacerbate the
potential for violent conflict and ideally contribute
to reducing the likelihood of such conflict. Second,
the objectives and instruments applied in fragile
states need to differ from those used in non-fragile
contexts. recent work by the oEcD/IncaF, the
ErD 2009, and the 2011 World Development Report
on Conflict, Security and Development (World
bank, 2011) have led to new insights on the unique
approaches required to help countries to overcome
fragility. this new consensus has translated into a
new Deal for Engagement in Fragile States, also
adopted at the busan HlF. In turn this is feeding
into the formulation of the peacebuilding and
Statebuilding Goals (International Dialogue on
peacebuilding and Statebuilding, 2011). It is not yet
clear how these may be linked to global targets.
there are major barriers to negotiating a
consensus on a new global framework to succeed
the mDGs. an obvious stumbling block is the
experience with similar international agreements
based on consensus decision-making. Despite high
points like the millennium Summit and the paris–
accra–busan process on aid and development
effectiveness, global cooperation on development
has not been as effective as many of its advocates
poSt-2015: Global actIon For an IncluSIvE anD SuStaInablE FuturE
Any global
post-2015
institutional
framework for
development will
need to reflect the
agreement of
traditional donor
countries and
organisations,
emerging SSC
providers and
also recipient
countries.
63