Post 2015: Global Action for an Inclusive and Sustainable Future

CHApTER FOuR
The main
challenge will
not be in reaching
consensus on the
need for a new
framework, but
in including all the
different priorities
of each actor and
of getting an
agreement that
is sufficiently
detailed to
produce concrete
results.
64
hoped. the fate of mDG8 and the difficult rio+20
process do not inspire confidence that there will
automatically be a new global agreement just
because the 2015 deadline is approaching. Indeed,
the very success of the mDGs is inspiring some to
want the new framework to cover a broader range
of issues including the SDGs first publicly mooted
at the rio+20 conference, thus complicating
the process. Furthermore, a strong disincentive
for the governments of developing countries to
engage in global cooperation is that many national
development goals have been achieved without
such agreement. china, India, brazil and other
mIcs, such as peru, largely achieved the mDGs for
themselves, and may have less of a stake in global
solidarity than countries in a weaker position. the
remarkable transformations of South Korea and
taiwan resulted from bilateral support, favourable
terms of trade and strong national leadership
rather than multilateral cooperation (rodrik,
2011). South–South cooperation has grown outside
global development frameworks, and will probably
continue to do so. the example of international trade
suggests that effective ‘minilateral’ cooperation is
more attractive to many countries than complex
global engagements, even if the potential gains from
a global agreement are much higher. this kind of
‘variable geometry’ is to the detriment of the un
system especially.
While it will not be easy to overcome these
obstacles, there are reasons to believe it can be
done. the main challenge will not be in reaching
consensus on the need for a new framework,
but in including all the different priorities of
each actor and of getting an agreement that is
sufficiently detailed to produce concrete results.
the mDGs have a high public profile and much
of this momentum is likely to carry through. Few
governments will want to be seen as responsible
for scuppering such a high profile process. there
are strong constituencies that will push for a new
agreement, including the un and its High-level
panel on the post-2015 Development agenda.
EuropEan rEport on DEvElopmEnt 2013
bilateral development agencies and ‘northern’
nGos will want to continue to rally support for
international development among citizens in oEcD
countries. least Developed countries are likely to
want a credible successor to the mDGs because
they see value in the international attention these
have provided, as well as the increased oDa it has
prompted. this is evident from the views expressed
in the three case studies of lDcs produced for this
report. a further ‘push factor’ is the political value
of a universal framework and goals that can be
referred to, even if not everyone adheres to them.
the mDGs and the related international agenda
on aid effectiveness have provided a basis for
building coordination and complementarity among
donors, encouraging transparency and fostering
predictability.
the Eu has already recognised the need for a new
global development framework: one of the themes
of this report is how the Eu might support a new
global consensus to succeed the mDGs. the 2011
the European commission policy statement on the
future of Eu development policy, Agenda for Change,
noted that continued focus on mDGs was necessary
but not sufficient for global development (com,
2011). In mid-2012 the commission conducted a
public consultation on the feasibility, potential shape
and scope of a post-mDGs framework. the purpose
of the consultation was to facilitate the emergence
of a common European position and provide
input for the commission’s communication. the
consultation found that European stakeholders
broadly agree that a new global framework is
necessary and that it should include obligations and
responsibilities for all countries. moreover, while
support for poor and fragile countries is crucial
the focus needs to be on people living in poverty
rather than on governments. responses underlined
that the early engagement of private sector and
especially emerging donors was essential for the
long-term success of any future global development
framework (com, 2012). the recent commission
communication (com, 2013) makes proposals