Discussion
Return to [previous page]
E-discussion Facilitator
on Tue, February 23, 2016 at 10.33 pm

The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development: scope and implications

This discussion is now closed. Thank you for your participation.
 How can the guiding principle of 'Leave no one behind' be put into practice in implementing the 2030 Agenda in different development contexts (e.g. least developed countries, middle-income countries, high-income countries, fragile states etc.)?
 At the international level, what are challenges to ensuring policy coherence for sustainable development? What are some examples of best practice and/or who are the "trail blazers" leading the way to improved coherence?
 How could the UN development system provide coordinated and integrated support for the achievement of the 2030 Agenda?
Moderator's Message

 

Welcome to the discussion on Thematic Window I: “The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development: scope and implications”. The discussion starts today and will continue until 25 March 2016.

As you know, the historic 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development was adopted at the United Nations Sustainable Development Summit in September 2015. Leaders from around the world unanimously adopted a holistic, universal, transformative, 15-year global plan of action to end poverty, reduce inequalities and protect our planet.

This new Agenda cannot succeed without the firm commitments of all countries and all stakeholders. Now is the time to roll up our sleeves and begin the difficult task of figuring out how to implement the new Agenda.

One of the main features of the 2030 Agenda is that it is universal. That means that it applies to all countries, developed and developing, low, middle and high-income countries. This makes the task of identifying the right implementing tools and policies ever more complex, as different countries will have differing capacities, priorities and starting points. How do we carry on the unfinished business of poverty eradication and the MDGs and ensure that no one is left behind?

We are certain to encounter challenges to policy coherence at all levels. What do we see as the main challenges to ensuring coherence for sustainable development at the international level? How can we improve policy coherence in the context of a universal agenda through approaches that highlight synergies, trade-offs and the transboundary impacts of domestic policy choices? Strengthening support systems is also an important aspect that we should consider. We need to ensure that the appropriate capacities are built in international and regional institutions, particularly for integrated policy-making.

The UN development system needs to make the necessary adjustments to support Member States to implement the 2030 Agenda and achieve the SDGs. Effective support to implementation will require the UN to deliver as one, bringing together the normative and operational aspects of its work, and to strengthen its capacity to deliver in countries with new and different needs in widely divergent contexts. 

I look forward to hearing your thoughts and ideas and hope that you will share with us your success stories and challenges you are facing in implementing the 2030 Agenda.

Diana Alarcón
Chief, Development Strategy and Policy Unit - DPAD
UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs

Tags:
Visibility: 
Public
Please or to post a comment.
Featured Comment (What is this ?)
Diana Alarcon Discussion Moderator
Fri, May 6, 2016 at 03.40 pm

Week 4: 21-27 March 2016

Discussion Summary

 

I would like to thank everyone for their contributions and their highly interactive exchanges during the final week of the e-Discussion.

 

Below is a summary of the key points made during the final week of discussion:

 

How can the guiding principle of 'Leave no one behind' be put into practice in implementing the 2030 Agenda in different development contexts (e.g. least developed countries, middle-income countries, high-income countries, fragile states etc.)?

 

 

The implementation of the SDGs will require the participation of people from all sectors of society including state, civil society, education and private sector. Among other things, CSO’s can work with the state to integrate the SDGs with national development plans, formulating policies, resource allocation and monitoring and follow up. The role of civil society groups, especially those engaging women and youth, was noted by participants as key in advancing the implementation agenda in promoting peace and education in harmony with nature and in monitoring its progress through participatory monitoring. 

 

In the first phase of the implementation of the Agenda 2030, to make sure that the agenda takes root at a local level, each country’s government and its leaders should consider the following:

 

  • develop a clear strategy on how the SDGs will be implemented;

 

  • ensure that the process will be inclusive and participatory;

 

  • conduct future spending reviews to ensure a coherent cross-department SDGs delivery;

 

  • appoint a Government Minister for day-to-day responsibility of the SDGs; and

 

  • allow and support progress to be independently reviewed by academia, business and civil society.

 

A fundamental step for ensuring that the implementation of the 2030 Agenda ‘leaves no one behind’ lies in the active involvement of local communities both in consultations leading to the design of relevant sustainable development strategies and programmes and in subsequent implementation activities. The ‘localization’ of the SDGs, including the active involvement of local governments and civil society organizations, should be an essential step for the ownership of the 2030 Agenda, its implementation and its results.

 

Small businesses are the present and the future of sustainable development.  More thought needs to be given to better, more efficient management and utilization of existing resources.  The SDGs required extensive participation of stakeholders in their designation and definition and they will need universal commitment to their achievement, and that includes business at all levels. There is a need to discuss how to elicit commercial interest, locally.

 

Social inclusion is a key tenet of Sustainable Development, yet rural communities have been left behind in development terms through a complex mix of social, political, technological, economic and environmental factors. It will be very challenging to implement the SDGs in these communities. Encouraging CBOs to work together and share their networks with each other would substantially increase the impact in rural community development. The need to empower rural communities to drive the implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals through youth-led collaborative initiatives that inform effective implementation, monitoring and follow-up and advocacy campaigns was stressed. Necessary actions include popularizing and localizing SDGs, cooperation and partnerships, ICT for rural communities, capacity building, mobilizing resources and monitoring and evaluation. Village Institutes established in Turkey to train teachers in reading and writing as well as modern agricultural methods as a part of the country’s rural development project were proposed as an example of maximizing the use of scarce resources to “leave no one behind”.

 

The need for the full, effective and meaningful participation of indigenous peoples in the implementation of sustainable development strategies was highlighted. One contributor stressed the importance of social inclusion of vulnerable groups including persons with disabilities and shared good practices of including persons with disabilities in society (Asia-Pacific and Japan). The need for the active engagement, education (especially secondary education) and economic empowerment of women was stressed.

 

The need to localize SDGs to measure progress at the local and bio-regional level was stressed. Communities must be made aware of Agenda 2030 and encouraged and supported in implementing the SDGs. It is thus fundamentally important to close the gap between implementation at the local and national levels and ensure both horizontal and vertical integration (across all sectors or issue areas and all levels of society and government) and commitment to planning and implementation at all levels of government. The need to encourage active participation by women in the rural communities; include a major focus on ICT for rural communities; Train teams on proposal writing and grant applications; Train the trainers; Equip youth leaders with skills that they can transfer to rural communities; Form partnerships with national organizations and global organizations and vice versa; and ensure that funds are made available at both national and global level for capacity building was emphasized.

 

"No one left behind" and creating an alternative model in harmony with nature must be about a new natural community where meaningful livelihoods are a core ingredient in the building of that community.  Communities need to come together and design the indicators they actually want and then start making these happen.

 

The real problem is one of needing to persuade our historically imbued institutional instruments to adapt to allow such multidimensional issues as these to be fairly and democratically explored. Not everyone has access to the necessary technologies. A more representative version of a global narrative must emerge. It’s the mechanisms, the instruments of bringing about change that really need to be addressed in a sensitive and considered manner.

 

The mutual benefit philosophy should guide development partnership for achieving the SDGs. Due to its threat to peace and stability and its political social, cultural and economic implications, migration should be an important factor in catalyzing the global partnership for achieving the SDGs.

 

The Agenda for Sustainable Development Goals document fails to recognize a crucial support system: the family and their faith-based communities.   Sustainable development begins with a strong family system. Support for free expression of religion needs to be included in the Sustainable Development Goals. Family systems and religious institutions are key elements in all development contexts. States and other secular institutions should work in partnership with them.

 

The SDG should include a stronger emphasis on biomedical research and therapy for older persons. Ageing-related diseases are on the rise in developing countries and constitute the largest incidence in absolute terms. The need to research and treat aging-related diseases needs to be emphasized both for the developed and developing countries.

 

Men are born equal, but they became more and more unequal, for lack of tangible and intangible means, occasions and opportunities. The only tool for social equity is, and should be, EDUCATION. Education in schools and in the community can become a change agent. Quality Education could ensure all are equal and no one is left behind. Education is one of the surest ways out of poverty. Most of the SDGs revolve around quality education. By investing in quality education to improve human capital most countries can achieve poverty reduction alongside most of the SDGs. Education depends on governments; most of them do not fit out the right conditions. A supra-governmental organization is necessary to equalize the same opportunities for all, since education is seen as an expenditure by governments. Sustainable community education needs to be taught in schools and inside communities themselves as part of social services. This enables every community resident to be a change agent in the world and every community to believe in the dignity of their life and for the rest of us to appreciate the dignity in everyone else's.

 

The need to launch a big communications campaign about the relevance of the commitment to "Transforming Our World: the Agenda for Sustainable Development to 2030" and the access to and training in the use of broadband and ICT tools to spread best practices was stressed.

 

Leaving no one behind means counting in all people, going beyond inclusion, enhancing contributions of all people and addressing inequality between people of all ages, countries and regions. Implementing social protection floors which guarantee income security and access to basic services across the life course, together with that of achieving universal health coverage, guaranteeing access to quality basic health care without risk of catastrophic out of pocket expenses, are essential as a concrete basis for leaving no one behind. An important aspect of "Leaving no one behind" can be achieved by providing healthful, resilient public spaces in human settlements of all sizes. Inclusive public spaces are spatially accessible to all, and offer space for the community to provide inputs, exchange ideas and build consensus.

 

Leaving no one behind is about inclusive development comprising inclusive voice, inclusive action and inclusive results and that this can be put into practice by ensuring multi-stakeholder engagement in the design, implementation and review of national level policies and plans for the 2030 Agenda. All social stakeholders must play an important role of management, innovation and participation in sustainable development. Development at all times should be horizontal, inclusive and a self-managing process that makes communities be engaged, through the identification of their needs and the development of creative solutions. It was reiterated that sustained development can only come from a flow of new ideas to solve new and old problems, access to such a market appears central if we are to leave no one behind, and allow all nations to benefit from their human creativity in a sustained way. The need for hands-on solutions was emphasized. The danger of falling into the analysis paralysis that has been the most common end of many problems was stressed. Overthinking or overanalyzing the problem implies no decision or action taken; therefore, a waste of resources and making the problem bigger is the inevitable end. The need to examine how we determine that some people are left behind was highlighted. The factors that are contributing to such a situation need to be measured and addressed. One contributor suggested the establishment of a Poverty Fund as a non-profit social company that will build its emphasis around accelerating the implementation of the SDGs (Agenda 2030) by mobilizing the world around specialized resource mobilization campaigns to end global poverty everywhere by 2030. 

 

As the main and strong leading structure in United Nations, it was stressed that ECOSOC, together with Security Council and other UN organs, must hold Member States accountable, ensuring good governance, respect for human rights and right to development.

 

At the international level, what are challenges to ensuring policy coherence for sustainable development? What are some examples of best practice and/or who are the "trail blazers" leading the way to improved coherence?

 

“The People’s Coast Ecovillage Network” (PECEN) initiative in The Gambia involves eleven villages, including three from Southern Senegal. The villages have signed an Accord to transform their villages into ecovillages. Participants are teaching others the techniques related to the preservation of their ecology, culture, social organisation and economy that they have learned.  Levels of self-reliance, self-confidence and responsibility-taking have shot up, especially among the female participants.

 

The best way to provide employment opportunities for these villagers would be to engage them in transitioning to more sustainable ways of doing things in their own community. Ecovillage communities around the globe are demonstrating how to effectively live in harmony with nature, create a regenerative economy, restore the natural environment, replenish soil health, adopt biological waste processes and eliminate waste and phase out or eliminate the use of toxic substances.  This is a model that needs to be replicated and scaled up around the globe as a part of the 2030 Agenda and SDGs process in order to meet people’s basic needs and fulfill the SDGs. The Global Ecovillage Network (GEN) is developing a Pan African ecovillage development program based upon the many models and examples throughout Africa that have been created in local communities.

 

In Chololo Ecovillage community in Tanzania, as a part of a climate mitigation and adaptation program funded by the EU, 26 different interventions within various sectors of community life were adopted. As a result, they doubled agricultural productivity in just a few years and achieved many of the other goals listed above. In Southern Africa the Regional Schools and Colleges Permaculture (ReSCOPE) Programme works in schools and with students to regreen the natural environment where the schools are located. Produce that the children grow is sold in the local community, soil health is restored along with biodiversity and the students learn about a permaculture approach to sustainable development.

 

Gender equality has been at the heart of the Global Goal for Sustainable Development. The UK Government launched the new cross-government Violence Against Women and Girls strategy, which sets out ambitious plans for building on work to prevent violence, to support victims and to take action against perpetrators and tackling the challenges facing women in the age of technology and social media.

 

The achievement of the 2030 Agenda requires capacity-building and inclusiveness, as well as the creation of conditions that enable the fulfillment of individual potential closely linked to their social environment. The 2030 Agenda must be translated into national and local development plans immediately via reforms and communication efforts in order to harmonize local and national development initiatives with global policies. Local efforts are essential for the success of the 2030 Agenda and must be constructed and adopted by all stakeholders, especially non-state actors. Institutional reforms alone cannot drive a transformative development agenda without other essential inputs such as material and financial resources, leadership, human capital and political accountability that recognize the concerns of communities and respond through coherent interventions. This requires ensuring a wider representation in decision-making processes and follow-up mechanisms for Civil Society Organizations at the global, regional and national levels, but especially at the local level. 

 

The global rules that will form the basis for coherence must be evidence-based, not ideologically driven. Creating incentives to take risks associated with breaking new ground must then be matched with a policy of encouraging risk taking, through an institutional frameworks that reduces risks overall.

 

"Do not leave anyone behind," requires a true understanding and ownership by citizens of its meaning, connected to current global issues, social, environmental and economic, and those of Governance. This understanding could be facilitated through civic education to disseminate knowledge related to the complexity of the elements involved in the SDGs for students as well as civil servants.

 

At the global level, the new universal, sustainable development agenda requires an international community and a UN system that is “fit for purpose”. Recent crises have underscored the need for the UN to become more agile and responsive. The current Ebola epidemic has highlighted the need for significant reforms and strengthening of WHO, including fundamental changes in its financing and its agility to engage with non-state actors including NGOs and the private sector. Sectoral cooperation, both multi-sectoral and inter-sectoral is the cornerstone of political response, and only through such cooperation will countries begin to witness progress towards achieving the SDGs. A challenge for the UN system to achieve results in health and NCDs will be to “deliver as one”. A promising example of coordinated global governance is the recently formed UN Inter-Agency Task Force on NCDs (IATF), which convenes a range of UN agencies to support the NCD response at global and country levels.

 

How could the UN development system provide coordinated and integrated support for the achievement of the 2030 Agenda?

 

The UN development system could provide coordinated and integrated support for the achievement of the 2030 Agenda through:

 

  1. Promoting immediate selection of One Worldwide Approach, Whole of the UN System including WBG and IMF Approach;

 

  1. Promoting an immediate shift from silos to synergy and fragmentation to Multi Stakeholder Partnership;

 

  1. Promoting Innovative Use of Science and Technology;

 

  1. Promoting Innovative Use of Monitoring and Evaluation results;

 

  1. Promoting Innovative Use of Finance for Development results;

 

  1. Promoting Change and Modernization in the UN System including WBG and IMF to become Fit for the 21st Century and to become more cost effective and deliver better;

 

  1. Promoting Attitudinal, Behavioral and Cultural Change within the UN System including WBG and IMF;

 

  1. Immediately addressing the current lack of clarity with regard to an overall point of integration to synthesize and oversee the implementation effort in its entirety; and

 

  1. Immediately addressing all How To(s) and Know How(s) within (1) – (8).

 

Development partners must review the Paris, Accra and Busan Declarations and put them into practice.  The UN development system needs to help all SDG implementing countries adopt and utilize an integrated approach to development management (covering all components of the development cycle).  By working with the governments and "encouraging" them to adopt an integrated approach, the countries themselves would be able to get a better handle and better manage their development initiatives and to produce better development results. Many countries need this assistance and support to guide them on the one hand, while maintaining their country-driven priorities and policies on the other. The integrated approach to development has shown positive results in Malaysia and several other countries in Asia and Africa.

 

To reach the ambitious goals of the 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda, there must be a broader understanding of development support. Crisis, fragility, conflict and protracted displacement are central development concerns. The collective responsibility in the 2030 Agenda to reach the furthest behind first includes the 100 million of the most vulnerable people targeted by the humanitarian community. Peace and democratization are the foundation for sustainable development. Therefore, work must be integrated to bring together resources from across the development, human rights, humanitarian and peace and security pillars of the system.

 

The UN needs to do better at addressing political blockages to development and ensuring support to SDG planning and implementation recognizing and embedding solid conflict analysis. The UNDG has adopted the Conflict and Development Analysis methodology as an agency neutral tool for just such a purpose. In addition, UN programming should be improved and augmented with a focus on inclusive and transparent governance, the establishment of the rule of law, reduction of violence, and addressing inequalities, in particular, in conflict settings.

 

In its own planning, the UN can focus on its leveraging role in delivering collective and joint outcomes, including by prioritizing prevention, peacebuilding, preparedness and resilience building. This approach needs to be piloted concretely through country implementation. We have some positive lessons from putting in place genuine system-wide frameworks to build on including the Global Focal Point for Rule of Law (UNDP-DPKO), the Joint Programmes which UNDP and DPA manage on conflict prevention, and electoral processes.

 

There is also a need to rethink the link between UN financing architecture and how the UN system plans across humanitarian, development and peacebuilding dimensions. Ideally, there should be one, coherent framework that can be financed as a comprehensive whole through multi-year commitments.  We can learn much from the progress of the Somali Compact, and the principles of peacebuilding and state-building promoted in the New Deal. Donors also need to rethink coherence within their own financing architecture so that they can provide incentives for the UN system to work together across existing silos. This includes reformulating how “gap issues” such as solutions to protracted displacement should be financed as part of the Agenda 2030.

 

An empowered leadership at the country level (Resident Coordinator/Humanitarian Coordinator), that oversees collective outcomes, including humanitarian, development and peacebuilding, is a prerequisite for a shift in the way that the system delivers the 2030 Agenda.  They should be able to call on and mobilize the capacities and resources across the system, to work together on joint products and services to deliver as one.

 

The UN, therefore, could lay down the broader 2030 principles framework in consultation with stakeholders and provide an enabling support/assistance to nations to align their contextual policies/implementation to the agreed principles and use the agreed frames to achieve both policy coherence as well as coordinated implementation for the 2030 Agenda.

 

The UN development system can provide coordinated and integrated support through enabling the participation of all stakeholders in the sustainable development discussion. This should consider a system in which policies and frameworks are fair, clear, concise and democratically adopted for the successful implementation of the 2030 Agenda. This should include the establishment of stronger and more inclusive partnerships. The United Nations should reflect the reality of today's world through the inclusion of efficient, effective, transparent and accountable mechanisms for discussions and negotiations.

 

The coordination, development and dissemination of methods and content of “leaving no one behind” should be coordinated by the UN to promote the development of a common culture. A powerful potential tool for dissemination is a peer to peer organization at the human settlement level where cities and towns can learn from each other. One contributor suggested the creation of a visual Results Framework map consisting of all SDGs to facilitate a better understanding of the logic, and increase the chances of solving the relevant development challenges.

 

Management of risk is all about expanding the taking and managing of risk and reducing uncertainty in new ideas then may benefit greatly from a coordinated and integrated support promoting institutional development. The support for the above process may be clearly in the convening power of many UN institutions. The institutions thus reduce uncertainty so that firms interacting with each other can take on higher risks in inventing new ideas.

Lanre Rotimi from
Tue, May 17, 2016 at 09.10 am
Dear Team,

Please find attached Commentaries on the HLPF Modalities and Resolution on Review of SG Report on Follow Up and Review.

It will be recalled that at the 12 May meeting, co-facilitator Petersen highlighted the consultation process 'mandate of transparency'. All ongoing processes should also be 'mandate of transparency' that produce outcome documents that are Vision and Words with Action. 

Best wishes,

Lanre Rotimi
Director General
International Society for Poverty Elimination /
Economic Alliance Group and
Director NEHAP (New End Hunger and Poverty)



On Thursday, 12 May 2016, 13:00, NEHAP INITIATIVE <nehap.initiative@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
Lanre Rotimi from
Thu, May 12, 2016 at 12.27 pm
Global Consultation on Review of SG Report on Follow Up and Review of 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development - 12 May 2016 Meeting

Dear All,

The co-facilitators have called a meeting today (in few hours) for first reading of Draft Resolution on Follow Up and Review of the 2030 Agenda and aim to have a final draft resolution ready for adoption by end May 2016.

The ECOSOC President has circulated a letter on possible modalities of 2016 HLPF and has requested comments to help improve the document by 18 May.

The co-facilitators of the Review of the SG Report on Follow Up and Review have stated that they are in regular consultation with co-facilitators of other processes and that they are working towards ensuring coherent approach across the entire UN System - UNO, WBG and IMF.

It will be recalled that we earlier circulated Commentary (1) on the Draft Resolution on Follow Up and Review with promise to circulate Commentary (2) suggesting edits to Draft Resolution language and text.

Our view it that the ECOSOC President's letter underline need for the co-facilitators to pilot affairs at today's meeting in ways that effectively address key points made in Commentary (1) and also announce deadline for submission of comments / edits, if these are to be processed into final draft ready for adoption by end May. Given the gaps in ongoing Global Consultation, there may be need to extend date final draft ready for adoption may be released.

It is against this background that we wish to make the following comments:-
1. The NGO MG is yet to begin Global Consultation. TAP Network began Global Consultation on 10 May. As at time of this mail on Day 2, no Member has commented. However, a Member on Day 1 suggested the Google Document be made available to all 9 MGs and 3 or 4 other Stakeholders, this way MGoS submit a Single HLPF Paper. As at this time on Day 2, no Member has responded to this suggestion.

2. Points made in ECOSOC Presidents letter regarding MGoS highlight Resolutions 67/290 and 70/1 to recommend Active Participant Role for MGoS. However, paragraph 12 in the Draft Resolution highlight only Resolution 67/290 to recommend Observer Participant Role for MGoS. This contradiction needs to be resolved in favor of Active Participant Role for MGoS.

3. NEHAP/ISPE/EAG Commentary (1) raise fundamental issues of Engagement Mechanism and ECOSOC accreditation etc that needs to be professionally tackled if MGoS in Active Participant Role are to deliver on their duties and responsibilities as well as enjoy their rights.

4. The co-facilitators of the Review of the SG Report on Follow Up and Review process as well as co-facilitators of all other processes, with the exception of co-facilitators of the UNDP and UNDESA e-Discussion 2016 process continue to pilot affairs in ways that over answer What questions and avoid or evade clear and correct answer to How questions. As long as How questions remain unanswered, Outcome Documents of these processes will remain Vision and Words without Action. This will ensure past mistakes - flaws and failures remain re-occurring decimals and work towards achieving Global Goals - AAAA, SDG, COP21, Agenda 21 Vision Ambitions in Communities in 306/183 UN Member States will be uphill task or mirage.

5. We are concerned that UN CEB April 2016 Outcome Document is yet to be made available to the public. We urge relevant authorities to speedily release this document.

6. It is pertinent to note that Draft Resolution being prepared by co-facilitators of the review of the SG Report on Follow Up and Review is not a stand alone document but a document that should make clear recommendations on ways and means of improving the SG Report on Follow Up and Review earlier rejected by UN Member States. As long as there is no revised SG Report on Follow Up and Review accepted by UN Member States; revised similar SG Reports accepted by UN Member States and complementary New SG Reports accepted by UN Member States, very little progress will be made in 2016 Year of Implementation and probability of achieving SDG by 2030 target date would be low. Allowed to occur in reality - that is fail to achieve the SDG by 2030 target date, the ultimate consequences for 7 Billion Citizens in both Developed and Developing Countries could be catastrophic.  

7. We do look forward to co-facilitators of the Review of the SG Report on Follow Up and Review process and other relevant UN System Authorities response to points we have raised. 

Best wishes,

Lanre Rotimi
Director General
International Society for Poverty Elimination /
Economic Alliance Group and
Director NEHAP (New End Hunger and Poverty)




On Wednesday, 11 May 2016, 10:07, NEHAP INITIATIVE <nehap.initiative@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
Lanre Rotimi from
Wed, May 11, 2016 at 10.17 am
Dear All,

Please find attached herewith our Commentary (1) on the Draft Resolution circulated by co-Facilitators reviewing SG Report on Follow Up and Review for your information and appropriate follow up action.

We are concerned that despite of the fact that our request for copy UN CEB April 2016 Outcome Document has been made public, the Document is yet to be made available to the public.
 
Best wishes,
 
Lanre Rotimi
Director General
International Society for Poverty Elimination /
Economic Alliance Group and
Director NEHAP (New End Hunger and Poverty)


On Friday, 6 May 2016, 17:43, NEHAP INITIATIVE <nehap.initiative@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
Lanre Rotimi from
Fri, May 6, 2016 at 05.29 pm
Dear All,

We are pleased that 2030 Agenda: Scope and Implications Strand has joined National Implementation Strand of the UNDP and UNDESA e-Discussion 2016 to adopt key points in NEHAP/ISPE/EAG submissions to UNDP ad UNDESA e-Discussion 2016 that are crucial if Global Goals - AAAA, SDG, COP21 and Agenda 21 are to be Vision and Words with Action and if implementation as well as monitoring and evaluation of the implementation of all Agenda Items from Community to Global levels is to achieve increasing convergence between Vision Intention and Reality in each Community in each UN Member State by 2030 target date. 

This is indeed cheering news. It is our hope that the Integrated Report of the 3 Strands will produce a First Draft SG Report on e-Discussion 2016 that would be released soon. We do look forward to making contributions that could help improve the Draft SG Report on e-Discussion 2016.

We observe that the attendance of Heads of UNO, WBG and IMF at UN CEB April 2016 is evidence that our type of advocacy is being increasingly taken seriously by relevant UN Authorities. The outcome of this UN CEB is yet to be made available to the public. It is our hope that more of our ideas and suggestions will be included in the document. We urge UNDP or UNDESA to please obtain a copy of the UNCEB April 2016 meeting and send us.

Our view is that it is in making such important decisions available to the public that contributions towards improvement of its contents as well as the fully implementation and effective monitoring and evaluation of this implementation by Community to Global Stakeholders on UN System - UNO, WBG and IMF; 306/193 UN Member States and MGoS could be better assured. 
 
We are pleased to know that Outcome of Consultation on Elements Paper on Follow Up and Review included regular consultation with co-facilitators of other processes, ensure coherent approach across the system etc that coincide with points we consistently advocate.

It is good that these ideas are gaining increasing currency and more authorities on UN System - UNO, WBG and IMF; UN Member States and MGoS sides are recognizing urgent need to answer How questions - although language and text in some of these UN Documents is yet to be clear in stating specifically that How questions need to be answered. We note that this 2030 Agenda: Scope and Implications Summary used clear language in calling on Stakeholders to address urgent need to answer How questions.

We urge relevant authorities to recognize that without meaningfully involving the idea creator and as soon as possible, in the implementation and monitoring and evaluation of the implementation of ideas harvested from each UN System - UNO, WBG and IMF Entity Global Consultations avoidable error would be make and this could be very costly. For example, it is not helpful to keep the UN CEB April 2016 Outcome Document outside public view. It is only when the document is in public domain that Institutions like ours could make comments on improving its provisions and in ways that help achieve better implementation of these provisions and it is not helpful to implement UNDP and UNDESA e-Discussion 2016 Outcome Document / SG Report on e-Discussion 2016 without meaningfully involving idea creators whose submissions have been synthesized into the Report..

We further urge the relevant authorities need to recognize that correct answer to How questions can only be found in the Doing and this would involve the type of capacity building we have described in 3PCM Model. It is our hope that these authorities will stop looking for solutions that exist and will not allow bright prospects of success to be squandered.

Records show it is only our Institution that has built the Hard Competences: Learning and Skills and Soft Competences: Character, Courage and Mindset to effectively support Community to Global Stakeholders in this regard. 

It is our hope that we would be given Master MSP and MSP Platforms required to provide the required levels of support to UN System - UNO, WBG and IMF; UN Member States and MGoS and as soon as possible.

We do look forward to receiving copy UN CEB April 2016 Outcome Document shortly.
 
Best wishes,
 
Lanre Rotimi
Director General
International Society for Poverty Elimination /
Economic Alliance Group and
Director NEHAP (New End Hunger and Poverty)


On Friday, 6 May 2016, 16:33, "notification@unteamworks.org" <notification@unteamworks.org> wrote:
Tokunbo Lijadu-Oyemade Country President, Kins of Africa [KINSAF] for Development and Re-integration, NIGERIA from Nigeria
Fri, April 29, 2016 at 06.17 am

Dear Moderator,

Thank you for a comprehensive and yet strategicly conclusive summary of this discussions.  I see a future that's progressive by sheer interdependence of development actors all things being equal.  The aportioning of role-plays to different partners in the process has not been forgotten either.  All in all, its a good summary which we do hope will be considered and aceeded to by state and non-state actors  as the way forward towards  ensuring that none is left behind during the process and period of implementation of Agenda 2030.  

We look forward to future opportunities and priviledges of contributing our own little quota to any subject on global development in future.  This has been a rewarding exchange.

Cheers.

Tokunbo Lijadu-Oyemade Country President, Kins of Africa [KINSAF] for Development and Re-integration, NIGERIA from Nigeria
Fri, April 29, 2016 at 06.17 am

Dear Moderator,

Thank you for a comprehensive and yet strategicly conclusive summary of this discussions.  I see a future that's progressive by sheer interdependence of development actors all things being equal.  The aportioning of role-plays to different partners in the process has not been forgotten either.  All in all, its a good summary which we do hope will be considered and aceeded to by state and non-state actors  as the way forward towards  ensuring that none is left behind during the process and period of implementation of Agenda 2030.  

We look forward to future opportunities and priviledges of contributing our own little quota to any subject on global development in future.  This has been a rewarding exchange.

Cheers.

KIm Davis "Chair, Board of Directors" from Canada
Fri, April 29, 2016 at 12.16 am

Thank you for this great opportunity to participate in this e-discussion. Unfortunately I heard about this opportunity late in the process, but better late than never!

Regarding question 3 ("How could the UN development system provide coordinated and integrated support for the achievement of the 2030 Agenda?"), here are some thoughts. First, on governance and the issue of agreeing on what constitutes sustainability in a more operational way.  Then, on whether an overarching strategic framework can help in this regard.

Governance

Vision
Update the WCED “short” sustainability definition (1987) to reflect current scientific & strategic aspects, in order to help organizations focus & line up strategic plans & actions.


Rationale
Global efforts to mitigate the mounting pressure on all ecosystems increase as societies acquire a deeper understanding of "eco-interdependence". In order to focus such efforts towards creating durable societies, while reducing ongoing contributions to social-ecological unsustainability, the sustainability definition used in institutional documents would benefit from becoming more operational.


Starting Questions

    What constitutes a precise & operational definition of sustainability—our goal?
    How far are we from that goal?
    How can we close the gap to our goal?

Strategy
It is widely acknowledged in management that objectives too loosely defined are of little help in reaching intended results, while they may foster many unintended consequences. Empirical evidence suggests meaningful objectives criteria, such as the ones encapsulated in the SMARTER mnemonic: Specific – Measurable – Attainable – Relevant – Tangible – Engaging – Rewarding...

The current WCED definition of sustainability satisfies several of those criteria, while being short of the ones stressing preciseness. Emphasizing awareness over concerted action has been successful, since sustainability issues are widely discussed. Current times call for the strategy's next phase in strengthening concerted actions while keeping awareness level high. To do so, it is proposed to renew the definition of sustainability used by large institutional bodies.

Example Process
One possibility of a model process calls for stakeholders to transparently

    - update the objective criteria used to grade a sustainability definition,
    - compare the major existing definitions according to those criteria,
    - debate the final choices at COP22/23,
    - announce the chosen definition at the end of the COP.

Overarching Framework

See document

Again thank you for this opportunity, and I look forward to share and exchange views with all stakeholders. Take care...

Patricia M. O'Donnell from
Fri, April 29, 2016 at 02.07 pm

Dear Kim Davis, Thank you for this interesting and thoughtful sustainability response.

I always begin with the Bruntland Commission definition, 1987, in Our Common Future noting the three pillars of Sustainability as Society-Economy-Environment, which indicates the need for integration and the required recognition of intertwined and interconnected response. To these, as a heritage and culture professional, I add an overlay of culture and heritage as the basis for and underlying framework of human actions toward sustainability. This integration of culture and heritage permeating the Sustainability aspect of Society-Economy- Environment provides a holistic platform for considerations of actions and for measuring performance.

To address the broader question “How could the UN development system provide coordinated and integrated support for the achievement of the 2030 Agenda?" -- the first response is found in SDGs Goal 17- Partnerships, encouraging collaboration across multiple platforms. The direction that the UN SDGs website has taken is encouraging as it is multi-faceted- for example reaching out to youth through educational tools and inviting partnerships. It has been pointed out through the process that actions happen at the local level. A powerful potential tool is a peer to peer organization at the human settlement level where cities and towns can learn from each other.  

 

Best Regards,

Patricia M. O'Donnell, FASLA, AICP, IFLA, ICOMOS, Principal

Heritage Landscapes LLC, Preservation Landscape Architects & Planners

Charlotte VT 05445 Norwalk CT 06850

New email: odonnell@heritagelandscapes.com

office 802.425.4330

www.heritagelandscapes.com

 

From: notification@unteamworks.org [mailto:notification@unteamworks.org]
Sent: Thursday, April 28, 2016 10:04 PM
To: odonnell@heritagelandscapes.com
Subject: [Teamworks] KIm Davis "Chair, Board of Directors" from Canada commented on the Discussion "The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development: scope and implications"

 

You

Mustafa Khawaja from
Sat, April 30, 2016 at 06.14 am
Lal Manavado from
Fri, April 29, 2016 at 10.06 am
Dear Mr. Davis,
 
I would like to touch upon one aspect of your contibution, and it is one on which I have commented extensively in this and other related fora.
 
Your question,   "What constitutes a precise & operational definition of sustainability,our goal?"
 
As I have taken part in this set of discussions since 2013, I can say with certainty, that we are very far from it. It is not a question of lack of ability or desire to change the current state of affairs, but rather a case of not seeing the wood for trees with a dash of the desire to fight for one's favourite cause rather than general good of the deprived.
 
Having said that,  our first challenge is to identify what constitutes a general sustainable goal which will subsume a certain justifiable set of sub-goals. It is their adequate achievement that requires to be sustainable.
 
The general goal I have proposed time after time is obvious to the point of being trivial, viz., enabling a not unlimited global population to continue to lead a life of contentment with reference to their chosen cultural norms in a manner that does not entail any harm to others and to our shared environment.
 
In my view, attainning this superordinate goal requires an adequate satisfaction of six goals it logically subsumes, viz., need for education in its broadest sense, nutrition, security in its widest sense, health, and a set of non-material goals such as aesthetic satisfaction, entertainment,etc. Let me add that the satisfaction one experiences on achieving something, be it the discovery of a new sub-atomic particle or on acquiring a new skill,  or on partaking a good meal or a glass are some other examples of non-material goals every man is capable of appreciating. 
 
I have called the above man's six fundamental needs. For the sake of brevity, I shall not give you here their epistemological justification. Where I differ from the current approaches, is I keep this hierarchy of goals as what we should strive to render sustainable, whereas the present efforts of the UN is aimed at making a curious blend of some whole of partial fundamental goals, and the needs they subsume as its target of sustainability. It is this category error that will make UN sustainable goals less than optimal even if they are attainable.
 
The possibility of achieving our six fundamental needs,  depends on the possibility of adequately satisfying the needs each of them subsumes. Some of those subsumed needs may be shared by two or more  of the fundamental needs. For instance,  getting to school, hospital, etc., may depend on having access to some mechanical transport. If analysed carefully, it would be clear that need for irrigation, energy, money, etc., are important, but are certainly valueless except insofar as the goal of possessing them is necessary in order to attain a higher goal that subsumes them. The UN approach has failed to take this logical fact into account.
 
 


Your next question,   "How far are we from that goal?" gives one cause for concern. As far as I can see, we are rather far from reachinfg it, and what is very unfortunate is that there does not seem to be a mechanism to re-define the SDGs so that they may fit into a holistic framework, while allowing individual nations and areas within them to concentrate on what is most important for them. Holism and flexibility have not received the attention they deserve.


 Finally, we come to what I feel like the impossible, viz., "How can we close the gap to our goal?"
The difficulty lies in our general failure to appreciate the following:
 
1. The possibility of our continued adequate satisfaction of our six fundamental needs, depends on the well-being of our environment, for the mineral and biological resources we need for our existence are derived from it and they are finite.
 
2. The availability of those resources  depends on the adequate running of many inter-related natural cycles governed by gnomic and biological laws, which manifest themselves as 'ecosystem services'.
 
3. Their adequate running depends on the equilibrium between mineral uptake by the lving (water, oxygen,etc) and the return to nature of the taken up material, and this in turn, depends on the equilibrium among all the living species.
 
4. The equilibrium among the living has a qualitative and a quantitative component. The former represents bio-diversity, while the latter indicates the population of each individual species. H. sapiens cannot justifiably claim to be exempt from this by referring to some supernatural entity.
 
So, unless strict human population control with a view to its gradual reduction is undertaken, it would be futile to talk about sustainability in a meaningful way. No politician will dare say this let alone act on it, even though most of them are skilled exponents in creating monsters out of mosquitoes.
 
Even if we live up to the scientific name we have humourously given ourselves, and agree on a tenable definition of sustainability, attaining it runs into a major difficulty nobody seems to be willing to name even though it is rather obvious. Let us consider the following:
 
1. Achievement of SDGs, whatever they are, requires material and financial resources in addition to the relevant knowledge and skills.
 
1. Current economy is driven by the desire to gain, and there are no limits on what one may legally gain or acquire.
 
2. Desire for continued gain generates 'the need' for increased demand whether it is rational or not. This manifests itself as increased economic activity, which according to the dogma embeded in the mind of many a 'developer' is desirable!
 
3. This has already  dramatically reduced  the available ecosystem services leading to drought, flooding, climate change, etc, whose nutritional, health and security implications are serious.
 
4. Current economy not only generates 'wealth', but it also generates social inequity and severe environmental degradation that has already begun to threaten life in many previously salubrious areas.
 
5. Going back to 1 above,  great deal of world's material and financial resources are sequestered in private hands, even when jovial lawyers jocosely attribute their ownership to some abstract  but legal entities such as 'companies', 'coporations', etc.
 
6. Those private owners of resources will not 'invest' their resources in SDGs, unless they can make a profit, which will only exacerbate the current environmental ills for theirs is the Aristotelian approach to economy, viz., everything revolves around me.
 
7. Hence, even if we agree on all else, there does not seem to be  enough resources to get on with it.
 
One likes to be optimistic, but the desire to be realistic compels one to be otherwise.
 
Lal Manavado.
 
Dr. Timothy Barker maker from United Kingdom
Tue, May 3, 2016 at 06.08 am

Dear Lal,

Thank you so much for your thoughtful comments. I largely agree with your theses. However, since the UN is a kind of 'democratic' organisation and certainly seems to be adopting these 'participative' (online) mechanisms could you perhaps tell me how you resolve the conflict between one persons (albeit notable) ideas and those of the larger community? By way of explanation I am currently thinking this is the crux of why so many different elements are attempted to be represented in the 2030, etc. initiatives of the UN rather than a synthesised, overall, 'holistic' view...

Cheers, Tim.

Lal Manavado from
Tue, May 3, 2016 at 08.58 am
Dear Tim,
 
 
I think everybody agrees that mankind has seldom faced such a complex bunch of threats to its well-being as it does today. Now, we also agree that something ought to be done at least to mitigate the ills of the world.
 
Here, we face the age-old problem; what problems shall we address and how? Shall we deal with those that affect largest number of people, or those whose 'advocates' are most vociferous? And to make matters worse, once a set of problems have been agreed upon, then the arguments begin anew about what solutions to use. Here, one bids farewell to holism and relevance without even knowing it! For instance, advocating IT solutions to rural populations where the literacy rate is very low.
 
Let me ask you a simple question,  could one possibly have resorted to democratic debate in order to ascertain the respective merits of  Aristotelian and the Copernican notions of the Solar system five centuries ago? The church has the power then and ...
 
 
It seems I offer no solution but scepticism ad infinitum. No, not quite. I suggested a logical re-arrangement of the so-called SDGs in the order of their real importance to live huan beings. Their importance is to be determined with reference to how necessary they are for one to lead a life of reasonable contentment. For instance, despite its lack of prestige, no rational person can maintain that a rural subsistence-farmer leads less contented life than a young man in a city slum with a 'smart phone'. Those people are there for us to go and ask what they need most, but we do not. Rather, most contributors look at people through their  'theory telescopes' and recommend solutions prescribed by their pet 'theories' I use the word theory only to describe a hypothesis concerning  a gnomic phenomenon, not human behaviour.
 
So, the diversity of opinions synthesised are hardly representative. I know, it is impractical to canvass the views of everybody whose situation is pitiful or dire, but, there is a way forward, it does not sound like the  big cliches of 'development', but it is as close as one can get to those who really need help, viz., small local cooperatives whose freedom of action can be guaranteed in some way.
 
At a higher level, I have suggested policy congruence at all levels, beginning at the international one. Please consider how difficult it would be to make the current 'trade treaties' consistent with national efforts to conserve and regenerate the environment, promote health, expand national labour-intensive agriculture and  industry and  so on. All this is obvious, but how far have we come even at the international level towards policy congruence? Then, how credible are we when we advocate national policy congruence, which is precluded by the existing unfair treaties?
 
No, democracy is more or less effective at local level, but as you go higher up the scale, the number of 'ifs' necessary for its more or less adequate functioning proliferate to what seems to be unrealistic levels. Of course, I must add, in my humble opinion.
 
A somewhat rambling answer, I fear, but,  let it stand.
 
Cheers!
 
Lal.
 
 
 
 


From: notification@unteamworks.org [mailto:notification@unteamworks.org]
Sent: 03 May 2016 08:57
To: Lal Manavado
Subject: [World We Want 2030] Dr. Timothy Barker maker from United Kingdom commented on the Discussion "The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development: scope and implications"

Dr. Timothy Barker Founder from United Kingdom
Thu, May 5, 2016 at 02.31 pm

Dear Lal and everyone,

Thanks again for your thoughts Lal. Whilst I like most of your ideas I find myself obligated to point out that you may be demonstrating the effectiveness of your own argument regarding the most vociferous being most noticed in these 'global conversations'. I totally agree that this is an unfortunate state of affairs especially when those with most funding are able to effectively usurp more 'democratic' practices. That said, there are many conceptual issues yet to be grappled with regarding those current democratic practices. However, we then have to ask what alternatives are historically available and I for one do not necessarily always like the idea of autocracy either though it all depends upon the current societal circumstances as to which could be accused of being the most effective, perhaps. I actually believe in a kind of unity for which I am still formulating a 'theory'. I personally do not like divisive systems and would preferably have a society in agreement rather than divided by class, ideology, gender or anything else for that matter. I do not think complexity is to be feared but should be embraced - and its study comes with a wealth of tools to help us in this quest. So, to summarise (maybe) please do positively continue this dialogue rather than abide by the deadline imposed by the organisers. I do believe dialogue is the answer to overcoming obstacles which impede progress of the development of a new (set of) system(s)...

Cheers,

Tim.

Lal Manavado from
Tue, May 10, 2016 at 08.06 am
Dear Tim and Maurice,
 
First, a word to Maurice. I am awfully sorry I could not post my arrangement of SDG's on Monday as promised. To use a hackneyed excuse, too many things cropped up during past few days. I shall get back to you as soon as I can.
 
Now a few comments to Tim.
 
Let me present to you an others who might be interested a new law:
 
Manavado's Law:
 
The intensity of criticism of country X's human right violations by any democratic country Y is inversely proportional to the extent of their economic relationship, while the fullsomeness of their mutual praise is directly proportional to the magnitude of their latter relationship. -LM.
 
Perhaps, a mathematician with nothing better to do may work out a usable mathematical formula that embodies my law in it.
 
I am sorry if I came out as vociferous, and if I did, I might add it is in support of all deprived in one way or the other.
 
In my next submission, I'll try to give reasons for my unhappiness about the way SDG's have been chosen purely both on methodological and pragmatic grounds.
 
I agree with you that adverserial forms of government as in both UK and USA are undesirable for a variety of reasons, the most glaring being it is easy to turn the government into a travesty of democracy.
 
The question you seem to grapple with, how to render democracy what it purports to be, when the ability of the governed to chose a government on reasonable grounds has never been adequate. It is not just a question of having the ability to think critically when voting, but indifference as well, the so-called voter lethargy. Well, even old Plato was quite aware of it, but only comrade Machiavelli dared to suggest a pragmatic solution. Bit cynical, one might say, but old Nick has to work with what he got.
 
Best of luck with your work!
 
Lal.
 


From: notification@unteamworks.org [mailto:notification@unteamworks.org]
Sent: 05 May 2016 17:21
To: Lal Manavado
Subject: [World We Want 2030] Dr. Timothy Barker Founder from United Kingdom commented on the Discussion "The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development: scope and implications"

maurice phillips from
Tue, May 3, 2016 at 12.59 pm

Hello Lal,

 

I would be interested to receive your “revision”/prioritising of the SDGs.

 

I, and many  others , are members of the Global Ecovillage Network (GEN) a NGO that is the umbrella organisation facilitating the development of ecovillages worldwide.  This is a very bottom-up approach to dealing with the SGDs.  In the work being done in The Gambia, West Africa, we consider that we are covering 10 of the 17 SDGs in the work we are doing with 11 coastal villages.  It would be interesting to see whether our list coincides with your own ideas.

 

I look forward to g=hearing from you,

 

Maurice Phillips,

Chair of the Sandele Foundation.

 

From: notification@unteamworks.org [mailto:notification@unteamworks.org]
Sent: 03 May 2016 12:00
To: maurice@sandele.com
Subject: [Teamworks] Lal Manavado commented on the Discussion "The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development: scope and implications"

 

You can

Lal Manavado from
Wed, May 11, 2016 at 12.18 pm
Hello, Maurice!
 
Here's my view. Sorry about the delay. Afraid it's not as 'traditionally structured' as is common.
 
Cheers!
 
Lal.
 

Arranging the SDGs in a Logically Coherent Array<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

 

Before we begin, I would like to emphasise that despite its tone, this discussion is totally free of metaphysical speculation, and it is strictly secular. Somewhat technical terms are used here, not to give it any academic pretentions, but to ensure its clarity and precision.

 

First, let me ask the obvious; why should we bother about achieving the SDG’s, or any ‘development goal’ for that matter? I think most of us would agree if one said that it is because it is worthwhile to do so. In other words, the achievement of them has a certain value. This notion of value provides the sole rational justification of one’s attempts to attain SDGs within a certain time.

 

Next, another question; to whom is their achievement really worthwhile? Is it to the politicians, administrators, myriads of experts involved, or is it to those billions known to suffer diverse deprivations, or even all of us? Here, irony and sarcasm could have a field day, but, let us be serious. Then, it becomes clear that the achievement of those goals has some value to all of those, but its justifiable value to each group is different.

 

We will leave the politicians and other professional agents and move on to the last two groups. Obviously, achievement of some SDGs is very important the deprived, which its importance for the others is less in the short term. Moreover, their value to these two groups has different origins. I will touch upon the latter at the end of this discussion.

 

What we have to ascertain now is what sound reasons we can put forward to justify attributing a value to the attainment of SDGs.  This would immediately beg the question, if one could justify the value given to SDGs, do they all have an equal value? I postulate that they do not, and the origin of its value would enable us to array each SDG in its appropriate niche in a hierarchy of goals, whose origin is common to living species including man. Do please remember, I promised to be strictly secular.

 

It would be reasonable to suggest that all our reasonable value attributions to objects or events would have to be with reference to the degree to which those could enable us to continue to live, or to enhance the quality of our lives. An extreme illustration to justify this postulate would be the richest specimen in the universe and all his gold, totally isolated on a tiny barren island will perish in a few days. There, wealth has no value to him as a living being.  When dead, value is an academic notion to him.

 

This contrived example underlines two important points; first., the goal of sustaining a life of adequate quality has the only epistemologically defensible fundamental value, and the second, all other justifiable values are attributed to objects or events in proportion to what degree they are needed to enable us to attain that goal. That is why the gold in the above example is valueless to that man in real terms while even a can of brackish water and a bag of junk food would prove priceless.

 

 Let me pre-empt the objections now rolling towards me. The example is unrealistic one might say. Is it? There are starving homeless throughout Asia, Africa, and even in affluent parts of Europe. In some continents, their numbers run into millions. In one way, their situation is worse,  because they  can see around them others having what we all need while they only have a scavenger’s access to a few of those things, and at least some of them can still think and feel as humans do.

 

Man must adequately satisfy six fundamental needs in order to sustain a life of acceptable quality. They are nutrition, health, education in its real sense (not jobber training or the joke of ‘paperless education’), security in its widest sense (security from climatic changes, varieties of robbery, violence, etc), balanced procreation (not only with respect to personal reasons but also environmental ones), and finally, what I have called a set of non-material needs, which includes aesthetic satisfaction, entertainment, etc.

 

Now, we have a culture and location independent measure of poverty totally free from monetary relativism that is irrelevant to the poor. Poverty represents one’s inability to meet one or more of our common fundamental needs. Both a starving beggar and an oafish millionaire are poor, but we often are rightly more concerned about the hunger than lack of culture owing to the greater value of nutrition in order to sustain life.

 

Although important to our quality of life, the non-material goal set is not vital to sustain life somewhat above the brute level.  Meanwhile, it is difficult to give a justifiable priority to nutrition, health, education or security, while the value of balanced procreation depends on what value we may justifiably attribute to the continuation of the human species. Most justifications offered here, either stray into the realm of religion, or some sort of scientific determinism that is epistemologically unsound.

 

After this ground work, let us consider some obvious facts. Today, no human is born with any innate knowledge of how to sustain a life of adequate quality, nor possesses the skills needed for the purpose. This knowledge and skills are acquired through education. Here, the quality of life is determined with reference to the individual’s cultural norms. These in turn, are learned, in other words, acquired by education. Please note these include everything from learning to walk up-right to splitting atoms.

 

The first steps of this education has been paperless since the emergence of the human race, for they including learning to talk, what to eat, how to do so in a socially acceptable manner, etc. Thus, education in its proper sense, embraces the whole spectrum of human activities within a given cultural framework. Its modern truncation into a means of enabling one to secure ‘well-paid job’ has not only perverted its purpose, but has also championed destructive competition that has lead to social inequity and environmental disaster.

 

Having thus established the importance of real education, let us move onto security. No other human concern seems to be shrouded in so much reductive fog. The irony though is that it is a quite simple issue, if you do not let the trees prevent you from seeing the forest. I think there will be general agreement on that having security entails having freedom to undertake what one believes to be worthwhile and freedom to keep what one believes to be of value. In both instances, value is ascertained with reference to a cultural framework.

 

I will not touch on insecurity arising from natural causes as they are well known. True, lack of security could deny one of both freedoms, viz., freedom of action and possession. Denial of both could be brutal and include violence, it may be more subtle, or even legal as permission to gain unlimited wealth in a world with finite resources. In some cases, such denial may cause physical pain and injury and/or varying degrees of mental distress.

 

So, let us look at threats to one’s security arising from one’s own species. In the beginning, the threats from others like those from wild beasts, in clemencies of the weather, etc., far exceeded those from one’s fellows, for otherwise species would have become extinct. Therefore, let us look closely  at the strategy man evolved to mitigate the threats to the individual from the other people. If it is to succeed, it should enable the greatest possible number of people to have the two freedoms described above.

 

The only possible way of achieving this seems to be moving towards peaceful co-existence of peoples. This requires undertaking steps to thwart anyone from hindering or preventing a person engaging in adequately satisfying one’s fundamental needs, or from acquiring  what belongs to a person except by a fair exchange of values. Now, it is easy to see that by varying numbers of who acquires something of value and from whom, we can subsume under this head, a wide variety of denials ranging from armed conflict and arbitrary requisitions to petty burglary. Unfortunately, current thought appears to emphasise ‘one’s person and possessions’ as the sole concern of security.

 

The question is, how to attain these two goals? At its emergence, survival of humans as a species with a limited foraging range, seems to have been dependent on deprecating competition for personal gain in favour of social cooperation.  Until fairly recently, this cooperative behaviour has been observed in isolated communities in the Philippines, South Africa, etc. However, to ensure this desirable behaviour, the early communities resorted to taboos and similar social norms. Later on, they evolved in ethical codes anchored in some religion. Still later, legal codes embodying varying degrees of justice emerged, but they are of recent vintage when compared with the length of human history.

 

This rather condensed analysis allows us to subsume every form of discrimination as a violation of one’s security for it lessens one’s ability to meet one’s fundamental needs adequately. As human societies evolved and grew in complexity with respect to how our fundamental needs are satisfied, the onus of ensuring security gradually passed into some institution of increasing size that finally ended a national government.

 

This evolution of ‘security guarantee’ has two dimensions; The first is who shall guarantee it, and secondly, how. Most seem to believe that a group chosen by the people is best, and as to how, it is believed that this is best achieved by the chosen government acting in accordance with a set of norms that specify the ways and means it may legitimately employ. Very often however, not much emphasis is placed on adequate law enforcement even though good governance in print is legion.

 

Now, let us look at SDGs relevant to security:

 

SDG 16 Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels                      

 

I have covered this goal above, including government and the supreme importance of adequate law enforcement. Let me add here that corruption and nepotism and other forms of favouritism are threats to security, because they deprive the public of common material resources, in other words, thievery, while they deprive the better qualified people of their opportunities, and thereby reducing their ability to secure the means of satisfying their fundamental needs adequately.

 

SDG 10           Reduce inequality within and among countries        

                                  

At first glance, this appears a noble idea. But, the crux is, what is meant by ‘inequality’ here? If it is related to economic status, it will not belong here. However, if it is concerned with equality before the law, it is at home here. Surely, we are thinking about some sort of intellectual or a biological equality. No, equality of opportunity among countries is an ideal when it comes to economics, while within a country, it is governed by a country’s law and how well it is enforced, and what public resources are at its disposal.

 

SDG 5  Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls                

 

It should be obvious that the SDG 16 subsumes both SDG 10 and SDG 5, thus turning the listing superfluous albeit ‘politically very correct’.  Moreover, it will require three separate expensive efforts, instead of one carefully designed single plan that could be inclusive, logical and less expensive. After all, ‘all’ in SDG 16 includes both men and women.

 

After this brief look at security, let me move onto education. There I am delighted to see:

SDG 4            Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all                                                

 

Health is our next fundamental goal, and here we encounter confusion again:

 

SDG 3            Ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages

Obviously, this subsumes the curative and preventive health services including the so-called health promotion. Of course, it is a multi-faceted task, where several different entities have to engage in coordinated activities. Obviously, this goal includes sanitation as a major component of prevention, which is for some curious reason included in the goal below.

 

SDG 6            Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all                                                          

As for water management, it includes both drinking water supply as well as that required by agricultural irrigation. The former has both nutritional and health implications, while the latter is a sub-goal of nutrition as will be described below.

 

Jumping to nutrition, it is proposed to address inequities there by:

 

SDG 2 End hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture

 

Of course, there is a link between nutrition and health. However, its non-scientific components govern the degree to which nutrition affects health. These include the nature of education, what is allowed by trade laws and even more importantly, how adequately they are enforced, tenets of economy in practise, access to appropriate technology and infra-structure to mention the most important.

 

 

I will take up human procreation later on. Let us take a brief look at what I have termed the set of non-material needs. Right to culture is a phrase often bandied about with unseemly vim and vigour. If the achievement of SDGs is supposed to be a universal goal, I find it difficult to see how it may be fully reconciled with this right to culture. Of course, all cultures change, but, unlike in the days of Roman empire, is it justifiable to impose it down from above? If so, it is hard to understand many modern complaints about cultural destruction during colonial times.

 

I have noticed a tendency to advocate ‘teaching English’ to everybody including illiterate or semi-literate populations so that they may gain access to the latest technology. I am not competent to speak of cultures other than those of Europe and their extensions in the Americas, Australia and New-Zealand. Leaving aside English, the literary treasures created at least in 10 European languages are well-known. National poverty has nothing to do with it as one can easily see in the cases like Ruben Dario (Nicaragua), Gabriella Mistral (in a remote part of Chile) clearly shows. I am sure this applies to many other countries, and it is sad to see that no real efforts are made to improve local language competence even in many parts of Europe. It Aesthetic satisfaction is not vital to sustain life, but it does certainly raises it above the level man lived during early stone age.

 

Because the discussion in this forum has been more or less anthropocentric, I did not begin by raising the question what physical conditions must obtain if we are to continue to exist? Perhaps, someone might now ask a supplementary question, as man as we do like to see ourselves, i.e., a sentient being, or as another species of ape? This is neither a rhetorical or an ironic question, because the attainability of any SDG depends on how clearly one has in mind the answers to these two questions when we try to determine how it may be attained successfully.

 

Whether we satisfy our fundamental needs as we do now using knowledge and skills we have acquired by learning, or by instinct (I have simplified matters here), salubriousness of our climate, and our  food and water supply depends on the well-being of our environment. Unless these obtain, life becomes increasingly difficult to sustain on earth.

 

So, ensuring the well-being of our environment is a necessary condition for attaining any SDG, for without food and water, the rest becomes merely academic. Hence, I suggest we regard ensuring the well-being of environment as our super-ordinate goal.

 

For more than half a century, there was ample scientific evidence to show that vegetation played a vital role not only in regulating the climate, but also in the circulation of water (water cycle) and several other natural cycles.

 

Moreover, marine vegetation plays a crucial role in environmental well-being by regulating mineral content of sea water as well as providing an important source of food for thousands of marine species.

 

Put differently, all living things depend on certain mineral resources in order to continue to live (eg. water, oxygen, etc). Nowadays, their supply is often termed ecosystem services. Further, despite their capacity to adapt to their environment, most living things need a certain salubriousnessof climate to survive. This salubriousness represents a yet another ecosystem service.

 

The capacity of our environment to provide an adequate level of ecosystem services to sustain the living within a possible range of evolution,  a certain equilibrium between the living and the mineral and biological resources they need must obtain.

 

But, the availability of those mineral resources is finite. Hence, the equilibrium between the living and those finite mineral resources depends on the equilibrium among the living species themselves. This equilibrium has a qualitative and a quantitative component; the former represents bio-diversity, while the latter indicates the population of individual species including that of man. In every thriving wild life sanctuary, required species including the elephant are culled from time to time to uphold this balance so as to prevent extinction of the culled species.

 

Unless one invokes some super-natural origin to oneself with a pre-ordained destiny, it is difficult to exclude man from the necessity of having to regulate his own population without danger to himself and to the other living things on which his very survival depends on this earth.

 

Hence, I think I am justified in postulating as an our supreme goal:

 

00. Preservation of our Environment and its Regeneration to Redress our Past Errors

This requires among other things;

 

I.             Human population control (I reject the argument, ‘more heads more consumers, hence, economic growth’, for it is analogous to ‘more crime, more jobs as cops, lawyers and judges’.)

 

  II. SDG 15     Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss                                                    

 

  III. SDG 14  Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development (Oceans, seas, etc., are a integral part of our environment. Kindly refer to the Aral sea disaster believed to be the greatest ecological disaster of modern times. It indicates what happens when reductive approach is applied to huge projects.)

 

  Iv. SDG 13     Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts                  

Apart from the strict control of the emission of gaseous, liquid and solid pollutants in to our environment, achievement of SDG 13 will be automatic when one attains I to III above.

 

Provided we are really willing to do so, the ability and skill needed to achieve goal 00 and all the rest has to acquired by learning, which requires-

 

Goal 01 Education

 

Possibility of acquiring knowledge and skill entails we remain alive, which requires three needs of logically inseparable import-

Goals 02-05  Nutrition, Health, Security as described above. And to enhance the quality of our daily lives we need to satisfy our culturally determined set of non-material needs represented by-

 

Goal 06  Aesthetic enjoyment, leisure activities, etc.

 

 

As for what we need to attain these six goals and their parts, it is quite simple. Possibility of satisfying a need, depends on the possibility of satisfying a set of other needs. For instance, need for nutrition is satisfyable, only if food for consumption is at hand. To satisfy the need for food at hand, one may need to prepare and cook it. That would be possible, if one could procure the food stuffs, etc.  The need whose satisfaction depends on the prior satisfaction of one or more goals is said to subsume them.

 

At one point down this scale, the need for money may appear, hence, the need for employment. Economy is only concerned with the last three needs, i.e., buying and selling food, and earning money, hence, economy serves a tertiary need despite the importance given to it. In other words, it is a useful tool serving a secondary purpose, whose satisfaction is required to meet a fundamental one, i.e., nutrition.

 

Likewise, if we trace down the set of needs subsumed by our six goals above in a logically cohesive way, we will observe a hierarchical structure of needs, where some secondary or tertiary needs are common to all six of them.  These include the needs embodied in the present notion of security at the institutional level, and some that have been nominated as SDG’s:

 

SDG 7            Ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all                         

 

Energy in the sense used above becomes meaningless unless taken as a need subsumed somewhere under the six main ones.

 

SDG 8            Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment and decent work for all                                   (my comments about economy holds here).

 

SDG 9            Build resilient infrastructure, promote inclusive and sustainable industrialization and foster innovation                                   

The second clause is so vague, I regard it as positively dangerous, and as it stands can become the greatest hindrance to attaining goal 00 here, and SDG 1, because sustained or not, industrialisation coupled with innovation lead to capital-intensive industry in our over-populated world, and we want to-

 

SDG 1            End poverty in all its forms everywhere                         

 

Which cannot be attained without labour-intensive activities, which the second clause of SDG 9 excludes! I strongly suggest dropping it altogether.

 

The question of economic resources involved in moving towards a more equitable world will be taken up in due course. Meanwhile, let us look at the two following SDG’s:

 

SDG 11           Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable

Their inclusivity and safety are two aspects of security we have already discussed. They might be rendered resilient up to a point, but no more, and no human settlement can be made ‘sustainable’ if its population is allowed grow ad libitum, hence, this idea ought to be dropped.

                                                    

SDG 12           Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns          Simple placing of ‘sustainable’ in front of ‘production’, ‘consumption’ and            ‘industrialization’ coupled with innovation does not make them commensurable, hence, possible. Production is motivated by gain, and this gain is not subject to legal limits, otherwise, we would not have specimens such as ‘richest man in the universe’.

 

In order make such gains, increased consumption would have to be encouraged, and competitors pushed out of market or absorbed by fusion. Innovation in this context is concerned with reduction of production costs by technical measures that reduces man-power needed in it. While this leads to laying-off of workers, consumerism today is generally accepted to be one of the biggest threats to our habitat. This is contrary to what is intended by SDG 8 discussed earlier. I recommend their removal from the list.

 

In outline,  I have reduced the number of main goals to six, which do logically include some SDG’s as their integral parts, or subsume them. For example, SDG’s 13, 14, and 15 merely constitute three aspects of the whole, viz., achievement of enhanced environmental well-being, while employment, production, consumption, innovation and energy are needs lower down in the hierarchy of needs spreading down from the six main ones.

 

Finally, we come to the thorny question of implementing appropriate strategies to achieve those parts of the six main goals that are relevant to a nation state. This is not necessarily linked to a country’s economic state. For example, for many years Cuba and some other ‘poor’ countries were far above the USA in Who’s health rankings. So, health would not be one of their areas of priority, while environmental regeneration might be a very pressing issue with respect to nutrition via agriculture that depends on a more clement local weather and larger water supplies.

 

Once priorities have been established, it is possible to identify certain shared strategies that could increase the chances of their successful attainment. They are concerned with systemic changes, and the deployment of authority to make plans and implement them. Let me emphasize again, that unless we array our chosen goals in a logically sound hierarchy, or a network if you will, the resulting confusion will make real progress extremely difficult.

 

Our first step would be to ascertain the most urgent needs in a given area, for instance, a national state. Naturally, it could well be a smaller unit like a region, a group of villages, or even a single village. Now, we face the challenge, who is most competent to do this? Many inappropriate goal selections have resulted from delegating this responsibility to outsiders unfamiliar with what the local people themselves desire, but who were keen to impose on them what outsiders believed was the best.

 

For example, attempts to promote computer literacy or E.learning to a villagers who sources of food and drinking water are precarious at best, can only be described as a surrealistic divorcement from reality. A less irrelevant, but equally ineffective goal would be to build an expensive cardiac unit among villages, where there is neither a GP or a midwife in sight. All too often, this error is committed not only by foreign experts, but also by their local counterparts from cities.

 

This forces us to conclude that it would be desirable to have competent local people to identify their most urgent needs. This requires their empowerment to do so by the distant central authorities by adapting a policy of limited autonomy whose implementation ought to be guaranteed.

 

Once such goals have been identified, it would be necessary to gather information on what material and human resources are available to attain those goals by using the most appropriate means at one’s disposal. It is when deciding on these means some have a tendency to enter into the realm of fantasy, or to prescribe what they believe to be the best. These ought to be avoided at all costs.

 

Once these needs, resources and means have been identified, the next step is fairly easy. First, goals tagged with their name, for instance, primary health care and the place, can be mapped into the hierarchy of goals we have discussed earlier. For example, if the village X needs better primary health care, it is noted under health, but if the old clinic there has no water supply, it would become a part of another goal farther down the hierarchy, viz., water supply.

 

We can then make such hierarchies for our chosen area, which may grow in size with its extent. Then, it could be superimposed on a map of the chosen area, which will serve as an excellent basis for planning and implementing appropriate projects ranging from laying down the national infra-structure to digging a village well.

 

Next step would be to correlate the resource audit (manpower included) of the chosen area with reference to the goal selection. One is fully aware from the outset that there is a considerable gap between this, and what is required to achieve those goals by the most appropriate (not the latest high-tech) means. Here, contiguous area may chose to cooperate, and by coordinating their work and pooling their resources, they may be able to close the gap between the available resources and their projected expenditure. Ideally, this should be a local policy decision.

 

At this point, we can identify two necessary higher level policy decisions, i.e., a policy decision to make up the shortfall in resources needed to attain the goals selected by and for the lower level, and the policy on its implementation. The latter may include getting relevant help from sources outside the country as well as from NGO’s carefully chosen to ensure their relevance with respect to competence and their non-interference in actual goal selection.

 

Another point to stress here, is what is often called policy coherence. However, a policy can be coherent with reference to the individual goals with which it is concerned. But, in a holistic approach, all policies involved should be congruent in the sense that no single policy should refrain from making it difficult for another policy to attain the goal the latter is intended to serve.

 

The importance of this is obvious, and it is a direct consequence of the reductive thought that has governed the development efforts until now. For instance, if in the name of economic growth, trade policy permits import/manufacture and sale of industrial food and drink, it would certainly counteract what the health policy on the so-called NCDs is designed to achieve. Unfortunately, this logical confusion is all too common among the experts in affluent countries and their adherents in less affluent ones.

 

Last section of this discussion has been dealing with-

 

SDG 17                            

Strengthen the means of implementation and revitalize the global partnerships for sustainable development                                                    

 

Revitalisation in my view, requires ensuring the two qualities competence with reference to local needs and willingness to refrain from interference among the ‘partners’, as described. As for development, my definition of the term has been implicit so far, let me make it explicit now.

 

 

Development represents the state of affairs, where the members of a social group (a village, a province or a country) are able to satisfy adequately all their fundamental needs without entailing harm to the others and to our common environment.

 

Please note the proviso about entail harm is in our own interest. If our actions here were to deprive the others of their chances of satisfying their own fundamental needs, we are guilty of flouting the simple ethics of life, viz., unless we cooperate honestly with each other, we are on our way back to a well-known law of the brutes, the fittest will survive and often glossed into survival of the fattest wallet. But, throughout our sad history, rivers of blood have marked the times when the deprived who had nothing to loose went on the rampage indiscriminately destroying not only those who were wittingly and unwittingly responsible, but also the innocent and a priceless cultural heritage.

 

I will conclude with something we all ought to consider very carefully. Worlds resources are finite, and an unjustifiable portion of it is owned and controlled by a few using legitimate means that turns justice into a dubious joke. This does not imply that I subscribe to the revolting reductive analysis of C. Marx or his descendent minions. Please examine the basis of our modern economy, viz., gain or profit, and there are no legal limits to how much of it one may accumulate. Still, we want to be rich, and isn’t it obvious this will inevitably end up with world’s resources owned by the few, leaving the majority to fight for crumbs?

 

 

Best wishes!

 

Lal Manavado.

 



From: notification@unteamworks.org [mailto:notification@unteamworks.org]
Sent: 03 May 2016 17:03
To: Lal Manavado
Subject: [World We Want 2030] maurice phillips commented on the Discussion "The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development: scope and implications"

Lal Manavado from
Wed, May 4, 2016 at 09.09 am
Hello, Maurice!
 
Thank you for your request, and I shall get down to it and put it on Monday.
 
Lal Manavado.
 



From: notification@unteamworks.org [mailto:notification@unteamworks.org]
Sent: 03 May 2016 17:03
To: Lal Manavado
Subject: [World We Want 2030] maurice phillips commented on the Discussion "The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development: scope and implications"

Dr.Amb.Asabe Shehu Yar'Adua from
Tue, May 3, 2016 at 07.01 pm
Dear Maurice,

Kindly highlight the 10 SDGs out the 17SDGs that your Organization is working on in Gambia so i will able to comment may be we share common ground.

Thank you.
Yours sincerely.
Dr Asabe. 

Asabe Shehu Yar'Adua Foundation (ASYARF)
www.asabeshehuyaraduafoundation.org
Skype: asyarf1


On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 4:04 PM, <notification@unteamworks.org> wrote:

Y

maurice phillips from
Wed, May 4, 2016 at 07.08 am

Dear Dr Asabe,

 

Here is the list of SDGs that are inherent to ecovillage development and on which we are already or beginning to work in the Gambia.  In saying this I am representing an organisation called The People’s Coast Ecovillage Network(PECEN)  – a group of some 65 “eco champions” from  9 villages adjacent to each other on the Atlantic Coast of The Gambia (6 villages) and the Casamance, southern Senegal (3 villages).  All PECEN members have completed the Ecovillage Design Education (EDE) course certified by Gaia Education.

 

PECEN is at a very early stage but our vision is to launch a major land use planning/permaculture study so  that, in addition to the other SDG objectives, issues of coastal erosion, sea level rise, climate change adaptation and mitigation can all be tackled over the coming years.  We have declared 2016 to be “the Year of the Forest”.  This season the action will be modest but we plan to build it up as an activity that will engage all the schools, the village Development Committees and so on.

 

The Alkalos of the 9 villages (together with the Alkalos from two non-coastal villages) have signed an Accord agreeing to the transitioning of the villages into ecovillages and to becoming members of the Global Ecovillage Network (GEN).

 

Our SDG list is attached above.

 

Regards,

 

Maurice.:

 

 

From: notification@unteamworks.org [mailto:notification@unteamworks.org]
Sent: 03 May 2016 22:06
To: maurice@sandele.com
Subject: [Teamworks] Dr.Amb.Asabe Shehu Yar'Adua commented on the Discussion "The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development: scope and implications"

 

You can post a repl

Paye Banza Sales Manager from Canada
Tue, May 3, 2016 at 05.19 pm

As long as EDUCATION is concerned, no need to delay and wait for SDGs2030 AGENDA, let do it now! #OneWorldOneAcademicLibray for all to share spells up every requirement. Further around us, PAPER FREE EDUCATION coming your way sooner than anticipated? Newfoundland already closing over 50 Static Library Centres, more seving to invest in what matters and ENVIRONMENTAL FRIENDLY!https://twitter.com/FinalVision1/status/727201165759254528Fortunately, DIGITAL based solution‪#‎OneWorldOneAcademicLibrary‬ to tackle Quality Education Resources DIVIDE in a way that NONE IS LEFT BEHIND! No internet, no problem, the OFFLINE feature of it allows resources delivery pre-loaded on FvTech Smart Tablets ( http://www.fvtelibrary.com ). If there is a will the hole world would have quality education now, no need to wait for 2030 time!

Paye Banza Sales Manager from Canada
Tue, May 3, 2016 at 05.17 pm

As long as EDUCATION is concerned, no need to delay and wait for SDGs2030 AGENDA, let do it now! #OneWorldOneAcademicLibray for all to share spells up every requirement. Further around us, PAPER FREE EDUCATION coming your way sooner than anticipated? Newfoundland already closing over 50 Static Library Centres, more seving to invest in what matters and ENVIRONMENTAL FRIENDLY!https://twitter.com/FinalVision1/status/727201165759254528Fortunately, DIGITAL based solution‪#‎OneWorldOneAcademicLibrary‬ to tackle Quality Education Resources DIVIDE in a way that NONE IS LEFT BEHIND! No internet, no problem, the OFFLINE feature of it allows resources delivery pre-loaded on FvTech Smart Tablets ( http://www.fvtelibrary.com ). If there is a will the hole world would have quality education now, no need to wait for 2030 time!

John Lawrence from
Fri, April 29, 2016 at 02.07 pm



Dear Moderators,
I am still getting emailed contributions to this very informative discussion, so am offering the following post in case you have not yet closed the `list'.
Today a small team of Columbia University (SIPA) grad students are presenting their findings from six months of study (and two field missions) with UNDP Jakarta and the Government of Indonesia on assessing the characteristics of a multi-stakeholder approach to monitoring SDG achievement at national to local levels. Their conclusions and recommendations are being considered as groundbreaking since they deal with a new arena in this key south Asian nation, with implications for sustainable development in the region and beyond. Anyone interested in a copy of the complete report (due Mid May 2016) can go to the Columbia University School of International and Public Affairs site and search for `Multi-Stakeholder Participation for Sustainable Development Goals in Indonesia' or email me at jeslawrence@att.net.
Kind regards,
John
 

John E.S. Lawrence PhD,
Adjunct Professor, School of International & Public Affairs
Columbia University, New York, 2002-16
and former Principal Adviser and Deputy Director
Social Development Division, Bureau of Development Policy
United Nations Development Program.

<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, April 29, 2016 8:07 AM
Subject: [Teamworks] Lal Manavado commented on the Discussion "The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development: scope and implications"

You can post a reply on Teamworks by replying directly to this email. Text above this line will be included in the post.

teamworks

Posted on: Action Research on Disability, Livelihood and Poverty
New comment on Discussion The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development: scope and implications by Lal Manavado : RE: [World We Want 2030] KIm Davis "Chair, Board of Directors" f


Dear Mr. Davis,
 
I would like to touch upon one aspect of your contibution, and it is one on which I have commented extensively in this and other related fora.
 
Your question,   "What constitutes a precise & operational definition of sustainability,our goal?"
 
As I have taken part in this set of discussions since 2013, I can say with certainty, that we are very far from it. It is not a question of lack of ability or desire to change the current state of affairs, but rather a case of not seeing the wood for trees with a dash of the desire to fight for one's favourite cause rather than general good of the deprived.
 
Having said that,  our first challenge is to identify what constitutes a general sustainable goal which will subsume a certain justifiable set of sub-goals. It is their adequate achievement that requires to be sustainable.
 
The general goal I have proposed time after time is obvious to the point of being trivial, viz., enabling a not unlimited global population to continue to lead a life of contentment with reference to their chosen cultural norms in a manner that does not entail any harm to others and to our shared environment.
 
In my view, attainning this superordinate goal requires an adequate satisfaction of six goals it logically subsumes, viz., need for education in its broadest sense, nutrition, security in its widest sense, health, and a set of non-material goals such as aesthetic satisfaction, entertainment,etc. Let me add that the satisfaction one experiences on achieving something, be it the discovery of a new sub-atomic particle or on acquiring a new skill,  or on partaking a good meal or a glass are some other examples of non-material goals every man is capable of appreciating. 
 
I have called the above man's six fundamental needs. For the sake of brevity, I shall not give you here their epistemological justification. Where I differ from the current approaches, is I keep this hierarchy of goals as what we should strive to render sustainable, whereas the present efforts of the UN is aimed at making a curious blend of some whole of partial fundamental goals, and the needs they subsume as its target of sustainability. It is this category error that will make UN sustainable goals less than optimal even if they are attainable.
 
The possibility of achieving our six fundamental needs,  depends on the possibility of adequately satisfying the needs each of them subsumes. Some of those subsumed needs may be shared by two or more  of the fundamental needs. For instance,  getting to school, hospital, etc., may depend on having access to some mechanical transport. If analysed carefully, it would be clear that need for irrigation, energy, money, etc., are important, but are certainly valueless except insofar as the goal of possessing them is necessary in order to attain a higher goal that subsumes them. The UN approach has failed to take this logical fact into account.
 
 


Your next question,   "How far are we from that goal?" gives one cause for concern. As far as I can see, we are rather far from reachinfg it, and what is very unfortunate is that there does not seem to be a mechanism to re-define the SDGs so that they may fit into a holistic framework, while allowing individual nations and areas within them to concentrate on what is most important for them. Holism and flexibility have not received the attention they deserve.


 Finally, we come to what I feel like the impossible, viz., "How can we close the gap to our goal?"
The difficulty lies in our general failure to appreciate the following:
 
1. The possibility of our continued adequate satisfaction of our six fundamental needs, depends on the well-being of our environment, for the mineral and biological resources we need for our existence are derived from it and they are finite.
 
2. The availability of those resources  depends on the adequate running of many inter-related natural cycles governed by gnomic and biological laws, which manifest themselves as 'ecosystem services'.
 
3. Their adequate running depends on the equilibrium between mineral uptake by the lving (water, oxygen,etc) and the return to nature of the taken up material, and this in turn, depends on the equilibrium among all the living species.
 
4. The equilibrium among the living has a qualitative and a quantitative component. The former represents bio-diversity, while the latter indicates the population of each individual species. H. sapiens cannot justifiably claim to be exempt from this by referring to some supernatural entity.
 
So, unless strict human population control with a view to its gradual reduction is undertaken, it would be futile to talk about sustainability in a meaningful way. No politician will dare say this let alone act on it, even though most of them are skilled exponents in creating monsters out of mosquitoes.
 
Even if we live up to the scientific name we have humourously given ourselves, and agree on a tenable definition of sustainability, attaining it runs into a major difficulty nobody seems to be willing to name even though it is rather obvious. Let us consider the following:
 
1. Achievement of SDGs, whatever they are, requires material and financial resources in addition to the relevant knowledge and skills.
 
1. Current economy is driven by the desire to gain, and there are no limits on what one may legally gain or acquire.
 
2. Desire for continued gain generates 'the need' for increased demand whether it is rational or not. This manifests itself as increased economic activity, which according to the dogma embeded in the mind of many a 'developer' is desirable!
 
3. This has already  dramatically reduced  the available ecosystem services leading to drought, flooding, climate change, etc, whose nutritional, health and security implications are serious.
 
4. Current economy not only generates 'wealth', but it also generates social inequity and severe environmental degradation that has already begun to threaten life in many previously salubrious areas.
 
5. Going back to 1 above,  great deal of world's material and financial resources are sequestered in private hands, even when jovial lawyers jocosely attribute their ownership to some abstract  but legal entities such as 'companies', 'coporations', etc.
 
6. Those private owners of resources will not 'invest' their resources in SDGs, unless they can make a profit, which will only exacerbate the current environmental ills for theirs is the Aristotelian approach to economy, viz., everything revolves around me.
 
7. Hence, even if we agree on all else, there does not seem to be  enough resources to get on with it.
 
One likes to be optimistic, but the desire to be realistic compels one to be otherwise.
 
Lal Manavado.
 



29 Apr 2016 [ read more ] [ reply ]

To manage your subscriptions, browse to http://undp.unteamworks.org/user/57570/notifications
This is an automatic message from UNDP

View original post: https://undp.unteamworks.org/mailcomment/redirect/%3C57570.522533.90986....

Dr. Timothy Barker from United Kingdom
Mon, April 4, 2016 at 09.46 am

For me the real problem is one of needing to persuade our historically imbued institutional instruments to adapt to allow such multidimensional issues as these to be fairly, democratically explored. See shamblaba DOT org DOT uk for a socio-technological prototype. Sadly, there are individuals and groups who become adept at manipulating those in 'authority' with the result of policy becoming skewed in favour of those who 'shout the loudest' or perhaps those who are funded the most? Everybody deserves a voice - "leave no one behind" - yet how should we achieve this? Not everyone has access to these technologies, for instance (as I am sure we're all aware). Can we reply upon the status quo to adapt **in time** for this is a time critical mission? Can those with 'power' relinquish it so that a more representative version of a global narrative emerges FROM THE GROUND UP? I like education in this regard. So what I am proposing is a kind of meta narrative where all these various influences are right and proper, that's indisputable - there are a lot of valid issues being explored here, for example - but its the mechanisms, the instruments of bringing about change that really need to be addressed in a sensitive and considered manner. If not enacted accordingly then structural change will fail and we (or our ancestors) will still be 'sitting around' discussing these same issues well into the next century, at least. To sum, I personally don't have all the answers but I have a whole host of questions that are not being asked - I would like to see those 'meta', principally structural questions answered please?

Lal Manavado from
Mon, April 4, 2016 at 12.20 pm
Other things being equal ...
 
At the risk of sounding theoretical, which I am not, other things being equal,  the main issue Dr. Barker raises seems to be the inability/unwillingness of government institutions to make their policies congruent on six fundamental areas, viz., nutrition, education in its broadest sense, health, security in its widest sense, sustainable human procreation, and what I have called our non-material needs like aesthetic satisfaction, leisure activities, etc. It is amazing that those in authority seems unable to appreciate that energy, water supplies, economic persuits, etc., are simply secondary or even teritiary means required to satisfy the above six fundamental needs.  It is incredible that most participants here appear to believe that job creation and economy as ends in themselves!
 
So, in formulation of congruent policies,  agricultural policy ought to be in harmony with health policy as well as the policy on environment. Likewise, the economic policy should be congruent with health and environment policies. If the trade policy allows the imports of unhealthy food, it would obviously undercut what one attempts to achieve by  the health policy, and so on. The vital importance of  a healthy environment as a whole, not just global warming,  does not seem to have sunk into the minds of those who are in a position to do something positive about environmental regeneration, not just stop further abuse of it.
 
It would be salutory for anyone to read some 19th century travellers' comments on the Brazilean rain forest, Indonesian archipelago, Africa etc. They lamment  that none has cleared up the forests and 'developed' the areas so that they may support millions more! Now, most of those areas have undergone 'development', and they can hardly support a flock of hardy goats.
 
Reductive thought has given to economy  a role akin to that enjoyed by religions in the middle ages. So, anyone who questions its importance and wishes to  place it in its proper place, would be treated the same way as every  heretic was during those good old days but with one little difference. Instead of an honest auto de fe (it is unfair to call it in Portuguese as it is often done), the heretic will be simply ignored, perhaps, this is the way democracy displays its torarance.
 
Now, to my next point; Hunger and ill health require immediate action, while the other needs require sustained long-term efforts. These require financial, intellectual, and other material resources. However, an inordinate portion of world's total real financial and material resources,  are sequestered in comparatively few private hands, and as such will not be forthcoming unless they can profit from it. What would enable them to profit by it entails engaging in the same type of economic activity, which together with greed and selfishness has brought about the human misery we  observe today.  This seems to be the way the majority want to take, I never thought that there would ever be any proponents of Catch-22 as a development strategy.

 
Lal Manavado.
 

From: notification@unteamworks.org [mailto:notification@unteamworks.org]
Sent: 04 April 2016 12:21
To: Lal Manavado
Subject: [World We Want 2030] Dr. Timothy Barker from United Kingdom commented on the Discussion "The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development: scope and implications"

Paye Banza Sales Manager from Canada
Mon, April 4, 2016 at 06.42 pm

The Quality of Education only could ensure all are equal and NONE IS LEFT BEHIND! There is growing concerns behind Quality Education Resources DIVIDE same as DIGITAL DIVIDE worries are! Shouls get same awereness, we are in for humble contribution with a practical approach boosting solidarity around education through mutual SHARING!

Quality Education consist of up to date Library and Research. “The technology allows students to do research and to develop critical thinking” #OneWorldOneAcademicLibrary for Mutual Quality Education Resources sharing with CANADA and the WORLD to close the GAP. All grow equally in knowledge and Develop.

ATTENTION!!!

 STUDENTS AND RESEARCHERS should make a difference between SEARCH (on a search engine like GOOGLE etc ...) and RESEARCH! While one WASTES time with irrelevant and inappropriate materials in most cases the other with TRUE RESEARCH, keeps you 100% on task. AIDDE platform is not a search engine!https://twitter.com/FinalVision1/status/716326784938209282
 

Courtesy of http://www.fvtelibrary.com

 
Mohamed Elsayed from Sudan
Wed, March 30, 2016 at 07.55 pm

How can the guiding principle of 'Leave no one behind' be put into practice in implementing the 2030 Agenda in different development contexts (e.g. least developed countries, middle-income countries, high-income countries, fragile states etc.)?

The guiding principle of 'leave no one behind' is a very important principle for global partnership to achieve the SDGs. The experience of "Goal 8" of the MDGs tells us how wrong the development cooperation was shaped previously. Simply because it was mainly baed. on the assumption that high income countries flow of aid to least developed was the formula to enhance economic growth and eradicate poverty. Obviously, it appears from a glance that nothing wrong about this assumption, but the benefit could have be better achieved if partnership principles were set around an important guidance: "leave no one behind". This. Principle emphasizes a strong sense of cooperative partnership rather that one direction flow of benefits. In fact. This. Principle demonstrates that as far as the high income countries have much to provide to the least developed ones, on the other hand, benefits are also expected from the latter to the former. This mutual benefit philosophy should guide development partnership for achieving the SDGs.

Previously- in the period before and after the MDGs launch- always, it was the high income countries that provide the sole support to the least developed. In this respect, least developed countries were defined by where they are located geographically. Today, 'least developed populations' migrate from their traditional locations and reside in many middle and high income countries. The burden on middle and high income countries is therefore growing, given the challenges of economic recession and unemployment and other social aspects that are linked to integration.

The challenges facing least developed countries have proved to be extending to other middle and high income countries. Truly, conflict in many parts of the worlds, and particularly in Syria and Iraq; consequently led to displacement of massive numbers of people who overburden some high and middle income countries. As well, natural disasters such as climate change that hit the living mechanisms of societies in least developed countries, making them unable to cope and survive in their lands; and eventually fleeing to other locations, particularly middle and high income countries where they hope for better life. This is a migration issue!

Therefore, migration should really be an important factor in catalyzing the global partnership for achieving the SDGs. Migration in todays world is never a simple question with a simple answer; it is a serious and threatening issue with its political social, cultural and economic implications. Understanding the parts of the equation in migration, its impact on both migrating and migrated to communities requires deep analysis. The philosophy and programmatic architecture of development partnership should take a form that benefit all in the SDGs era. Technical cooperation among countries is an example we need to bring in designing development support and reshaping partnership in the coming fifteen years. Mechanisms for integration private sector in the development dividends is crucial. Involving the private sector, meaningfully, is the name of the game in order "not to leave anyone behind". With the significant growth of private sector social responsibility activism, much can be achieved if such great potential articulated properly.

John Lawrence John E S Lawrence, Adjunct Professor, School of International & Public Affairs, Columbia University, New York from United States
Wed, March 30, 2016 at 12.51 am

One contribution in this discussion stood out to me, from Cameroun, Federation of Environmental and Ecological Diversity for Agricultural Revampment and Human Rights ( FEEDAR & HR ) 

 as follows:

Many little businesses face a critical challenge of the inability to secure Loans and benefits from Banks. It therefore very important for financial institutions to leveraging opportunities for all and not only for the rich.

Small business is not only the present, but the future of sustainable development, yet there is very little in this discussion that I have seen on the private sector and its contribution to sustainable human progress.... even the current movement towards corporate social responsibility (CSR) seems targeted mostly towards large multinational enterprises.. furthermore, economic theory specifies `growth' as a necessary condition for societal advancement, speaking  hardly at all about better, more efficient management and utilization of existing resources... the SDGs required extensive participation of stakeholders in their designation and definition... they will also need universal commitment  to their achievement, and that includes business at all levels...how can we elicit commercial interest, locally, in this quest?

Lal Manavado from
Tue, March 29, 2016 at 09.31 am
Helping the poor in Dollar terms; is this the way to go?
 
I wholeheartely agree with  your intention, but have difficulties with the yardstick you have chosen.
 
On paper, increased income may seem to indicate an alleviation of poverty.
 
But, if the cost of living of the poor has risen in step, one has not achieved much. Nor yet the poor have to live under appalling conditions.
 
I think the poor will consider a reduction in their food items as a real boon, when higher wages entail higher food prices.
 
Lal Manavado.
 



From: notification@unteamworks.org [mailto:notification@unteamworks.org]
Sent: 26 March 2016 00:04
To: Lal Manavado
Subject: [World We Want 2030] Hüseyin Mahir FİSUNOGLU commented on the Discussion "The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development: scope and implications"

Yo

Federation of Environmental and Ecological Diversity for Agricultural Revampment and Human Rights (FEEDAR & HR)
Tue, March 29, 2016 at 06.29 am

Hhhv Federation of Environmental and Ecological Diversity for Agricultural Revampment and Human Rights ( FEEDAR & HR ) 

 

P.O.Box 321 KUMBA Meme SWR Cameroon. 

 

Email : feedar97@yahoo.com, feedar.hr@gmail.com, feedarsecretariat@yahoo.com 

 

Means of implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals Agenda 2030

 

NATIONAL LEVEL. 

 

Partnerships between Governments and Civil Society. 

 

The National means of implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals Agenda 2030 requires that both governments and the non governments work together in a more stronger partnerships to reach the entire 17 Goals by 2030 and beyond.  It has been proven that the government's can not do all the works of a country alone that is why the civil society is very critical to achieving the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals Agenda. I must first of all commend government ministries for their commitment to try to reach everyone in the geographical cycles. In the implementation of the Millennium Development Goals many were left out and many mistakes made.I think it is time informed decisions bring all on the platform so that no one is left behind.

 

The government's should consider working in strong collaboration with the Civil Society sector. That is to provide a non competitive grants to every Civil Society Organization recognised by the competent administrative authority.This running budget will assist Civil Society increase their capacities to reach their objectives and goals.  This would equally assist the Civil Society to extend their tentacles to secure other funding from other sources and create synergies and partnerships to implement the 17 Goals implementation. The civil society will provide report activities that explains how the budget support was used. This would be evaluated and progress monitored.

 

The various government ministries to work with the civil society organizations to reach out to everyone, impacting every social group. For example Ministry of Education , not only provides schools to communities but making sure the schools have the necessary basic necessities like enough school Teachers, Benches, rooms, space, library, Canteen, Drinking Water, Toilets and a first aid kit,  A School Bus or any Transportation services. And also constant supplies of learning materials like chalks , writing materials where necessary. 

 

B)  Partnerships Among Civil Society Organizations 

 

One of the most important aspects to meet the Agenda 2030 is the partnerships among the civil society groups. Providing a platform for effective approaching Civil Society issues and an environment of effective participation would achieve greatly the Sustainable Development Goals Agenda 2030. This is by involving the women, youths , students, unemployed, disabled, 

 

C) Other stakeholders including Business and Banks

 

Many little Businesses face a critical challenge of the inability to secure Loans and benefits from Banks. It therefore very important for financial institutions to laveraging opportunities for all and not only for the rich.

 

On  Regional Level (CENTRAL AFRICAN REGION ) csoscaregion@gmail.com,  csocaregion@googlegroups.com 

 

 

Thesame national approach above appliies to all countries in the region , however though the region is considered to be one of the richest in the world in terms of Natural and Mineral Resources it is still the poorest in terms of socio - economic and political paradigm. The standard of living is very poor among the majority of the population,  social security is completely off the table,  security is threatened daily as Conflicts,  Terrorism, Wars, Crime, Corruption and lack of democratic reforms on the rise, outward migration and internally displaced persons.

 

The formation of a civil society body that would enhance partnerships and efforts to the Agenda 2030 is what is fundamental in the region. In this light the Coalition of Civil Society Organizations in the Central African Region  (CSOSCAR) has created. The Coalition will increase coordination,  participation,  engagement,  implementation and monitoring progress of the 17 Goals in all countries and put in place decency where necessary. 

 

As a regional institution it will create new partnerships , merge with other regional bodies to the effective implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals Agenda 2030.

 

It will equally source funding,  interven in Humanitarian Crisis and in other emergency and would be able to  providing a regional reporting mechanism on the progress of the 2030 Agenda in all countries. 

 

Paul Shaw Steering Group Leader
Tue, March 29, 2016 at 08.15 am

Thanks for your comments above. The #NAYDSDSGs initiative will have youth-led, gender balanced rural community development acitivists teams in all countries in Africa with the mission to empower rural communities with the SDGs. I have posted the roadmap to this group in a previous post. The concept note for the workshop is attached.  We are working with regional and continental organisations to progress this. My email is paul@geovision.co.uk.

Dr. Dennis Anderson professor, e-government expert, chairman from United States
Tue, March 29, 2016 at 01.44 am

In order to achieve a sustainable future for all, we must recognize that today’s more than 50% of world population is young people under the age of 35 years old and many of them do not have a real future due to the lack of education, employment and upward social mobility.  Until we address this core issue, we cannot build a sustainable future for all.  The current poverty, global migration, terrorism and wars will only exacerbate any efforts to focus on sustainable development. 

Lal Manavado from
Tue, March 29, 2016 at 07.29 am
Very true, but ....
 
Your observation is very true, but it would be salutory to remember that with the current global population growth with decreasing job availability owing to 'labour saving' inventions, sequestration of global financial resources in few hands, and  increasing degradation of  our environment, which in the final analysis, is the source of all our material resources, we face the impossible, unless the notion of 'develpment' is redefined in a way compatible with civilised behaviour, and active steps are taken to reduce world population.
 
Lal Manavado.
 



From: notification@unteamworks.org [mailto:notification@unteamworks.org]
Sent: 29 March 2016 05:29
To: Lal Manavado
Subject: [World We Want 2030] Dr. Dennis Anderson professor, e-government expert, chairman from United States commented on the Discussion "The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development: scope and implications"

Paye Banza Sales Manager from Canada
Tue, March 29, 2016 at 07.24 am

EDUCATION IS THE FOUNDATION FOR ALL!

To help YOUTH better, we need to associate and listen to them. For EDUCATION, over 83% of them have shown their learning motivation; DIGITAL ORIENTED. The future of education and research for them is not STATIC where they are in continuous fight for resources and never enough for all despite the space and even if not financially justified, impossible to have all up to date references in a static library! That where One World One Academic Library approach comes in handy. All access same quality resources for equality of education and grow equally in knowledge, create new ones and develop. Sharing feature part of it starting with Canadian quality education reources with others around the world guarantees reciprocity and OFFLINE feature insure there is enough resources delivered to remote areas where there is no connectivity. Students and researches continue reading OFFLINE anywhere at their own ease and convenience. Courtesy of http://www.fvtelibrary.com/faq


Twitter: @FinalVision1 
 
Robert Ruitenbeek IT Consultant from Netherlands
Mon, March 28, 2016 at 12.26 pm

Dear All,

In addition to previous post I strongly advise to read the attached analysis on the interrelationships between Sustainable Development Targets and dietary change and reflect on how these insights effect the (to be localized) SDG priorities and approach.

Kind regards,

Robert

 

Ethan McLaughlin International Development student from United Kingdom
Mon, March 28, 2016 at 10.24 am

Okay so in order to adaquatly approach answering the large question of how to implement 2030, I will be approaching it by answering each question one by one. 

So firstly in order to truly understand and appreciate how best to find some kind of universal approach of implementation across the many different types of countries which occuppy this earth we inhabit, its important to appreciate how diverse the world is. As such implementation in order for  it to be successful each country needs guidelines to judge and shape their policies around. The issue is however that one set of guidlines on how a government must implement the agenda will not work and would in fact be rather counter productive. I think first and foremost because their are roughly 18 different target some which needs greater focus in certain regions in the world than others. As such their needs to be a greater appreciation of the usefulness of regional multilateral organisations like  the EU like the African Union, in there ability to be able to shape there own regional agenda based on their values, and their  peoples belives of goverance. This is also very useful because of  the fact fragile states in those particular regions are more likely to be influnced by their region than an organisation like the UN, who it could see or judge the mandate to be against its interest.  

 

Now looking at the second section if we are talking about trail brazlers, or best practise to ensure policy coherance I think this very much relates to my previous point. In order to allow for policy coherance there needs to be greater focus  on the success a regionally based agenda can have.

 

 

Paye Banza Sales Manager from Canada
Mon, March 28, 2016 at 04.26 pm

As far as EDUCATION, base of any development, is concerned, we suggest moving forward based on what is available to improve and where there is none, in most area in developing countries, start from scratch; http://www.fvtelibrary.com/aboutus . The DIGITAL revolution era and Internet have made it easy to deliver same quality education contents that none is left behind and resources are available anywhere at any time needed! INTERNET CONNECTIVITY should be a concern, OFFLINE feature of the Platform all to deliver resources pre-loaded on TABLETS and updated any time needed! It is easy than ever to dispatch quality education resources for mutual sharing of same quality material and cooperate on research projects to ensure reciprocity.

 #OneWorldOneAcademicLibrary allows all to SHARE same quality education resources starting from Canadian education institutions resources, boost research, frees invention spirit and avoid PLAGIARISM and re-invention of the wheel, gives a chance for all to grow equally in Knowledge, create new ones and develop! In addition, all communities, regardless geographic locations have same opportunity to do and manage their own to SHARE SELECTIVELY with the world while creating and developing effective solutions should fit better address respective local need to sustain development and climate change initiatives. Every community shapes its own Local, National, Continental or international agenda based on what they believe, their values with option share with others what they want, such an empowering enough to expect local competency and knowledge harvest from initiatives people made, believe and trust in.

Twitter: @FinalVision1

 
Lal Manavado from
Tue, March 29, 2016 at 07.29 am
A very questionable thesis indeed.
 
This notion of education seems to be unteble because it does not take into account some elementary facts, viz., functiona and total illiteracy, global linguistic variation which is a cultural right of peoples, levels of individual capacities for learning , and the crux, what should enable one to undertake? Is the answer the kind of work most popular today? Ah, it is that aspect of economy that has brought about the current misery and suffering.
 
Lal Manavado.
 



From: notification@unteamworks.org [mailto:notification@unteamworks.org]
Sent: 28 March 2016 19:29
To: Lal Manavado
Subject: [World We Want 2030] Paye Banza Sales Manager from Canada commented on the Discussion "The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development: scope and implications"

Ethan McLaughlin International Development student from United Kingdom
Mon, March 28, 2016 at 10.23 am

Okay so in order to adaquatly approach answering the large question of how to implement 2030, I will be approaching it by answering each question one by one. 

So firstly in order to truly understand and appreciate how best to find some kind of universal approach of implementation across the many different types of countries which occuppy this earth we inhabit, its important to appreciate how diverse the world is. As such implementation in order for  it to be successful each country needs guidelines to judge and shape their policies around. The issue is however that one set of guidlines on how a government must implement the agenda will not work and would in fact be rather counter productive. I think first and foremost because their are roughly 18 different target some which needs greater focus in certain regions in the world than others. As such their needs to be a greater appreciation of the usefulness of regional multilateral organisations like  the EU like the African Union, in there ability to be able to shape there own regional agenda based on their values, and their  peoples belives of goverance. This is also very useful because of  the fact fragile states in those particular regions are more likely to be influnced by their region than an organisation like the UN, who it could see or judge the mandate to be against its interest.  

 

Now looking at the second section if we are talking about trail brazlers, or best practise to ensure policy coherance I think this very much relates to my previous point. In order to allow for policy coherance there needs to be greater focus  on the success a regionally based agenda can have.

 

 

galma t. arcilla Director Intelligence from Philippines
Sun, March 27, 2016 at 12.12 am

THE 2030 AGENDA FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: SCOPE AND IMPLICATIONS

How can the guiding principle of “Leave no one behind” be put into practice in implementing the 2030 Agenda in different development contexts (e.g. least developed countries, middle-income countries, high-income countries, fragile states, etc.)?

The common and universal agenda to eliminate poverty, to promote global peace, and to sustain prosperity via planetary protection and preservation is an ambitious objective. This is view of the differing levels of development among participating member States. This disparity in human and natural resources, the unequal conditions for sustained economic development, and the disproportionate capacities of developing and underdeveloped countries to absorb and sustain the impact of the soon-coming economic development pose great challenge to the 2030 Agenda of the United Nations.

The principle of “leaving no one behind” is rhetoric for humanitarian intervention among less- and least-developed countries. The quest for global sustainable development by the year 2030 requires redistribution of wealth among participating countries. This redistribution of wealth – technological, natural, and commercial should be judicious and equitable such that a standard benchmark of development is attained by all member States. This means a global economic integration wherein the flow of goods, the protection of raw and natural resources, the peaceful conditions for a sustained commercial growth are to be put in place and then sustained for lasting prosperity and eradication of poverty.

This sustainable development agenda is supposed to be achieved by 2030. This translates to the adoption of common global economic policies and the implementation of national priorities attuned and aligned to this global agenda. The present inequalities of member economies must be solved and be eliminated. The present national predicaments of under- and least-developed countries must be transformed and remodeled such that preconditions for the elimination of poverty, eradication of diseases, elimination of social equality and the promotion of dignity among women and vulnerable sectors of society are achieved. World peace is attainable only where there is commitment among member countries to eliminate external aggression and engagement to war. This could be done initially by eliminating threats to national extinction – global disarmaments and the resolution of insurgency and ideological conflicts that often lead to property destruction, loss of lives, hunger, diseases, and retrogression of economic growth. Peace is thus understood as the absence of war and the cessation of hostilities that lead to intra- and international conflicts.

At the international level, what are the challenges to ensuring policy coherence for sustainable development? What are some examples of best practices and/or who are the “trail blazers” leading the way to improved coherence?

The challenges to ensuring policy coherence are basically rooted on the refusal to abide with or the non-compliance of member States to the principles and commitments of Agenda 2030. In such cases, the enforcement of the prior commitment of member States to the UN Resolution adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on 27 July 2012, otherwise known as the Rio de Janeiro Manifesto for The Future We Want, is in order. The applicable commitments or affirmations demanding enforcements are the following:

23. We reaffirm the importance of supporting developing countries in their efforts to eradicate poverty and promote empowerment of the poor and people in vulnerable situations, including removing barriers to opportunity, enhancing productive capacity, developing sustainable agriculture and promoting full and productive employment and decent work for all, complemented by effective social policies, including social protection floors, with a view to achieving the internationally agreed development goals, including the Millennium Development Goals.

. .

26. States are strongly urged to refrain from promulgating and applying any unilateral economic, financial or trade measures not in accordance with international law and the Charter that impede the full achievement of economic and social development, particularly in developing countries.

27. We reiterate our commitment, expressed in the Johannesburg Plan of Implementation, the 2005 World Summit Outcome and the outcome document of the High-level Plenary Meeting of the General Assembly on the Millennium Development Goals of 2010, to take further effective measures and actions, in conformity with international law, to remove the obstacles to the full realization of the right of self-determination of peoples living under colonial and foreign occupation, which continue to adversely affect their economic and social development as well as their environment, are incompatible with the dignity and worth of the human person and must be combated and eliminated.

Economic integration could only be advanced and coherence be monitored if member States are found to be compliant and observing faithfully these foregoing affirmations. While it is true that member countries have different capacities and diverging priorities, but without solid and firm commitments towards global sustainable development, developing countries and fragile states will be left behind in this global quest. Barriers to progress have to be eliminated, and the hindrances to the adoption and implementation of the 2030 Agenda be first identified, then resolved, and be eradicated completely. Unless the international policy roadmaps are not adopted and shared, policy coherence will never rise beyond national boundaries.

The experiences of the European Nation, from its initial creation as the European Economic Council until its full economic and administrative integration as the European Union could serve as the model for economic integration and development. The UN Agenda 2030 could very well evaluate the faults, the failings, and the flaws of the European Union in order for the United Nations to come up with an improved and perfected system of governance and economic redistribution among its member economies. Aside from the success of the European Union, there is no regional body of member-countries that could come close to their experience in implementing a more successful integration of economies and putting them under one administrative control and supervision. How could the UN development system provide coordinated and integrated support for the achievement of the 2030 Agenda?

The 2030 is thus a utopian agenda crafted by the United Nations to protect the interest of the most vulnerable economies today. Within fifteen years, the necessary technological and commercial infrastructure must first be put in place, before a nationwide transformation in policies and economic priorities are implemented. This means that global standards for doing intra- and international commerce must first be implemented and using recent technological advancements as monitoring systems for compliance, monitoring and evaluation. A common technological roadmap must first be installed before any administrative policies are implemented. Without a system of effective monitoring of compliance to these provisions and affirmation of the 2030 Agenda, the United Nations vision will remain an illusion.

Moreover, the engagement of civil societies that are accredited by the United Nations shall serve as “international police” to monitor, report, and ensure compliance of and among member-economies. This is most true among fragile states and developing countries where the issue of political divisions cause much economic regression, proliferation of graft and corrupt practices, and inequality among people in their sovereign nations. An effective system of check-and-balance or of responsibility and accountability must be put in place as a matter of implementation and monitoring of sustained compliance. National transformation must be monitored and evaluated to eliminate defects and flaws that hinder sustained economic growth and the protection of human rights.

THE 2030 AGENDA FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: NATIONAL IMPLEMENTATION

How can the SDGs be effectively mainstreamed into relevant national sustainable development policies and programmes, while preserving countries’ policy space to pursue national priorities? How can the UN development system best support this?

National sustainable development policies and programmes must be fine tuned or realigned to the global policies and programmes of the United Nations 2030 Agenda. Since member States have already signed their decisions to support and made affirmations to implement the provisions of the 2030 Agenda of the United Nations, independent national policies and programmes that veer away from the directions of this Agenda shall be discouraged, or be encouraged on a short-term basis. This depends on the impact on the respective national development efforts of member countries.

Without firm and resolute commitment to implement the objectives of the UN 2030 Agenda, the envisioned global and societal transformations by 2030 will never materialize. But taking into consideration the present commitments and priorities of other lesser developed and developing economies, there shall deadlines and timelines when the pursuit of this global Agenda be pursued faithfully by these member countries.

Members of the UN system that are stationed or in-residence to these member-countries should employ the participation and engagement of civil societies and private organizations to hasten the implementation of this global UN Agenda. Since most developing countries are heavily politicized when it comes to crafting national and international policies, there must be a system of accountability wherein these member-countries are going to mainstream the global UN Agenda in their respective government operations. Civil societies and private organizations could likewise serve as conduits of national development by the United Nations, instead of merely relying on mainstream government to implement national developmental efforts. Sensitive infrastructures that do not infringe on national security issues could be implemented by non-government organizations and other private organizations for faster socio-economic transformation of developing and underdeveloped economies. In this manner, affirmation of human rights and the promotion of national security remain secure in the hands of the government. However, on a deeper analysis, poverty is another form of human rights violation. If there are means to eliminate instances of poverty and social depravities, the State is duty bound to ensure that the welfare and the social and moral well-being of its citizens are met and protected. Hence, there should be no barriers in the employment of civil societies and other private organization in meeting the needs – public and private – of the people.

Meanwhile, the technical and technological infrastructure of the global network for mainstreaming and monitoring compliance of member countries must be put in place parallel to the development efforts of underprivileged economies. The global infrastructure on trade and commerce, communication, and transportation must be facilitated earlier while mainstreaming of global policies are being elaborated and in the process of adoption by member countries.

Climate change and other economic hindrances to sustainable development must be eliminated where these factors continue to ravage less- or least-developed countries. High-income economies should extend all necessary assistance to speed up the transformation processes for these lagging economies. Otherwise, the agreed 15-year timeframe might proved too short and too idealistic if there is no intervention extended among lagging economies. The principle of “leaving no one behind” must be initiated even at the earliest stage of adoption by member-countries. Otherwise, these lagging economies might be hampered by too much poverty and too much politics in adopting and implementing these UN 2030 Agenda for sustainable development.

What are the key areas for making progress on and building national and sub-national capacities for sustainable development, and how do they differ across country contexts (e.g., least developed countries, middle income countries, high-income countries, countries in situations of fragility, etc.)? When and how can partnerships effectively contribute to capacity building and sustainable development?

The UNDESA and the UNDP should guide and assist participating countries in formulating monitoring forms wherein the Key Result Areas (17 Sustainable Development Goals) are given timelines for adoption and implementation of these goals, including the identification of implementing agencies, resources needed, and the desired results at a certain evaluation period. A monitoring and evaluation matrix of adoption and development should be submitted by member-countries to the implementing body/ies of the United Nations. These government matrices of implementation should be the bases also for fund infusion and other means of assistance whereby substantial success is achieved by least developed and developing economies. As no unilateral program of national government that runs inconsistent with the 2030 Agenda will be allowed, monitoring of government agencies in charge of implementing UN Agenda provisions shall be held accountable for timely and effective implementation of these goals.

UN financial institutions shall review and extend financial assistance to all development efforts of member-countries as reflected in their respective medium-term development plans. These National Medium Term Development Plans shall serve as the member-country’s commitment to adopt and implement the UN Agenda for 2030. Through this national socio-economic plan, strategic financing of development, strategic partnership in the implementation of these high-impact or relevant policies, programmes and projects are implemented effectively and without delays. The civil society partners of the United Nations shall ensure that their respective governments are moving along the lines of Agenda 2030. These alternative service mechanisms shall submit to the UN their reports and observations on the successful or failed implementation of these funded programs and projects.

A system of accountability is thus put in place, whereby the UN is assured of credible monitoring results while national governments measure their success or failure based on their targeted National Medium Term Development Plans. In reality, these national Medium Term Development Plans could incorporate Regional or Global Sustainable Development Goals aligned to the objectives of the 2030 UN Agenda. Among the Key Result Areas to be compared, monitored, and synchronized for global sustainable development are the following:

 Stable and sustainable macro-economy of every member-nation
 Industry and services sectors made globally competitive and innovative
 Agricultural and fisheries modernization
 National infrastructure development
 Energy self-sufficiency and conservation
 National Information and Communications Technology deployment and competitiveness
 National social infrastructure to ensure poverty alleviation
 Financial capability and resiliency of member-nations
 Good governance and adherence to the rule of law
 Social development – health, nutrition, and population management
 Education, training and skills improvement
 Housing and shelter provision and protection
 Peace and security issues of the nation and people
 Conservation of natural resources and environmental protection
 Climate change mitigation and adaptation

What steps are necessary to ensure that all stakeholders, including the government, private sector and civil society can readily exchange information and experiences? How can “peer exchange” be established and nurtured?

National governments and UN representatives should form a multi-sectoral bodies that will monitor the progress of adoption and the success of implementing projects and programs that would eliminate poverty in and among member-countries. The services of the resident UN bodies and accredited UN none-government organizations should be recognized and be given a hand in monitoring and implementing the relevant provisions of the 2030 UN Agenda. This is without prejudice to the monitoring of issues contributing to the failure or lack of compliance among participating countries.

“Peer exchange” or the exchange of files and information among participants to monitor, review, and revise certain policies and protocols in the implementation of these SDGs should be established early. “Benchmarking” of progress and development must be closely monitored by the UN and with the participation of host national economies to ensure transparency and honesty in adopting the sustainable goals of the UN 2030 Agenda. Through the ICT infrastructure of national government, the monitoring body of the UN should be connected to this governmental communication infrastructure such that systematic guidance and reviews of programs and projects under monitoring are kept within the allowable limits of success or failure in implementation.


THE 2030 AGENDA FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: FOLLOW UP AND REVIEW

What are the key components of a comprehensive national review process? What capacities will need to be strengthened at the national level in order to conduct the necessary reviews? How can accountability and transparency of the review process be supported?

The United Nations should provide common guidelines with common Key Result Areas (KRAs) for implementation and monitoring and with indicators on how effective or efficient did these countries implement these KRAs. The UN 2030 Agenda Oversight Committee should establish benchmarks indicating compliance and non-compliance, strengths and weaknesses, deficiencies and sufficiency of national development programs in the context of their recent economic status. Each member country shall adopt the United Nations common standards for labor, socio-economic and environmental programs. As universal access to funding is made available to finance development and to uproot underdevelopment, a common financing platform for all member-countries should be put in place.

The UN Oversight Committee should impose further common and coordinated efforts to monitor the status and the stability of member-nations at the macro- and micro-economic levels. This is to ensure that there will be compliance and common understanding of the UN 2030 Agenda in fostering comprehensive and sustainable means of funding development for all member-nations. These efforts should be based on common and global financial regulations applicable and imposable among recipient countries. This common regulation would thus regulate also the illicit flow of funding from sources not otherwise approved by the UN Oversight Committee.

Each country shall submit for review, implementation, and monitoring their respective National Medium Term Development Plans that take into account the present status of national development program and economic projections. These national development plans must be fine tuned, aligned and synchronized, and then be closely monitored by the UN Oversight Committee to ensure faithful compliance with the common platform. For those poor and underdeveloped economies, How can they be restructured economically to catch up with their developed counterparts must be given extra attention by the UN Oversight Committee. If poverty elimination is to be eliminated by 2030, then debt structuring, sustainable economic growth and unprecedented industrialization efforts must be put in place in order for these least developed countries (LDCs) to move on the economic ladder.

In the same vein, technology transfer from developed economies must also be done and must include all least developed countries (in the technology loop of the UN Agenda. Sane thing is true for scientific advancements that are now being enjoyed by the modern societies. Upgrading of social, technological, and economical status by and among these LDCs must be the main priorities of the UN 2030 Agenda. Redistribution of wealth, technology, scientific researches and development, as well resiliency of environmental conditions to combat global challenges of climate change must be put in place also, with urgency, among these LDCs and fragile economies.

The UN 2030 Agenda Oversight Committee must also demand fine tuning of national development efforts with the goals and objectives of the UN 2030 Agenda. The respective national Medium Term Development Plans of member-countries should reflect the overall visions and strategies of implementation by the UN Oversight Committee. These developmental demands could also be incorporated or form part of the over-all Regional or Global Sustainable Development Agenda that is aligned to the objectives of the 2030 UN Agenda. Among the Key Result Areas to be compared, monitored, and synchronized for global sustainable development are the following:

 Stable and sustainable macro-economy of every member-nation
 Industry and services sectors made globally competitive and innovative
 Agricultural and fisheries modernization
 National infrastructure development
 Energy self-sufficiency and conservation
 National Information and Communications Technology deployment and competitiveness
 National social infrastructure to ensure poverty alleviation
 Financial capability and resiliency of member-nations
 Good governance and adherence to the rule of law
 Social development – health, nutrition, and population management
 Education, training and skills improvement
 Housing and shelter provision and protection
 Peace and security issues of the nation and people
 Conservation of natural resources and environmental protection
 Climate change mitigation and adaptation

From macro level, the implementation and adoption of the UN 2030 Agenda should be monitored down to the micro level to ensure compliance to the common developmental platform of the 2030 Agenda. National accountability should pass through the lens of the Regional Councils and ultimately to the Global Council of the UN 2030 Agenda. However, at the National level, there should be a composite team from the UN Global, Regional, and National Levels that would monitor and follow up compliances and adoptions of these global sustainable development agenda.

How can the follow-up and review at the regional and global level – including through a strong High-level Political Forum under the auspices of the ECOSOC and the newly created ECOSOC-Forum on Financing for Development – facilitate the achievement of the SDGs?

The ECOSOC Forum shall serve as the main avenue to discuss, evaluate, and address developmental concerns by member-countries, based on reports from the national, regional, and global levels of the UN 2030 Agenda Committee. The SDGs shall serve as the baseline developmental efforts of all member-nations and the implementation of which shall be coursed through national governments, with the ready assistance of the regional UN bodies to urgently and immediately address brewing issues of non-compliance or incapacities of fragile economies on the adoption and implementation of these SDGs.

A third and objective monitoring and evaluation efforts should be given by civil society groups or non-government organizations accredited by the UN ECOSOC to participate and monitor the implementation of these SDGs. A “whole of nation” approach that includes the presence and participation of NGOs and civil society groups in the Political Forum should be encouraged. This all-level system of monitoring and implementation of SDGs at the national and regional levels could be given immediate attention and solution by the Committee on global implementation.

Financing and economic regulation concerns are thus easily addressed and resolved to the minutest satisfaction of the global committees. Trade and economic barriers that differ among nations are either eliminated or eased up to allow the smooth flow of goods and commerce in every regional bodies, as well as to the global synchronization of all member countries.

What steps need to be taken to put in place the evidence base (i.e., established, new and emerging sources of data and monitoring capacities) to help track progress on the 2030 Agenda and inform decision-making where course correction is needed?

Global implementation of SDGs require the establishment of a global communication infrastructure that would hasten decision-making processes in addressing inequality of wealth and natural resources and disparity in national capacities of member countries. A “Third Force” a community of non-government organizations should be tapped and be connected to the global communications system to monitor implementation of these global SDGs. This “Third Force” shall facilitate national adoption and the elimination of barriers in implementing business and social processes outside of the ambit of bureaucratic systems. A regional, national, and sub-national communication infrastructure should be established such that facilitation of compliance and elimination of negative factors are easily addressed. This global communication facility should keep track of all levels of adoption and implementation. It should include a global network of organizations that are not subject to bureaucratic restraints that would impinge national sovereignty.

A global benchmarking system is thus a necessity to establish an “evidence-based” monitoring system. This would help global mangers determine the accountability and responsibility of member-nations as they implement the global SDGs. In this manner, fine tuning and aligning of national policies are tracked and re-oriented to keep pace with the growth of other member-nations. A global compliance index is thus secured and put in place, plus a global accountability map is formulated ensuring that no one is left behind in the sustainable development agenda of the UN 2030.

Humphrey Tonkin Professor from United States
Sat, March 26, 2016 at 11.21 pm

Talk of two-way communication and of reaching everyone really doesn't mean much if we cannot engage people in their languages.  It is all too easy to formulate our plans in English, but not at all easy to get feedback from people who either don't understand English or understand it too poorly to formulate a response.  Globalization only extends so far: it does not extend as far as many of the people whom we wish to engage in dialogue.  Here is a brief position paper that my organization recently put together on the neglect of the linguistic dimension to the SDGs...

The SDGs must embrace civil society as well as governments.

The seventeen Sustainable Development Goals recently adopted by the United Nations build on, and go beyond, the Millennium Development Goals, the focus of the UN’s development efforts in the period 2000-2015.  At the time of the launch of the MDGs the representatives of the Member-States made it clear that their successful completion would depend not only on the efforts of governments but also on the efforts of those whom the governments serve – the ordinary citizens who must hold their governments accountable, and the various organizations of civil society which can both provide help in ways that governments cannot and also put pressure on governments to fulfil their commitments.

 

The SDGs are for everyone everywhere.

This outreach to civil society that proved increasingly necessary as the fifteen years of the MDGs proceeded was given particular emphasis in the planning and formulation of the recently announced SDGs for the period 2015-2030.  Civil society, especially in the form of nongovernmental organisations, was involved from the beginning. “This 2030 agenda is for everyone everywhere,” remarked Helen Clark, Administrator of the UN Development Program and former Prime Minister of New Zealand, in a recent meeting on the SDGs.  The SDGs, added Erna Solberg, Prime Minister of Norway, constitute “the largest development dialogue the world has ever seen.” “It is important to listen to the voices of the people,” remarked Phan Binh Minh, the Deputy Prime Minister of Viet-Nam, in that same meeting.

 

The SDGs must involve dialogue as well as monologue, listening as well as talking.

In short, as these political leaders suggerst, we are looking at an effort that involves everyone – in a dialogue, a two-way conversation, on development – and a dialogue in which it is important to listen to the voices of the people rather than dictate solutions to them in the one-sided, top-down development process that in the past was all too common in international development circles and also at the national level. 

 

The dimension of language is largely missing from the SDGs.

Yet, while the talk is of dialogue, and of listening as well as talking, somehow this does not translate into an awareness of language itself.  It is striking that the dimension of language is barely mentioned in most discussions of the SDGs, and not at all in the seventeen goals themselves.  The “dialogue” to which Prime Minister Solberg refers is conducted overwhelmingly in English, and to a lesser degree in other major languages.  Yet the people at whom so many of the goals are directed – particularly those dealing with such fields as poverty, education, and literacy – often do not speak the language or languages of the policymakers.  Often they belong to language minorities with little voice in their own countries, and certainly not in the wider world.  As Suzanne Romaine, of Oxford University, puts it, citing Clinton Robinson, “Use of local languages is inseparable from participatory development. Local people will not own development until they can discuss it among themselves and with outsiders without the barrier of someone else’s language.”

 

Are we listening?

Yet are we listening to these voices?  Are their governments listening?  Are the NGOs listening?  As the editors of the journal Reconsidering Development recently stated, “International development exists inside language; we do not have international development without language” – but is the dialogue truly a two-way dialogue?

 

Language lies at the very core of human communication.

When, a couple of years ago, the Canadian scholar Mark Fettes examined the eighteen “think pieces” put out by the United Nations System Task Team in the early stages of formulating the SDGs, he was startled to find that this “group of senior experts from over 50 UN entities and international organizations appointed by the Secretary-General” mentioned language only a total of four times in the entire length of all eighteen documents, and then only in connection with other “indicators of diversity, inequality or discrimination,” never as a factor in its own right.  Yet language choice and language use have a direct effect on the efficacy of political engagement, on the effectiveness of education, on legal processes, on human rights.  Language is a major factor in the inclusion or exclusion of particular populations, and sadly is often used as an instrument of discrimination and disempowerment.  It seems odd that people of goodwill (and we have no doubt about the goodwill of our UN colleagues in the field of development) should accord so little attention to the linguistic processes that lie at the very core of human communication.

 

The United Nations must pay greater attention to language in development.

The Universal Esperanto Association, an NGO associated with both the Economic and Social Council and the Department of Public Information at the United Nations, is interested not only in the promotion of the International Language Esperanto but also in the elimination of all forms of discrimination, including linguistic discrimination, and in the advancement of all basic human rights, including linguistic rights.  It is one of only a very few NGOs concerned with issues of language.  It is pursuing a two-part strategy in connection with the Sustainable Development Goals.  First, it is using its worldwide network of Esperanto speakers to advance the SDGs and urging the members of this network to intervene with their governments in support of the SDGs.  Second, it is urging the United Nations in the strongest possible terms to pay greater attention to language issues and to recognize that effective communication and inclusive language policies go hand in hand.

 

Translating words into action involves attention to language.

In a recent article, Kathy Calvin, president and CEO of the United Nations Foundation, and R. Venkataramanan of the Tata Trusts, pointed out that “We are in a new era of development that recognizes the need for fresh approaches and engagement from all sectors. These lessons can help the international community move beyond traditional models and strengthen public-private partnerships so we can translate our next set of global goals from words to lasting change.” The authors’ choice of metaphors merits a second look: they talk of translating global goals from words to lasting change. Such translation will not be realised if we do not listen to the languages of those we wish to include, nor will words produce lasting change unless the words are their words as well as ours, and the lasting change a result of change on the part of all.

Humphrey Tonkin

UN representative, Universal Esperanto Association

Lal Manavado from
Tue, March 29, 2016 at 07.29 am
A terrific point, Prof. Tomkins!
 
 
I am very happy to see your contribution which addresses a general problem so succintly.
 
In some of my remarks, I have touched on this point with reference to its importance in a specific field, planning education  and elearning for instance.
 
Political leaders often say the obvious, but the inspired mien they can easily assume when saying such, and the context, make the general public hope for the best even when their reason warns them against such maivate.  Yes, when would they ever learn? Small local civil society units seem to offer the only rational means towards a somewhat improved future for the deprived.
 
Lal Manavado.
 


From: notification@unteamworks.org [mailto:notification@unteamworks.org]
Sent: 27 March 2016 03:12
To: Lal Manavado
Subject: [World We Want 2030] Humphrey Tonkin Professor from United States commented on the Discussion "The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development: scope and implications"

Gary Chan from Australia
Sat, March 26, 2016 at 09.47 am

A Simplistic View or Implementation as an Empirical Process

I wish to consider what may seem a simplistic view, only for the purpose of clarity and to reduce the over-intellectualisation of programs and their development and implementation.

Relativity

The concept of leaving no-one behind, is relative.

It may assume that "advancement" is only the domain of the highly educated, the highly technically innovative, and the highly "developed" countries and population.

This is not to say that advancement is 'bad' overall, but the view must be taken from many perspectives.

However, if we take the goal of leaving no-one's health or well-being to diminish or not to advance, as the principal ambition, then the actions that support this individual goal will be comprehensive in range, but nuanced to the particular situation.

This suite of actions would include education, medical support, preventative measures in health, technology (requiring clarification as to suitability), measures for peace, environment management, biodiversity, climate, understanding of futures, and more.

At the very core of this is education, at every level, but to include necessarily, the education of the 'advanced' in understanding what impacts there are on development.

A Difficulty in Embracing Advancement

In the simplest of examples, advancement in technological practices often displace local and Indigenous knowledge, and indeed may limit the progress of those communities by taking away identity, and the models of sustainability that may have been practised for generations.

Even in this example, we have seen many situations (and still concurrent) of the impact on these communities, in displacement, mental well-being, and ultimately, life expectancy. Indeed, the unceasing progression of technical implementation is likely undermining the opportunities of many of the SDGs.

Again, there needs to be a broader understanding and an education process for those who are designing policies and implementing technological "advancements" on a global scale.

A View That Is Hard To Dismiss

In a somewhat facetious view, and on an even simpler example, "technology" is now able to reproduce systems that can take light from the sun, convert it to energy, that can be used to develop products that provide fuel for living beings. Plants have been doing this for quite a while, but human intervention is diminishing the sustainability of many plant systems (ecologies).

We are also now developing "technologies" and smart systems to make better use of sunlight much to compensate for the increased energy demand upon which the developed world is increasingly dependant. This includes the design in social and commercial management systems for people to operate in active work and services to make use of daylight.

In contrast, some of the most marginalised people are Indigenous peoples in advanced economies, where health prospects and outcomes in many cases are continuing to diminish.

Basic Needs

It would seem that the world has the capability to ensure that every living being can benefit from medicine and good health practices, whilst also having the capabilities to deliver education and technologies (at every level), and a system of roles whereby acceptance, understanding and sharing are eminently possible.

The question of why even the most basic needs of those in disadvantage or those disengaged or at the margins are consistently undermet or unmet, is not one of capability or capacity, but rather of will.

Implementation

In implementing and delivering actions that meet the SDGs, all actors on this stage must be educated as to what the basic needs required for each nuanced situation, and all actors must be represented in undertaking the processes of access, understanding and delivery.

This necessitates the engagement and empowerment of those in disadvantage, disengagement and at the margins, in knowing the full extent of what is possible and how they may be involved in the processes of development that would suit there demographic.

Similarly, those who are in a position of influencing national, regional and global policy and impacts, must also commit to undertake a process of education in order to understand the real impact of their decisions, and how best to apply acquired knowledge to nuanced situations.

The danger is that the top-down approach will still be adopted, with those at the 'top' being unaware of who is being left behind. Worse still, is that those who are left behind are considered only as an economic statistic.

Access to Knowledge, Empowerment of the Individual

There is nothing unequivocal about this statement.

  1. The conversation around the processes and outcomes of the SDGs and indeed, of the advancement of the individual at every level, and in every circumstance, must be enhanced. In particular, in the 'advanced' world, these conversations are most often secondary to other agendas.
     
  2. Individuals must have access to information as to what is possible, what the processes can be to achieve progress, and an understanding of what the impacts may well be of implementation (including heritage, culture, identity, and individuality), for implementation to be considered to be successful.

  3. Generations and populations must be able to have access to education systems and content that embrace both nuance and diversity, within local, regional and global contexts.

  4. Processes that produce global engagement must be facilitated; direct representation of those most disadvantaged must be included, with agreement to engage by understanding and accepting both nuance and diversity.
     

To achieve the implementation goals of the SDGs, each of these points must be considered.

Lal Manavado from
Tue, March 29, 2016 at 07.29 am
Environment  management?
 
As you insist on simplification, may I point out environment management sounds very much like  treating our environment  like some commercial venture to be managed with a view to unlimited profit.
 
Besides, it assumes that humans are it managers? Short of using the Bible, there is no way to justify such a belief, after all, we are just as a part of our habitat as any other living thing that inhabits it.
 
Our much vaunted reason certainly does not entitle us to that previledge as even a cursory look around what we have so far done to it will loundly proclaim in ringing tones.
 
So, let us simply learn to live in harmony with our environment, and drop biblical terms like 'mastering nature', 'taming it', 'exploiting it', etc.
 
Lal Manavado.

 

From: notification@unteamworks.org [mailto:notification@unteamworks.org]
Sent: 26 March 2016 12:06
To: Lal Manavado
Subject: [World We Want 2030] Gary Chan from Australia commented on the Discussion "The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development: scope and implications"

Paye Banza Sales Manager from Canada
Sun, March 27, 2016 at 01.46 am

Practically, the disparity is most due to declining Education support due to lake of research for personal development. Providing the minimum for one to stand make himself useful for his community. We thought  of a village SHARING way directly applied to EDUCATION RESOURCES availability to all; #OneWorldOneAcademicLibrary for fair bilateral dispatch! All share same quality education resources that none is left behind. Otherwise, how do you ensure a child in Burundi or Botswana etch ... and CANADA, USA, BRASIL ... access same quality education resources to grow equally in knowledge, empower youth to create relevant and effective solution for their respective communities? OFFLINE feature of delivering education resources eases on the process, no excuses to leave one behind in this digital era revolution. Regardless geographic location none is discriminated against knowledge acquisition to GROW EQUALLY in KNOWLEDGE, CREATE NEW ONES and DEVELOP. Local contribution for sustainable education for development value the same as developing countries ones would. Courtesy of http://www.fvtelibrary.com/faq 


Twitter: @FinalVision1 
 
Rob Wheeler "Rob Wheeler, Global Ecovillage Network and the Commons Cluster from United States
Sat, March 26, 2016 at 01.51 am

Ensuring Policy Coherence and UN Support for Achieving the SDGs

 

If we want to ensure that there is policy coherence at the international, national, and at other levels of governance it is essential that the United Nations develop guidelines for implementing the SDGs at the National and Local level. These guidelines should include such things as: 

 

  • Integrating planning and implementation both horizontally and vertically (thus across all goals, sectors, and issue areas and across all levels of the society and government)

 

  • Adopting comprehensive national and state legislation for implementing the SDGs and 2030 agenda, based on the findings and input from Local, Regional and National Sustainability Councils and participatory multi-stakeholder processes 

 

  • Establishment of an administrative and coordinating office within the executive or administrative branch of government

 

  • Ensuring that government ministers are fully engaged in the process, along with the leaders from the business community and leading civil society organizations

 

  • Establishment of multi-stakeholder cross-sectoral working groups or task forces

 

  • Including the participation of the academic community and educational institutions in the planning and implementation processes - and particularly to participation of students at all levels in an age appropriate manner in these processes. 

 

  • Basing the local and national planning and implementation processes on the Rio Principles

 

  • Establishing sustainable development and the achievement of the SDGs as a basic operating principle of governance at all levels of government

 

The implementation processes must be based upon such pre-requisites for creating a sustainable society and economy as: transitioning rapidly to a zero waste, circular economy and extended producer responsibility; restoration of the natural environment; biological waste treatment and processes; restoring natural water cycles and soil health; adoption of renewable energy; eliminating toxic substances; etc. 

 

The guidelines and review processes must look into the extent to which each of the things mentioned above is being incorporated and done at a local, regional and national level. 

 

How the UN development system could provide coordinated and integrated support for the achievement of the 2030 Agenda

 

For each of the SDGs a UN agency should be tasked with managing or overseeing the work being done on that Goal and the accompanying Targets and Indicators. Each managing agency or division within DESA would be mandated to support the development of partnership initiatives to aid in implementation for that Goal area. An agency or also should be designated to coordinate and support partnerships that are multi-sectoral in nature and that address multiple targets and goals as well. 

 

Each of the UN agencies should also be mandated and authorized to designate a contact person/office or liaison to support the development of partnership initiatives, particularly those that focus on the mandates of said agency. Each UN agency should be tasked with considering, supporting and participating in those multi-stakeholder partnership initiatives that include a focus and that are oriented towards fulfilling the mandates of that agency and the relevant SDGs and their related targets - and particularly those that include the substantial participation of civil society organizations or are being organized by civil society organizations. 

 

Finally, resources must be made available through UN agencies to support capacity building and development (particularly for civil society and civil society organizations) such as was supposed to be included through  UNDP’s thematic trust funds after WSSD in 2002 before they were phased out. 

 

Rob Wheeler

GEN UN Representative

1-717-264-0957

skype: robineagle333

rob.wheeler@ecovillage.org

Rob Wheeler "Rob Wheeler, UN Representative, Global Ecovillage Network" from United States
Sat, March 26, 2016 at 01.18 am

Leaving No One Behind

 

Most of those that face extreme poverty live in rural communities and areas or impoverished urban settlements. They typically face multiple challenges such as lacking access to clean water and basic sanitation, electricity and ICT; depleted soils and a degraded natural environment; lack of good jobs and right livelihood opportunities; etc. In rural areas they tend to depend upon subsistence agriculture for food and income and are highly susceptible to droughts and other climate disturbances. 

 

If we are truly to ensure that we leave no one behind, then we must provide the resources needed for planning and implementation processes at the local level and for small, informal and rural communities or villages. Implementation must take place in a cross-sectoral fully integrated manner. 

 

The international community and nation states must invest in such things as restoring the natural environment; increasing soil health and agricultural productivity thru agro-forestry and agroecology; restoring natural water cycles and creating water retention landscapes; and adopting natural building processes using local materials, etc. Given that 90% of waste water flows back into the watershed untreated in the developing world, and the money is not available for “modern” forms of waste treatment, we must invest in biological waste treatment and processes - which makes sense anyway as they can recover valuable nutrients that are needed to enhance and sustain agricultural productivity and soil health. Carbon farming and use of biochar is essential to sequester carbon and reduces the unwanted impacts coming from climate change. 

 

Again community based processes are needed to carry out such activities in an effective and integrated manner; and they should be integrated with national plans to implement them at the local to national scale and level. However the international community, United Nations, and its Member States need to support this as well to ensure that it can be scaled up as needed around the world. 

 

Rob Wheeler

GEN UN Representative

1-717-264-0957

skype: robineagle333

rob.wheeler@ecovillage.org

Carol Bangura Advocate, Educator, Doctoral Student from United States
Sat, March 26, 2016 at 01.11 am

Thank you for the opportunity to contribute to the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development: scope and implications. The guiding principle Leave no one behind is a reminder that we must not forget the most vulnerable amongst us, the children. This principle can be put into practice within the 2030 agenda in the context of children orphaned by the 2014 outbreak in Sierra Leone, Guinea, and Liberia. Declarations marking the end of the outbreak in each continue can serve as a call for healing for the children impacted by the trauma related to the disease directly and indirectly. Education and psychosocial support is needed for the children, specifically the girls to decrease their vulnerability for gender based violence and change their life trajectory. Providing such care is in line with SDG 5. Over a decade after the civil war that affected the three countries ended, the war orphans are still in need of assistance. We cannot allow the Ebola orphans to experience a similar fate.

At the international level, the challenges are ensuring funding for post Ebola recovery efforts are equitable and geared towards the girls. An example of a trail blazer is the Ebola Orphan’s Project, a Schools Without Borders program that empowers girls affected directly and indirectly by Ebola in Sierra Leone, Guinea, and Liberia. The project is cost effective and provides new books and guided reading workshops to girls. The UN development system can provide coordinated and integrated support for the achievement of the 2030 Agenda by ensuring the orphans are not left behind. Ensuring that the plight of these vulnerable children is not forgotten and that adequate and equitable funding is allotted for their care.

Thank you,

Carol Bangura

luiz gama Economist, College teacher from Brazil
Sat, March 26, 2016 at 12.37 am

Leave none behind,is a nice image, it expresses lot of humankind essence, forming groups, cooperating to survive, overcaming the obstacles with team work, intelligence, and communication such as to perform the Saga we are part of , and now we see ourselves, in a corner of the history of the planet, when seven billion people on the face of it, a finite planet, with one and only specie, that had become rational and soberana, comanding transformations that have been changing the face of it, called the Antropoceno period: The climate, the athmosphere, entirely biomas, oceans currents, in such a way that all of those problems are related, and living none behind, sometimes means understand the transformations that the microclimate is performing, and causing harm to the family agriculture,for example, breaking down the means of survival of an entirely society, putting them on the run, so they are gone, now as refugees...listen! This transformation i have been checking is called Desertification, and in African continent, it is expanding the area associated for decades, specially the last one, when a fast pace of spreadness, evolved towards Syrian region, affecting the the climate to change, but certainly in a predicted way, by usage of complex softwares,, and it´s consequences minimized, but unfurtunelly nothing was done!

According to the intrinsics aspects of the Steady State Theory, where it is fully recomended that the economical basis wich creates sustainbility of a specific society has to be preserved, and if it´s regular basis is under threat, one must look for new horizonts in therms of envoy other values, for example, in Africa, we were suggesting a Bamboo School, which was conceived to deal with people from different cultures, since the diversity of tribals, languages, cultures, were massive! So, once the school could deal with diversity problem by requesting diferents ways of dealing with that plant, that has as chracteristic, be universal use and present in the entirely planet, retaining lots of values, it has utilizations in clothing, civil engeneering, arts, instruments, decorationg, so on...i decided that this was the immediate iniciative to aggregate people that had passed severe traumas from misery, lost their parents, child abuse, so on. We are prepared to deal with. The school certainly will leavy none behind, and as it´s expands, it includes more and more people, tribal people.

And here is the best my atitude, put together my experience of 27 years working for Univercity Gama Filho, in Rio de Janeiro, as member of Board of Trustees, but also as a college teacher, long distance learning adviser, and economist. but now i decide to step out of, and lets go! I would like to form a workteam, find a path towards funds, make it happens.

Robert Ruitenbeek IT Consultant from Netherlands
Fri, March 25, 2016 at 11.13 pm

Dear All,

The principles of sustainable development is a principle of action concerning the whole of humanity and is officially accepted by virtually all decision makers in business and politics. This principle states:

We Humans must move towards the adoption of a lifestyle that can continue indefinitely

In this context we all are developing countries and therefore, through all available institutions, as one species we need to commit, engage & act upon the Sustainable Development Goals 2030 programme.

We Humans need to start right now (re-)educating and mobilizing all peoples in understanding and acting upon the SDG 2030 goals.

So far governments, as they are influenced by large economic entities (i.e. multinationals), have demonstrated to be ineffective (i.e. lack the economic leverage) in really taking the socio-economic-environmental changes forward.

If governments can't and multinationals won't then it's up to us! Now we need to understand that we Humans are the largest socio-economic-environmental entity involved and that we therefore do have the leverage!

Thus, the framework the DESA/UNDP/ECOSOC is looking for should, as opposed to top-down, be organized bottom-up and people-centric!

 

Moving forward to a sustainable lifestyle can be achieved through the following initial approach


1) Educate peoples worldwide on:

a.  understanding, acknowledging and acting upon the ‘Universal Declaration of Human Responsibilities’ and the ‘Earth Charter’

b. The urgency to commit, engage & act upon the 2030 SDG’s using data from the Global Footprint Network 2016 accounts,  University of Oxford (PNAS) report ‘Analysis and valuation of the health and climate change cobenefits of dietary change’ and 350.org

c. Improving their bio-footprint (how to live, eat, dwell, work, leisure & travel in a sustainable fashion!)
d. Availability of clean technologies for energy, water & transport (Solar, Wind, Tidal, Combined Wind/Water condensation turbines)
e. Environmentally Sustainable Farming (without pesticides, herbicides & GMO)
f. How to mobilize the socio-economic-environmental influence & Leverage peoples have
e. Making choices which will influence nations and industries into sustainability (live, eat, dwell, work, leisure & travel green!) 

2)
Facilitate (local) governments in changing priorities to:

a. Improve availability & accessibility of online knowledge infrastructures & education:
b. Reduce bio-footprint through honest (people before profit) information on how to live, eat, dwell, work, leisure & travel accordingly
c. Increasingly tax unsustainable products, services & industries (e.g. fast-food, fossil fuels)
d. Subsidize natural healthy sustainable products, services & industries  (e.g. natural plant based food, electric engines) 
e. Improve & accelerate availability & accessibility of clean technologies for energy, water & transport

3)
Encourage nations & other macro-economic entities into becoming people-centric by:

a. Turning the unsustainable Profit-before-People premise into an actual sustainable People-before-Profit premise in adherence with Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and ISO 26000 principles
b. Adapting monetary systems & economics to support the People-before-Profit premise
c. Setting up and applying (inter)national law against any form of (continued) profit-centric exploitation of earth’s resources, animals & peoples
d. Supporting industries in understanding their environmental impact & related costs, adapting their business models from a People-before-Profit premise and rendering their products & services sustainable

4)
Communicating using modern mobile web techniques we might just pull it off to get the programme forward in a faster pace and in a timely fashion in regard to the TWW2030 goals.

For instance: >> DESA/UNDP/ECOSOC could first build an mobile TWW2030 Educational app containing the basics on environmental sustainability!  Secondly one could build an TWW2030 Operations app using the indicator framework for gathering input on Development Goal specific progress. Make deals with international TelCo’s and ISP’s on delivering this apps for free. Promote the availability through an international media campaign (go viral on the web).
<<

 

With this approach we address the following challenges   


- To better the World as targeted by this UN body we Humans need to better ourselves!!

- We need to focus on restoring the balance from social, economic, environmental and systemic perspectives in favor off all nations and all peoples

- As long as 50 percent of global wealth is owned by 3 percent of the global population no real shift in balance is to be expected

- As long as 70 percent of all cereals are shipped and used as food for livestock for western markets no real shift in balance is to be expected

- As long as we allow meat/dairy industry and corporates to eradicate forests and erode more than 50 percent of globally available arable land no real shift in balance is to be expected

- As long as we allow corporates and financial institutions, macro-economic entities bigger than nations, to lobby for and dictate (buy) governmental policies on every aspect of our life no real shift in balance is to be expected

- As long as we allow capital, commercial propaganda to have preference over the wellbeing of Human Kind no real shift in balance is to be expected

- As long as we think that developing nations should do so using western nations as a template no real shift in balance is to be expected

- To have ended poverty, reduced inequalities significantly and reached a level of global sustainability within 15 years we need to start acting today

- Stop eating meat and help rebalance the availability of cereals to end famine- Stop eating dairy products and help rebalance the availability of water- Start eating plant based and help rebalance the availability of arable land for farming- Go vegan, use energy from sustainable sources, drive electric, reuse and end Global Warming

Better yourself and help restore a really healthy, save and sustainable global society!

 

Restoring the social-economic-environmental balance paves the way for final implementation of the Strategic Development Goals

 

Environmental Sustainability can be achieved mainly by implementing SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production) wich in itself implements SDG 13 (Climate Action) as a result of worldwide dietary adaptions (developed countries), and SDG 2 (Hunger) as cereals formerly used as livestock feed comes available for human consumption, and SDG 14 (Life Below Water) and SDG 15 (Life on Land) resulting from a dramatic reduction in animal waste and related greenhouse gases.

Economic Sustainability can be achieved by reinventing our monetary and economic systems based on the people-before-profit premise. This is the one people-centric foundation for SDG’s 9 (Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure), SDG 8 (Decent work and Sustainable Growth), SDG 4 (Quality Education), SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities) and SDG 7 (Affordable and Clean Energy).

Social Sustainability (SDG’s 6, 3, 5, 1, 11, 16) results from successfully implementing Environmental Sustainability and Economic Sustainability.

 

Please or to post a comment.