A. THE MDGS: BENEFITS AND LIMITATIONS

Transcription

1 EUROPEAN COMMISSION PUBLIC CONSULTATION TOWARDS A POST 2015 DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK A. THE MDGS: BENEFITS AND LIMITATIONS 1. To what extent has the MDG framework influenced policies in the country/ies or sectors you work in/with? The Royal Government of Cambodia ( RGC ) has expressed its full commitment 1 to the Millennium Development Goals ( MDGs ) and has implemented a number of policies aimed at meeting them, including localisation of the MDGs by creating the Cambodia Millennium Development Goals ( CMDGs ). In this sense, the MDGs have affected the policy direction and strategy of the RGC, even if the RGC is failing to meet MDG targets. The National Strategic Development Plan ( NSDP ) was formulated in the period of , but has been updated to 2013 in light of the global economic crisis. The Ministry of Planning claims the NSDP is entirely focused on achieving the CMDGs, 2 with 30 out of its 46 key targets acting as CMDG targets. 3 With regards to the MDG of eradicating extreme poverty and hunger, the RGC has responded to this by creating the Population Policy, which aims to integrate population related factors into development planning processes at all levels. 4 This policy has witnessed some successes, yet the RGC itself admits that non urban and less accessible rural areas still have a long way to go in meeting the MDG target of halving the poverty rate for the whole country. 5 In terms of achieving the MDG of universal nine year basic education, the RGC has provided donor supported scholarships to poor students, especially girls. 6 Moreover, in 2006, the RGC claims to have made efforts to promote gender mainstreaming in the entire spectrum of Cambodian society. 7 Five ministries sought to achieve this by developing Gender Mainstreaming Action Plans. 8 With regards to preventing domestic violence and protecting victims, the RGC endorsed an action plan in 2005 which has subsequently been developed and implemented. 9 To enhance the status of women, the financial support policy on social insurance to civil servants was amended to include maternity leave. 10 In an effort to meet the environmental sustainability MDG, the RGC established three eco tourism 1 Royal Government of Cambodia, Progress in Achieving Cambodia Millennium Development Goals: Challenges and Opportunities, 2007 at: 2 Royal Government of Cambodia, Achieving Cambodia s millennium development goals, 2010 at: 3 Ibid 4 N 1 above 5 N 1 above 6 N 1 above 7 N 1 above 8 N 1 above 9 N 1 above 10 N 1 above

2 destinations in 2006, and a further two more destinations are being developed. 11 More fishery communities have been created, plus the reclaiming of illegally occupied lands and the creation of protected area communities have also sought to meet this MDG. 12 Thus, the MDG framework has led to a more sophisticated approach to Cambodia s development strategy and has incorporated a clear, quantifiable benchmark for development policy to achieve. 2. To what extent has the MDG framework been beneficial for the poor in the country/ies or sectors in/with which you work? The NSDP states that poverty reduction in the fastest possible manner is the RGC s foremost priority. 13 The disparity in poverty between urban areas and less accessible rural areas remains one of the most potent obstacles in achieving the first MDG of eradicating extreme poverty and hunger. As the Ministry of Planning remarks, the poor are overwhelmingly rural, 14 and in 2004, 91.6 percent of the nation s poor were living in rural areas; and in 2007, this rose to 92.7 percent. 15 In an effort to speed up poverty reduction in rural areas, the RGC has implemented the Programme for Identification of Poor Households. 16 This aims to support RGC and NGO projects and services in providing assistance to the poor and to act as a component within Cambodia s social safety net system. 17 Furthermore, the RGC s National Population Policy, described by the RGC as a rights based policy that gives couples the right to decide if and when to have children and includes the information and services for them to do so 18 has resulted in a decrease of the average family size of 5.2 in 1998 to 4.7 in The policies enacted by the RGC have arguably contributed to a decrease in poverty of 35 percent in 2004 to 30 percent in 2007 a rate of about 1.2 percent per year. 20 This is a sign of progress, yet substantial improvements need to be implemented in order to meet the MDG target, as a third of the population still lives below the poverty line. 21 Cambodia also retains a significant poverty gap between rich and poor which correlates to the gap between rural and urban communities. The Ministry of Planning states that poverty reduction has occurred through a growing economy centred on urban activities, and thus to the detriment of rural communities. Indeed, the average rural poverty rate is 35 percent, compared to 1 percent in Phnom Penh. 22 It is therefore apparent that government policy aimed at meeting the first MDG is largely falling to reach communities which are rural and more inaccessible than their urban counterparts. The first 11 N 1 above 12 N 1 above 13 Royal Government of Cambodia, National Strategic Development Plan , N 2 above 15 N 2 above 16 N 2 above 17 N 2 above 18 N 2 above 19 N 2 above 20 N 2 above 21 N 2 above 22 N 2 above

3 MDG does not discriminate on geographic location and applies equally to all: rural or urban; thus, the RGC must do more to extend action and support that is rooted in achieving the first MDG to rural communities so that they may reach the economic status of those in towns and cities. 3. What features and elements of the MDG framework have been particularly valuable in the fight against poverty? The MDG framework has encouraged a more focused and comprehensive debate on poverty reduction in Cambodia and has raised awareness of development issues. Furthermore, government policy in Cambodia has expressly referred to the MDG framework and incorporated MDG targets into its structure. The Strategic Framework for Food Security and Nutrition in Cambodia explicitly refers to the MDGs and maintains the MDG framework as the benchmark for achieving targets. 23 The NSDP also states that achieving MDG goals is central to the RGC s strategy of reducing poverty. 24 The global economic crisis has diverted attention away from the economic status of individual households and provincial communities. The MDG framework has helped to promote awareness of poverty and economic activity on a more localised scale. By establishing largely quantifiable targets with simple and clear goals, the MDG framework sets a concise benchmark that is realistically attainable and not merely a vague vision of development. Progress is easily measurable and the objective form of the MDG framework has encouraged improvement in the efficacy of survey taking and the monitoring of data with regards to poverty. 4. What features and elements of the MDG framework have been problematic, in your view? The MDG framework has failed to account for the global economic crisis and the increasing cost of oil both having a detrimental impact on the ability of states to achieve MDG indicators. The Ministry of Planning remarks that to meet the 2015 MDG of eradicating extreme poverty and hunger, Cambodia would require poverty reduction rates above 1 percent per year. 25 The Ministry of Planning further argues that, due to the global economic crisis and rising oil rates, it is unlikely such targets will be achieved without a major shift in growth and poverty reduction strategies. 26 Moreover, the Ministry of Planning argues that past strategies alone cannot bring about the expected level of poverty reduction. 27 Thus, Cambodia must account for and adapt in response to these significant barriers if there is any prospect of achieving MDG targets. Complacency or a failure to address the impact of the global economic crisis and rising oil rates will undermine the entire MDG framework. Furthermore, the MDG framework is too broad and lacks political bite. The largely apolitical nature of the MDGs and their indicators means that corruption and vested interests prevalent in Cambodian governance remain un challenged, and thereby stand in the way of a long term development strategy. Despite the MDG framework being an admirable set of goals for the progress 23 Royal Government of Cambodia, Strategic Framework for Food Security and Nutrition in Cambodia (SFFSN), N 13 above 25 N 2 above 26 N 2 above 27 N 2 above

4 of humanity as a collective unit, it should be recognised how much influence the political climate of a country has on its development and the conditions of its people. 5. In your view, what are the main gaps, if any, in the MDG framework? The MDG framework lacks an emphasis on vital social and political issues which severely affect people s lives and act as a hindrance to long term development and prosperity. Despite many of the MDGs being targeted at improving tangible aspects of people s lives such as education, health and poverty the third MDG seeking to promote gender equality and empower women demonstrates that the MDG framework can encourage a shift in the domestic political and social climate in order to protect human rights and enshrine equality and other factors prevalent in a liberal democracy. The fact that there are not more MDGs promoting human rights, democracy and the rule of law highlights a gap in the MDG framework. In Cambodia, a clear separation of powers between the three organs of state is absent. The Cambodian judiciary is often accused of being a puppet of the government convicting dissenters and opposition leaders of vague offences where criticism has been directed at the government or human rights abuses have been highlighted. This results in restrictions on fundamental rights, including freedom of expression and freedom of assembly and renders the rule of law weak and ineffective. International law goes some way in protecting and promoting human rights, equality and the rule of law such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights ( UDHR ) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights ( ICCPR ); however, abuses still occur and MDGs seeking to protect and promote these factors would supplement international law. How factors such as the protection of human rights, democracy and the rule of law would be objectively measured, for the purposes of the MDG framework, remains to be formulated. However, a report such as the Democracy Index, for which Cambodia ranks 101 out of 167 in the 2011 Democracy Index, 28 highlights that such factors can be measured. B. FEASIBILITY OF A FUTURE FRAMEWORK 6. In your view, in what way, if at all, could a future framework have an impact at a global level in terms of global governance, consensus building, cooperation, etc.? In order to have an impact at a global level, a post 2015 framework would have to expand beyond the narrow scope of the current MDG framework. Human rights, democracy, equality and transparency remain issues that affect all countries regardless of development level and have an interdependent connection with the current MDGs. For example, if a state lacks a solid legal and political foundation for protecting human rights and equality, the third MDG of promoting gender equality and empowering women cannot be achieved. Human rights and equality cover a broad range of issues and communities. A barrier to achieving such a human rights focused post 2015 framework would be whether it would be willing to target more contentious issues. Lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender ( LGBT ) rights are in a dire state in 28 Economist Intelligence Unit, Democracy index 2012: democracy under stress, 2011 at:

5 many parts of the world. Yet, as Secretary of State Hilary Clinton remarks: gay rights are human rights 29 and a post 2015 framework would have to cross cultural and religious barriers in order to enshrine basic human rights for LGBT peoples. 30 Furthermore, in many states freedom of expression is suppressed and censored. This is especially prevalent in Cambodia where opposition voices are often silenced and even met with prosecution. No person is immune from this judicial harassment and censorship opposition MPs, journalists, human rights activists and even the president of Cambodia s largest opposition party have all had their right to freedom of expression violated. 31 A post 2015 framework would have to overcome governments who are less inclined to encourage criticism and accountability. Thus, while the scope of a future framework can be widened, it also needs targeted and specific emphasis on contentious issues like freedom of expression and LGBT rights if any practical change is to be achieved. Thus, a post 2015 framework should take a human rights based approach, supplementing existing international law and treaties on human rights such as the UDHR. It should encourage accountability, democracy and transparency and set forth objective targets that can make a real improvement to the status of human rights in all states. However, this can only be achieved with international cooperation, clear goals and the courage to negotiate and target human rights issues which may be met with cultural, political or religious resistance. 7. To what extent is a global development framework approach necessary or useful to improve accountability with regard to poverty reduction policies in developing countries? As mentioned, the current MDGs are reliant on and act interdependently with a number of broad factors which are absent as MDGs within the current MDG framework. These factors include transparency and accountability without which a poverty reduction strategy cannot thrive. As Cambodia lacks a separation of powers, an independent judiciary is largely paralysed in terms of holding the RGC to account and offering redress for failures in policy or human rights abuses. Furthermore, the constant judicial harassment of opposition voices, including the largest opposition party, undermines the democratic process and prevents opposition politicians and activists from holding the RGC to account and highlighting failures. A global development framework approach can only ever be useful if it is accompanied with more targeted and specific goals. The goals must have political bite and the courage to target contentious issues if they are to succeed in countries like Cambodia where corruption is endemic and the rule of law is in a dire state. 29 BBC News, Hillary Clinton declares 'gay rights are human rights', at: us canada For information relating to CCHR s Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Project, please see: I&show=show 31 For information relating to CCHR s Freedom of Expression Project, please see: x&show=show

6 8. What could be the advantages and disadvantages of a global development framework for your organisation/sector, including how you work effectively with your partners? One of the aims of the Cambodian Center for Human Rights ( CCHR ) is to scrutinise human rights abuses in Cambodia and hold the RGC to account when there is evidence that violations have been committed. This is often achieved by referring the RGC to its obligations under international law, such as the UDHR and the ICCPR. A human rights focused global development framework could supplement international law and enable the CCHR to highlight the RGC s obligations and targets under it, thereby adding a further element of pressure in encouraging the RGC to respect human rights. There is a danger, however, that a human rights focused global development framework may divert attention away from established international law. If a global development framework failed to deliver robust and universal protection for human rights that the UDHR, for example, achieves then such a framework could be used as a shield for governments to hide behind when they are presented with their obligations under international law. It could also be utilised as a form of propaganda where governments could showcase targets that have been met in relation to some areas of human rights, even if violations occur with regards to other areas. A human rights focused global development framework would encourage greater cooperation between the CCHR and its partners in Cambodia and overseas. The CCHR s national and regional experience and knowledge would also enable it to encourage flexibility and acceptance of regional differentiation within a future framework and provide a voice to those who are affected by any failures in meeting the targets of a future framework. C. THE POTENTIAL SCOPE OF A FUTURE AGENDA 9. In your view, what should be the primary purpose of a future framework? A future framework should have the protection of human rights at its core, while enshrining sustainability and state accountability. A future framework should seek to compliment international law on human rights and provide a robust mechanism for human rights protection targeting issues which may face cultural, political and religious barriers. The goals should focus on the primary factors vital in creating a fair and sustainable society, including: human rights, poverty, education, equality, conflict prevention, state accountability, the rule of law and the environment. These factors should go beyond traditional notions of aid and seek to ingrain the spirit of a human rights based framework into domestic and international policy decisions at all levels and in all sectors. Thus, the universalism of a future framework and its broad reach will render it more effective than the current MDG framework. The goals should be clear, provide attainable targets and have a realistic prospect of being met. Objective indicators are important, but the goals should also lay out what they are seeking to achieve and the manner and form in which the goals should be met. 10. In your view, should its scope be global, relevant for all countries?

7 The future framework should be universal applying to all countries, regardless of development stage or economic and political status. Many goals within the current MDG framework and those proposed for a future framework are applicable to developed countries, as many issues such as human rights, inequality and a lack of transparency are global issues, for which every country has scope for improvement. Goals should be established through a multilateral consensus and contain clear targets which can be applied to all countries and not tailored purely for poor and fragile countries. However, context is important and specific goals applicable to a developed country may not be feasible in a less developed country. With regards to human rights, however, as the UDHR demonstrates human rights are universal. Thus, there should be no discrepancy between countries on issues such as freedom of expression, gender equality, racial equality, LGBT rights, and so forth. 11. To what extent should a future framework focus on the poorest and most fragile countries, or also address development objectives relevant in other countries? A future framework should aim to address global issues which affect all countries. The future framework should not just focus purely on tangible issues which affect individuals lives, like poverty and a lack of education, but also broader social and political issues such as human rights, governance and transparency. Eradicating poverty in poor and fragile countries should remain a priority of a future framework and the interdependency between poverty and governance should also be addressed. However, financial inequality and the gap between the rich and the poor remain prevalent in developed countries also. Thus, a future framework should take a flexible multi tiered approach aiming to provide universal goals with clear aims, but also recognising differentiation between countries and specific regional issues. 12. How could a new development agenda involve new actors, including the private sector and emerging donors? It is paramount that a future framework receives support from all bodies within society, not just organs of the state. Positive involvement by corporations, NGOs, charities and so forth will contribute to achieving the goals set out in a future framework and should be encouraged. Furthermore, the impact these organisations have on a long term development agenda should be scrutinised in a future framework including addressing actions of organisations which may hinder development and those which have the potential to support countries in realising goals. Focusing purely on the actions of government in terms of development would be a piecemeal approach to an issue which is affected by all sectors of society. Thus, a future framework should endeavour to enshrine principles of financial, social and environmental responsibility within the private sector and other non state organisations. This should involve multi tiered approach where global targets are set out within a future framework and the private sector working on the ground, targeting specific issues that relate to the goals and complimenting action by the state. However, this can only be achieved if cooperation exists between private sector organisations and if such cooperation is facilitated in a future framework.

8 13. How could future framework support improved policy coherence for development (PCD), at global, EU and country levels? Policy coherence for development ( PCD ) is a core component in achieving a successful long term development agenda and should be sustained and encouraged by a future framework. Policy decisions, on both a domestic and international level, can have a fundamental impact on the progress of development. In an increasingly globalised world, with a number of countries growing in terms of their economic influence and political power the narrow sighted view that aid alone affects development progress is no longer credible. A number of areas set out in the PCD highlight the effect that policy, as a general mechanism, can have on development. These areas include: trade, agriculture, migration, transport and the environment. First and foremost, domestic and international policy should aim to safeguard human rights not contribute to their abuse. This can be achieved by a higher level of scrutiny and accountability when it comes to policy decisions, with human rights being more than a tick box, but a central component in the decision making process. Policy should neither exacerbate human rights violations nor support or demonstrate complacency towards states that engage in human rights abuses. Moreover, multilateral dialogue is vital in achieving policy coherence and should lead to harmonisation and cooperation with regards to policy decisions. Furthermore, policy decisions should refrain from aggravating the global gap between rich and poor by encouraging less food waste and remunerating agricultural providers in developing countries in a fair and consistent manner. This can be witnessed with Fair Trade International and a number of other NGOs seeking fairer trade standards. The future framework should encourage states to support the fair trade movement and adopt policies reflecting its ideals. 14. How could a new framework improve development financing? In light of the global financial crisis, which has had a profound effect on the ability of countries to meet current MDG goals, it is vital that a future framework incorporates measures designed to ensure countries are able to prevent and respond to any future financial crisis and manage their economies effectively. A future framework should encourage sustainable management of government debt, with responsible taxation that seeks to redistribute wealth to the poor and providing a reduction in tax to activities which strengthen a future framework. Furthermore, tighter regulation of the financial sector to prevent negligent or excessive activities should be incorporated into a future framework. This can only be achieved with international cooperation and agreed consensus on how such measures are to be addressed. Increased regulation would encourage and promote socially responsible investments that complement, not damage, a long term development agenda. D. THE POTENTIAL SCOPE OF A FUTURE AGENDA 15. What do you consider to be the "top 3" most important features or elements which should be included in or ensured by any future development agenda?

9 The top three most important features or elements of a future development agenda should be: human rights, state accountability and universalism. The first top feature, human rights, should be central to the overall aim and direction of a future framework, incorporating a rights based discourse into the goals and securing fundamental human rights for all sections of society. The second top feature, state accountability, should ensure that the goals of a future framework seek to ingrain transparency with regards to actions by organs of the state and ensure that adequate mechanisms are in place to hold the state to account. This relates to a number of human rights, including freedom of expression and freedom of assembly, as criticism aimed at holding the state to account or highlighting wrongdoings and peaceful protest should be encouraged and protected. Furthermore, a clear separation of powers where the organs of state maintain independence from one another would lay solid foundations for checks and balances on state institutions. This robust level of state accountability would enable the rule of law to prevail. The third top feature, universalism, would enable a new framework to be a truly global development agenda defining global issues which affect all countries and which are key to the progress and prosperity of humanity as a collective unit. This could be realised by setting benchmarks for which all countries could aspire to reach. 16. What do you consider to be the "top 3" features or elements which must be avoided in any future development agenda? The first feature to be avoided is apprehension or weakness when it comes to contentious issues such as human rights and government accountability. As has been previously mentioned, the current MDG framework lacks political bite and fails to pursue goals which aim to protect certain human rights and marginalised communities where there are political, cultural or religious barriers. A future development agenda should not lack the courage to target these issues and should not delver inadequate goals which lack the standard of human rights protection and equality present across international law. The second feature to be avoided is a rigid framework which loses sight of regional needs amongst a general global agenda. Countries are not homogeneous in terms of their wealth, education standards, political and social climate, etc. Regional needs should not be lost to a broad, overarching framework but addressed. This can be achieved with an element of flexibility in the future framework s approach and method of implementation enabling it to cater to regional needs, but without losing sight of the overall aim of the goals. Human rights, however, should maintain a level of rigidity due to their universal nature and should not bow to any regional specific pressures or differences. The third feature to be avoided is bowing to political pressures. A future framework should be independent and robust enough to put pressure, where necessary, on governments failing to reach targets and making excuses for a lack of reform and change. This can be witnessed in Cambodia where allegations of political interference have been rife with regards to the UN hybrid Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia ( ECCC ) with accusations that Co Investigating Judges have attempted to bury controversial cases against former Khmer Rouge commanders in

10 response to pressure by the RGC. 32 This sort of government interference with, what should be, a separate organ of the state the judiciary severely weakens the rule of law and the application of justice. 17. Should it be based on goals, targets and indicators? If any, should goals have an outcome or sector focus? Please give reasons for your answer. Although it has been suggested that universalism should be central to a future framework, not every country is the same and each suffers from different levels of poverty, corruption, human rights abuses, and so on. Thus, a future framework should recognise differentiation and consider areas which are dependent on country specific underlying factors and cannot be subject to global harmonisation through quantitative targets. Indeed an element of flexibility is key in order to address regional differentiation, but without losing the overarching aims of the goals. Goals setting out clear aims, targets providing realistically attainable thresholds and relevant indicators are all good guides for and measurements of progress and should be retained for a future framework. However, human rights, state accountability and equality should remain central to the overall structure of the framework. 18. How should implementation of the new framework be resourced? International aid should be a key component in the resourcing of a future framework. Currently, member states of the Development Assistance Committee ( DAC ) are falling short of meeting the UN International Aid Target of 0.7% of Gross National Income ( GNI ). In 2009, only five member states of the DAC met the target: Sweden (1.12% of GNI), Norway (1.06% of GNI), Luxembourg(1.04% of GNI), Denmark (0.88% of GNI), and the Netherlands (0.82% of GNI). 33 Clearly, there is the potential for a future framework to address these failures and reinforce the aims of the UN s International Aid Target by setting goals which encourage countries to balance the global gap between rich and poor, thereby realising many of the goals of the current MDG framework and a future framework. The private sector including corporations, charities and NGOs could also play a role in resourcing a future framework. This does not have to be solely in the form of monetary donations (although they should be encouraged), but can also be in the form of: investment in sustainable projects, environmental protection, responsible social practices and generally encompassing the spirit of a future framework into private sector policy decisions. Moreover, cooperating with local organisations which possess knowledge on local issues, maintain established relationships with other organisations and enjoy regional experience will compliment the desired flexibility of a future framework and ensure that regional issues are not lost to general, overarching goals. Although domestic investment and policy direction will play a significant part in the resourcing of a future framework; on an international level, countries that face an uphill struggle in attaining the 32 BBC News, Judge quits Cambodian UN backed Khmer Rouge trial, 2012 at: asia OECD, Aid targets slipping out of reach?, at:

11 goals of a future framework should be offered support and assistance in reaching targets. This could be financial support, including loans and grants, or advisory and informational assistance. CCHR is an independent, non aligned non governmental organization. CCHR s vision is of a non violent Kingdom of Cambodia, in which people enjoy their fundamental human rights, are treated equally, are empowered to participate in democracy and share the benefits of Cambodia s development. CCHR desires rule of law rather than impunity; strong institutions rather than strong men; and a pluralistic society in which variety is harnessed and celebrated rather than ignored or punished. CCHR s logo shows a white bird flying out of a circle of blue sky this symbolizes Cambodia s claim for freedom. To realize its vision, CCHR works to promote and protect democracy and respect for human rights primarily civil and political rights throughout Cambodia. For more information, please visit