gpgNet: the global network on global public goods

ACHIEVING THE MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS:
A GLOBAL PUBLIC GOODS PERSPECTIVE

•	CONTEXT
•	THE CHALLENGE
•	THE POINTS FOR DEBATE
•	THE QUESTION FOR DEBATE
•	PARTICIPATE!

CONTEXT

The Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and targets are based on the Millennium Declaration adopted by world leaders at the Special Session of the United Nations General Assembly in 2000.

Most of the Goals are to be achieved by 2015 and are aimed at such objectives as reducing some of the worst forms of poverty and other types of human deprivation.

(Click here for more information on the MDGs and on the indicators being used to assess progress.)

THE CHALLENGE: HOW TO ACHIEVE THE MDGs?

The MDGs are an ambitious initiative. As various studies have pointed out, a number of countries have a long way to travel in order to reach the Goals at the set target dates. In fact, it is increasingly becoming clear that a "business as usual" scenario will not do.

(Click here to see the latest Report of the UN Secretary General on the Implementation on the United Nations Millennium Declaration. Please choose document A/58/323)

Accordingly, there is at present much debate about the extra efforts required along three different routes.
One route places emphasis on the well-established principle that nation states have the primary responsibility for fostering development within their jurisdiction.

A second route calls on donor countries to strengthen their development-assistance efforts. In terms of the level of official development assistance, it is estimated that achieving the MDGs would require an additional $40 to $60 billion per year. This amount implies doubling the current level, bringing the average level of aid to 0.35% of OECD countries' GNP - still well below the target of 0.7%, agreed at the 2001 International Conference on Finance for Development in Monterrey, Mexico.

A third route draws attention to the critical need for enhanced policy coherence, i.e. for shaping international policy regimes (such as those governing for example, multilateral trade, knowledge management, the financial architecture or global environmental concerns) in such a way that they do not impede but facilitate the development of developing countries and their MDG strategies.

THE POINTS FOR DEBATE

"How could enhancing the provision of select global public goods facilitate achieving the MDGs at the set target date?"

To stimulate the debate on this topic, two background documents are presented.

(Click here to read the first document: Global Public Goods: A Key To Achieving The Millennium Development Goal, prepared by the Office of Development Studies – ODS)

(Click here for the second document, the paper Public Goods and Economic Development by Timothy Besley and Maitreesh Ghatak)

The ODS paper argues that simultaneous progress along all three routes discussed above is most critical to achieving the MDGs in a timely and self-sustaining, durable way. And that when analyzing the challenge through the lens of global public goods (GPGs), it becomes evident that special important is to accorded to the third route: enhanced policy coherence, or, more concretely, an enhanced provision of the GPGs "multilateral trade regime," "international financial architecture," and "global knowledge management."

The argument in more detail is:

•	People's well-being depends on private goods and on public goods.
•	More and more public goods have been "globalized," i.e. become embedded in international policy regimes. (If you want to know more about the concept of public goods and of global public goods, click here.)
•	Yet, those policy regimes are at present shaped so that some of their dimensions obstruct – rather than foster – the progress of developing countries. The resultant costs to poor nations may well exceed total official development assistance.
•	Correcting these "regimes costs" would have the following advantages:
	i.	It could be accomplished within a relatively short time frame - which is important given that most MDGs targets are to be reached by 2015;
	ii.	It would open up a significant resource flow - and do so on a continuous basis, providing new income opportunities to developing countries; and importantly,
	iii.	It would enhance overall economic efficiency, and if managed well, allow both developing and industrial countries to gain from the suggested policy responses (see notably, pages 3 through 7 of the ODS paper).

But, of course, we know from past experience that rational arguments do not automatically translate into a motivation to act. So, how to move from "argument" to "actual policy reform"?

The paper by Besley and Ghatak comes in to help addressing this question. The authors remind us that only some public goods are as what they are projected in economics textbooks, viz. state-provided goods. Most public goods constitute a multi-actor product, involving contributions from the public and the private sector, including those from households, firms, philanthropic foundations and civil society organizations.

This multi-actor notion of public goods production applies in particular to global public goods. While the state sometimes steps in to help us to break through national-level collective-action problems, nation states, when participating in international negotiations, behave like private, individual actors nationally: they primarily pursue their national (private) self-interest.

Does this mean we have to forget the arguments for "GPGs and MDGs" set forth in the ODS paper? Will they never be realized, because states will not accord to cooperate to implement the suggested corrective steps?

No so, if we follow Besley and Ghatak's analysis. If public goods, including GPGs, are a multi-actor product, the questions poses itself about the role that civil society, for example, could play to "nudge" governments to act?

THE QUESTION FOR DEBATE

Comments and observations would be, in particular, appreciated on the following:

•	Question 1: How do you see the link between GPGs and MDGs? What GPGs are of special importance to contribute to achieve the MDGs?
•	Question 2: What do you think about the policy options proposed on pages 8 and 9 of the ODS paper? Would you have any other policy recommendations?
•	Question 3: How to resolve the political economy challenges? How to motivate states to act to decide on some of the suggested improvements in the provision of GPGs? What role could civil society play? What role for business? How could the epistemic community of researchers and academics help?

PARTICIPATE

What do YOU think about this issue?

If you have not already registered with the Discussion Forum, then click here to register in the forum and take part in this discussion or send a blank email to:
Subscribe-gpgnet-mdgs@groups.undp.org

If you are already registered with the discussion forum, then click here to send your comments or post them to:
gpgnet-mdgs@groups.undp.org

The discussion forum on this issue will be open from 3 through 17 November 2003. After the discussion closes, we will prepare a report with reflections on the debate, which will be published on this website.