Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
What do the Referendum and the new post-2015 Framework mean
for us in Scotland?
James Mackie, ECDPM, Maastricht, Netherlands
23 October 2014
NIDOS Annual SeminarImplications for Scotland
In a post-2015 & post-Referendum Era
• The Conference• Post-Referendum and Post-2015• International cooperation • The UN post-2015 process
• Goals & Transformation agenda• Finance for development
• The European post-2015 process• Common positions, Dev & Env• Outstanding challenges
• Opportunities for Scotland• International cooperation• PCD – policy coherence for development • Post-2015 – Action inside Scotland
Outline
Page 2ECDPM
• Aims: to inform, to reflect and to debate• Very dynamic context – a threshold moment
• Post-2015 debate internationally & at home• Post-Referendum
• Further devolution – The Smith Commission • Creating a fairer Scotland – tackling inequality
• Widespread reflection on development policy• Scottish Government • UK Parliament –IDC ‘Beyond’-Aid inquiry• EU level debate on post-2015 – new leadership
• Engaging with Scottish public in 2015• Also 10 Years since Making Poverty History• How to use dynamism: youth, diasporas, …• How best to raise public awareness on 2015?
The Conference
ECDPM Page 3
• Post Referendum• Doing what we do already but better
• Expand Scottish international development?• Or focus more on increasing quality?
• Dynamism of the Referendum debate • Focus on creating a better Scotland • What does this mean for international
cooperation?• Post-2015
• Reframe global agenda for development• Build on the MDGs but go further• Wide agenda but can it be made manageable
and motivating like the MDGs?• Wider agenda has implications for action
inside Europe and inside Scotland
Post-Referendum & post-2015
ECDPM Page 4
• Debate on development has broadened• Lessons from the MDG experience
• Focus on poverty reduction good but too limited• Development aid not enough on its own• Demand for development – not just poverty focus
• Experience shows importance of other issues• Security, governance, trade, international financial
flows, global financial stability …• Our own internal policies with external impact • PCD – policy coherence for development – is key• Sustainable development has 3 aspects
• So post-2015 framework has to cover a lot more• But we also need to think differently about
development – it is not just about aid
International Cooperation
ECDPM Page 5
Our Collective Interest - new ETTG bookwww.ettg.eu
How will we judge success of new EU leadership?
By 2020 will the EU have helped to tackle 5 challenges?: 1.The world economy: is it becoming more equitable, resilient and democratic?2.Is world set on a more sustainable path?3.Is world more peaceful and secure?4.Is world better governed and more democratic?5.Have poverty and inequality declined?
10/10/146
• 2 working groups reported during summer:• OWG on the goals and target – 19 July 2014• ICESDF on the finance and means of
implementation – 15 August 2014
• UNGA – ~70 states supported OWG report• UN Secretary General Synthesis Report
• Due end November
• Negotiations on goals start early 2015 • Co-chairs: Ireland and Kenya
• Three key moments in 2015• Finance: UN Financing Conf. – Addis, July • Goals: UN-GA – New York, September • Climate: UNFCCC COP21 – Paris, December
The UN post-2015 process
ECDPM Page 7
UN High Level Panel Report May 2013•Five big transformative shifts
1. Leave no one behind2. Out sustainable development at the core3. Transform economies for jobs and inclusive
growth4. Build peace and effective, open and
accountable institutions for all5. Forge a new global partnership
•But what does this mean in practice?•Need to go further than just reducing poverty•MDGs too focused on tackling the symptoms and not enough on the causes
The Transformative Agenda
ECDPM Page 8
1. End poverty2. Achieve food security and improved nutrition3. Ensure healthy lives and well-being4. Inclusive and equitable education5. Gender equality and empower women and girls6. Availability of water & sanitation7. Affordable, reliable & sustainable energy8. Inclusive & sustainable growth9. Resilient infrastructure, inclusive industrialisation10.Reduce inequality within & among countries11.Make cities inclusive, safe, resilient & sustainable12.Sustainable consumption & production13.Urgent action to combat climate change14.Sustainable use of oceans, seas & marine resources15.Sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems16.Peaceful & inclusive societies, justice for all,
inclusive institutions17.Strengthen finance, MoI, global partnership &
PCSD
Goal
s pro
pose
d b
y O
WG
ECDPM Page 9
• MDGs became very focused on ODA• Financing gap notion – Jeff Sachs• But have to think ‘Beyond Aid’ (ERD2013)• There are a lot other types of finance
• Domestic resources• Domestic capital• Foreign direct investment• Remittances• South-South cooperation
• Finance cannot solve everything• Policies important – national & international• How to make most effective use of finance
Development finance
ECDPM Page 10
Low Income Countries
Source: ERD2014 (forthcoming)
Trends in development finance (2011 US$Bn)
All developing countries
Page 11ECDPM
63
Figure 4:1 Trends in development finance (public domestic, private domestic, private international, and public international sources) obtained by developing countries (2011 $, billion), 2002 2011
Sources: ODA+OOF OECD DAC CRS Table 1; Remittances and private international capital, GFCF and FDI World Development Indicators (WDI); public revenue IMF FAD database; Note: For ODA, OOF, remittances and private international capital data are drawn directly from relevant sources; for public revenues, data have been calculated by the authors using IMF FAD data on tax revenue/GDP and WDI data for GDP.
4.2.2 Finance trends by country group
This section discusses how finance flows have evolved for each of the income country groupings, by analysing their absolute levels (in real terms - 2011 dollars) and their levels as a proportion of GDP across our four categories. It shows that public domestic resources have been the most significant sources of financing for all the country income groups (especially LMICs and UMICs), with private domestic sources at levels not far below these. It also illustrates the impressive growth in private international sources, with public international sources being the most modest but still of major significance for LICs. Finally, the analysis shows that despite significant growth in development financing sources achieved by LICs, their levels of finance are dwarfed by those of MICs (especially UMICs). Figures 4.2 and 4.3 illustrate that for the current group of LICs there have been similar levels of strong sustained growth across all four pillars of financing in absolute terms. The most significant source of financing for LICs throughout the period 2002 2011 was public domestic revenues, which have more than doubled from an estimated $29bn in 2002 to reach $60bn in 2011. Rising levels of domestic public revenue have been achieved largely through the expansion of the economy rather than improving tax efforts, as the average LIC has only modestly increased its levels of domestic public revenue over the period. Private international finance has grown at the fastest rate (from a low base, with remittances having made a very significant contribution), and reached levels equivalent to private domestic finance by 2011. Public international finance has seen the most modest growth, albeit having more than doubled from $15bn in 2002 to $39bn in 2011, and remains a very significant financing source for LICs. Figure 4.2 Trends in development finance (public domestic, private domestic, private international, and public international sources) obtained by LICs (2011 $, billion), 2002 2011
Figure 4.3 Trends in development finance (public domestic, private domestic, private international, and public international sources) obtained by LICs (% GDP), 2002 2011
63
Figure 4:1 Trends in development finance (public domestic, private domestic, private international, and public international sources) obtained by developing countries (2011 $, billion), 2002 2011
Sources: ODA+OOF OECD DAC CRS Table 1; Remittances and private international capital, GFCF and FDI World Development Indicators (WDI); public revenue IMF FAD database; Note: For ODA, OOF, remittances and private international capital data are drawn directly from relevant sources; for public revenues, data have been calculated by the authors using IMF FAD data on tax revenue/GDP and WDI data for GDP.
4.2.2 Finance trends by country group
This section discusses how finance flows have evolved for each of the income country groupings, by analysing their absolute levels (in real terms - 2011 dollars) and their levels as a proportion of GDP across our four categories. It shows that public domestic resources have been the most significant sources of financing for all the country income groups (especially LMICs and UMICs), with private domestic sources at levels not far below these. It also illustrates the impressive growth in private international sources, with public international sources being the most modest but still of major significance for LICs. Finally, the analysis shows that despite significant growth in development financing sources achieved by LICs, their levels of finance are dwarfed by those of MICs (especially UMICs). Figures 4.2 and 4.3 illustrate that for the current group of LICs there have been similar levels of strong sustained growth across all four pillars of financing in absolute terms. The most significant source of financing for LICs throughout the period 2002 2011 was public domestic revenues, which have more than doubled from an estimated $29bn in 2002 to reach $60bn in 2011. Rising levels of domestic public revenue have been achieved largely through the expansion of the economy rather than improving tax efforts, as the average LIC has only modestly increased its levels of domestic public revenue over the period. Private international finance has grown at the fastest rate (from a low base, with remittances having made a very significant contribution), and reached levels equivalent to private domestic finance by 2011. Public international finance has seen the most modest growth, albeit having more than doubled from $15bn in 2002 to $39bn in 2011, and remains a very significant financing source for LICs. Figure 4.2 Trends in development finance (public domestic, private domestic, private international, and public international sources) obtained by LICs (2011 $, billion), 2002 2011
Figure 4.3 Trends in development finance (public domestic, private domestic, private international, and public international sources) obtained by LICs (% GDP), 2002 2011
Source: ERD2014 (forthcoming)
Financial flows by income level(% of GDP)
ECDPM Page 12
• High level of interest – commitment to MDGs• Commission (DEVCO+ENV) pushing a strong
common EU position• A Decent Life for All – 2 June 2014 [COM 335]
• Earlier policy papers in Feb & Dec 2013
• EU generally satisfied with UN process so far• Council conclusions in Dec 2014
• Outstanding challenges:• Goals & targets – coverage vs. number• Global partnership – Finance and other MoI• Universality and differentiation
I. Targets for in-country developmentII. Targets for helping other countriesIII.Targets for supporting global public goods
The European debate
ECDPM Page 13
• Devolution – does S.Govt. need more powers? • Scottish international development programme
• Expanding the effort – does that help?• Diversification or is it better to focus more?• Improving effectiveness – key principles to use:
ownership, alignment and harmonisation
• PCD – internal policies that affect others• Many such policies decided at EU level:
• Trade, Agriculture, Fisheries, Migration, …
• But Scottish attitudes & behaviour affect them• New issues: consumption, waste, renewables
• Achieving the post-2015 targets in Scotland• Inequality & poverty: domestic & international
Questions for Scotland
ECDPM Page 14
