South Asia Watch on Trade, Economics & Environment (SAWTEE)

« View All Articles

MDGs lack global partnership
Published: The Rising Nepal, 05 March 2004
By: Kamalesh Adhikari

The dawn of a new century brought forward a historic and unprecedented Millennium Declaration, calling nations across the globe to develop a global partnership for development with strong solidarity and determination. At the United Nations Millennium Summit held in September 2000, the largest-ever gathering of heads of states representing 189 countries, the Declaration set forth eight Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), binding countries to do more to tackle extreme poverty and widespread hunger, gender inequality, environmental deterioration, and lack of education, health care and clean water. At the Summit, world leaders pledged to work together to meet concrete targets by 2015 or earlier. Since then, governments, aid agencies and civil society organisations (CSOs) everywhere are reorienting their work around the MDGs.

One of the important aspects of the MDGs is Goal 8. It calls for a global partnership for development: the richer countries are challenged to alter the unequal global trade and financial system to better facilitate the development of poorer countries; establish a rules-based, predictable, and non-discriminatory global trade regime that provides for the special needs of least developed countries, and land-locked and small island states; and provide debt relief for developing countries, among others.

However, the recent report released by the United Nations in Kathmandu indicates that the Millennium targets for the Asian countries are almost impossible to accomplish with the present pace. Why? What has gone wrong with the MDGs and the commitments? The answer is -- there is a lack of sincerity, mainly on the part of the developed countries. Resultantly, not all countries are likely to meet the targets set under the MDGs, at least not the developing and least developed countries.

The United Nations Human Development Report (2003) reveals, 'It is hard to imagine the poorest countries achieving Goals 1–7 without the policy changes required in rich countries to achieve Goal 8. Poor countries cannot on their own tackle the structural constraints that keep them in poverty traps, including rich country tariffs and subsidies that restrict market access for their exports, patents that restricts access to technology…' In addition, unsustainable debt owed to rich country governments and multilateral institutions is affecting their endeavours to meet the targets of the MDGs.

At such a time, is it worth imagining that countries will make the Millennium Mission possible, particularly when there is no equal opportunity for unequal partners? For example, given the existing barriers to access to developed countries' markets in the form of discretionary standards, technical and environmental requirements, high tariffs, among others, the rules-based multilateral trading system espoused by the World Trade Organisation (WTO) is now the most unpredictable and discriminatory system. And this is obviously in contrast to the spirit of Goal 8.

In the present era, trade is seen as an engine of development. It has biggest potentials as well as greatest obstacles in terms of development. In the context of developing and least developed countries, while potentials are complex to harness, obstacles are often direct, severe and pressing. More appallingly, many of development obstacles, which are directly related to the MDGs, are put by the developed countries. A recent survey carried out by a United Nations agency covering 330 CSOs of 82 countries indicates that the changes in the practice of subsidising agricultural products in developed countries (worth US$ 320 billion) are an essential strategy for mobilising resources to achieve the MDGs, and to alleviating hunger and poverty in developing countries. According to the estimates of the International Monetary Fund (IMF), a repeal of all rich country trade barriers subsidies to agriculture would improve global welfare by about US$ 120 billion and a one percent increase in the developing countries' share of world export would lift 128 million people out of poverty. However, still developing countries' exports are being severely injured by the discriminatory trade policies of the developed countries.

It is surprising to note that rich countries have pledged action on a number of fronts, not only at the Millennium Summit but also at the Monterrey International Conference on Financing for Development in March 2002 and at the Johannesburg World Summit on Sustainable Development in September 2002. Further, agreeing to launch a 'broad and balanced' work programme through the Doha Development Agenda at the Doha Ministerial of the WTO in 2001, ministers directed officials in Geneva to undertake a series of negotiations and to address a variety of concerns, including those of the developing members, through work in various WTO councils and committees. Even if some of the major concerns of developing countries, if not all, were addressed, not only the WTO would make the global trading regime a fair, transparent, predictable and non-discriminatory system, poor members would also be able to perform better in meeting the targets of the MDGs. But multilateral trade negotiations largely failed to advance in 2003, mainly because the developed member countries did not sincerely work to provide momentum; they committed in words but remained non-committal in practice.

The slippage of deadlines for resolving the important issues of implementation and special and differential treatment, reforming the Dispute Settlement Understanding and more importantly, agreeing on the modalities of agriculture disappointed many. And with the failure of the Cancun Ministerial in September 2003 and re-launch the stalled trade negotiations by the 15 December 2003 deadline set by the Cancun Ministerial, hope for improvement in the existing scenario is tapering further.

Resultantly, poor countries are now bound to face a greater risk of huge socio-economic loss and further disintegration, mainly because Goal 8 seems merely a pipedream. These countries are left out alone to meet the targets set under the MDGs. Despite knowing that 'a concerted and collective effort' is needed to combat these global challenges, it is often the rich countries, which refuse to lend a hand to the poorer ones. But they must understand that if poor countries continue to remain disenchanted and disadvantaged, they would also have to bear the cost -- the global challenges may never ever be conquered!

At such a critical point of time, the Nepalese government has much to do, not least because the country is least developed and grossly inflicted with widespread poverty and hunger but also because the Nepalese development paradigm has taken a new shape now. The country, within a few couple of recent past months, has got the approval for WTO membership and signed two free trade agreements, namely South Asian Free Trade Agreement (SAFTA) and Bangladesh, India, Myanmar, Sri Lanka and Thailand Economic Cooperation (BIMSTEC) free trade agreement. These partnerships are of utmost importance with a view to achieving the MDGs but to utilise them in the national interests is more than an ordeal, particularly when there seems no true partnership at the global level.

« View All Articles