|
Recently the United Nations held general
debates in the 68th session of the General Assembly, the main deliberation,
policymaking and representative organ of the UN. As said by H.E. John W. Ashe,
president of the 68th session of General Assembly, the assembly is pivotal as
all of countries seek to identify the parameters of the post-2015 development
agenda.
With more or less two years left to accomplish the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), upon which a new, post-2015 development agenda will be built, civil society and governments alike are searching for new breakthroughs, realizing that “business as usual” has no future.
The MDGs are just one of the global development regimes seeking to fight poverty through development.
In Indonesia, efforts to solve this problem are also determined by national and subnational policies, and are often supported by the influence of overseas development assistance, both bilateral and multilateral.
Dominant talks about the upcoming framework on the global development agenda post-2015 had witnessed allegations of decreasing efforts to achieve global development targets before the deadline. The limited time remaining for the global development agreement toward the end of 2015 may divert our attention to the performance of each individual country in addressing the first millennium targets, as well as the promises of the global development partnership.
The discussion on the post-2015 global development agenda is now narrowed to three limited options. The first option is to continue the previous agenda. The second is to add some new goals to the agenda. And third, carry out a tiny adjustment under a very close review of the first millennium achievements.
President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono has repeatedly said he is reluctant to overhaul the existing framework. Moreover, he cited that some world leaders had pointed to not revamping the MDGs (The Jakarta Post, March 27).
Although there have been a number of successes, poverty eradication has been lame in each country. The global crisis that hit a number of countries (especially in Europe and US) has made many countries focus on their own national development interests. This has turned commitments toward global development.
Although Indonesia has been able to make it through the crisis, limited poverty reduction still exists in this country.
Many northern countries have introduced savings in their state budgets, but in Indonesia perhaps the real challenge of MDG attainment is the weak management of the state budget, which results in a poor quality of basic services received by Indonesian citizens. This blends together with weak monitoring.
Indonesia has a big opportunity to offer alternative models of global development. UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon even has appointed Yudhoyono, alongside British Prime Minister David Cameron and Liberian President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, to co-chair the UN High Panel on the post-2015 MDGs.
Learning from past experience, the upcoming framework for post-2015 could consider a deeper, substantive and non-elite institutionalization of a development partnership that will lead all stakeholders to equal cooperation, as well as to equal benefit.
On the measurement side, the upcoming framework should also consider approaches that lead to the measurement of good intentions. The government for instance may consider a social auditing approach in measuring the framework.
There are at least three main reasons why social auditing is worthy of being considered. I have developed these reasons from nearly five years experience of Tifa Foundation initiatives in doing social audit practices.
First, social auditing allows citizens to assess the progress of development that affects their lives in surrounding areas.
Second, it can deliver an impact assessment that is normally untouched by general monitoring and evaluation. Third, social auditing may encourage accountability and ownership of development by citizens themselves.
One example from our experience in Makassar, South Sulawesi, has taught us a lesson in how social auditing can be shared by all parties, not just only owned by the community but also by the city of Makassar.
In this city, social auditing has been institutionalized as a development measurement mechanism involving all citizens and integrated into annual development planning.
The other thing that matters most is that its findings and recommendations from social auditing have been respected by all stakeholders, particularly local agencies associated with the fulfillment of basic rights such as education and health agencies as well as the local development planning body and other agencies associated with poverty reduction efforts.
The experience was valuable for considering improvements in measuring development that can be adopted by the central government into the post-2015 framework.
Some pearls of valuable experience already exist in our own country. ●
With more or less two years left to accomplish the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), upon which a new, post-2015 development agenda will be built, civil society and governments alike are searching for new breakthroughs, realizing that “business as usual” has no future.
The MDGs are just one of the global development regimes seeking to fight poverty through development.
In Indonesia, efforts to solve this problem are also determined by national and subnational policies, and are often supported by the influence of overseas development assistance, both bilateral and multilateral.
Dominant talks about the upcoming framework on the global development agenda post-2015 had witnessed allegations of decreasing efforts to achieve global development targets before the deadline. The limited time remaining for the global development agreement toward the end of 2015 may divert our attention to the performance of each individual country in addressing the first millennium targets, as well as the promises of the global development partnership.
The discussion on the post-2015 global development agenda is now narrowed to three limited options. The first option is to continue the previous agenda. The second is to add some new goals to the agenda. And third, carry out a tiny adjustment under a very close review of the first millennium achievements.
President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono has repeatedly said he is reluctant to overhaul the existing framework. Moreover, he cited that some world leaders had pointed to not revamping the MDGs (The Jakarta Post, March 27).
Although there have been a number of successes, poverty eradication has been lame in each country. The global crisis that hit a number of countries (especially in Europe and US) has made many countries focus on their own national development interests. This has turned commitments toward global development.
Although Indonesia has been able to make it through the crisis, limited poverty reduction still exists in this country.
Many northern countries have introduced savings in their state budgets, but in Indonesia perhaps the real challenge of MDG attainment is the weak management of the state budget, which results in a poor quality of basic services received by Indonesian citizens. This blends together with weak monitoring.
Indonesia has a big opportunity to offer alternative models of global development. UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon even has appointed Yudhoyono, alongside British Prime Minister David Cameron and Liberian President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, to co-chair the UN High Panel on the post-2015 MDGs.
Learning from past experience, the upcoming framework for post-2015 could consider a deeper, substantive and non-elite institutionalization of a development partnership that will lead all stakeholders to equal cooperation, as well as to equal benefit.
On the measurement side, the upcoming framework should also consider approaches that lead to the measurement of good intentions. The government for instance may consider a social auditing approach in measuring the framework.
There are at least three main reasons why social auditing is worthy of being considered. I have developed these reasons from nearly five years experience of Tifa Foundation initiatives in doing social audit practices.
First, social auditing allows citizens to assess the progress of development that affects their lives in surrounding areas.
Second, it can deliver an impact assessment that is normally untouched by general monitoring and evaluation. Third, social auditing may encourage accountability and ownership of development by citizens themselves.
One example from our experience in Makassar, South Sulawesi, has taught us a lesson in how social auditing can be shared by all parties, not just only owned by the community but also by the city of Makassar.
In this city, social auditing has been institutionalized as a development measurement mechanism involving all citizens and integrated into annual development planning.
The other thing that matters most is that its findings and recommendations from social auditing have been respected by all stakeholders, particularly local agencies associated with the fulfillment of basic rights such as education and health agencies as well as the local development planning body and other agencies associated with poverty reduction efforts.
The experience was valuable for considering improvements in measuring development that can be adopted by the central government into the post-2015 framework.
Some pearls of valuable experience already exist in our own country. ●
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar