90 likes | 304 Views
Does the ‘Addis Abeba Action Agenda’ provide:. “a new global framework for financing sustainable development”? “a comprehensive set of policy actions”?. #FFD3: What to expect?. Unique forum or taking shop? Necessary multilateral discussion or waste of time? Hard law or ‘Leading Principles’?
E N D
Does the ‘Addis Abeba Action Agenda’ provide: • “a new global framework for financing sustainable development”? • “a comprehensive set of policy actions”?
#FFD3: What to expect? • Unique forum or taking shop? • Necessary multilateral discussion or waste of time? • Hard law or ‘Leading Principles’? • Ambition versus Realpolitik? • Link with SDGs & Post 2015
Enormous financing needs Sources: ICESDF (2014), UNCTAD (2014)
The ‘mood’ in Addis – CSO reactions • “tragic retrogression from the Monterrey and Doha agreements” • “failing to finance development” • “crisis of multilateralism” • “black box politics”, “behind the scenes pressure campaign” • “the world has changed” versus “inequality prevails”
(Some of) The Good • Technology Facilitation Mechanism(TFM) in the UN that supports SDG achievement • Institutionalized FFD follow-up mechanism that will involve up to 5 days of review every year to generate “agreed conclusions and recommendations” but linked to MoI of Post 2015 • 0.7% ODA target re-committed, but not very credible. Focus on LDC
(Some of) The Bad • No new financial commitments, domestic budgets need to finance SDG’s • No inclusive ‘global governance’ for tax matters • No critical assessment of current trade regimes • No progress in ‘developmentalizing’ systemic issues (debt, capital controls, SDR)
Ways forward • Spill-over into New York, Paris • Follow up in UN Debt work, Tax Committee,… • Not an end, but starting point of many ‘battles’ … • OECD efforts to include developing countries • UNGA discussion of debt workout mechanism