AASC Presentation Feb 2016
-
Upload
shiladitya-chatterjee -
Category
Documents
-
view
131 -
download
2
Transcript of AASC Presentation Feb 2016
Lessons of the Millennium Development
Goals for the SDGs Shiladitya Chatterjee
Conference on Sustainable Development Goals Assam Administrative Staff College 10-11 February, 2016
Plan of presentation• Performance on the MDGs• Lessons of the MDGs• The contributions made by the MDGs• Eight major lessons from the MDG experience
Performance on the MDGs
India’s performance has left much to be desired
Assam has made similar progress as most states
towards the MDGs
• Using 4-way classification of progress on each indicator
• Assam “on–track” on 9 out of 19 indicators; India “on-track” on 10
In several areas, Assam has made similar or even more progress than the India average
Population above poverty (%)
Primary survival Grade V:I (%)
Youth literacy rate (%)
Measles immunization rate (%)Skilled Birth attendance (%)
Water access (%)
Sanitation access (%)
52.2
63.21
76
50.700000762939542.4
71.545
27.0763
78.1
93
86.1
74.1
76.2
87.8
54.624775029266342.1
64.4
74.025.818.047.7
37.1
68
63.1
82.4
80.1
65.5
85.9
88
Selected indicator values earliest and latest for India and AssamIndia Earliest India Latest Assam Earliest Assam Latest
However, in terms of absolute achievements Assam has fallen behind, as other states have
done even better
GoaKerala
Tamil Nadu
Sikkim
Delhi
Tripura
Maharashtra
Himach
al Pradesh
Andhra PradeshPunjab
Manipur
Karnataka
Jammu & Kash
mir
Mizoram
Gujarat
West Bengal
Haryana
Uttarakhand
Meghalaya
Nagaland
Chhattisgarh
Rajasthan
Odisha
Assam
Madhya Pradesh
Uttar Pradesh
Arunachal P
radesh
Jharkhand
Bihar0.00
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
0.70
0.80
0.90
0.8130.790
0.7360.719
0.6940.659 0.658 0.650
0.627 0.626 0.616 0.609 0.603 0.592 0.585 0.584 0.577 0.5650.530
0.506
0.466 0.464 0.452 0.4510.426
0.398 0.396
0.3420.313
Ranking of states by MDG Composite Performance Index latest year
The lessons of the MDGs
Some important contributions of the MDGs
• Introduced a comprehensive approach to development • Established concrete objectives with clear targets• Practical, results based approach
• Forged consensus among the development community on development priorities• Brought international peer pressure to bear on Governments
spurring action • For example, there was a surge in India’s efforts after mid 2000s
• MDG targets incorporated in 11th Five Year Plan (2007-12)• National Rural Health Mission (2005), MNREGA (2005), Universalization of ICDS (2006)
Universalization of Midday Meals Scheme (2003), Right to Education Act (2009)
Major lessons1. Avoid delays in starting
• Little action till 2005 even at Central level• Assam has rectified this for the SDGs
2. Expand participation• MDGs focused mainly on public sector, national government level• State governments played a minor role
• Assam now taking lead • Non-state players neglected
• Private sector• Can play a major role through PPPs and CSR
• Communities• Have a crucial role in monitoring and feedback e.g. Bangalore report card system
• Media• Must be effectively mobilized for advocacy and awareness
Major lessons3. Strengthen monitoring of the SDGs• MDG data remained poor; gaps large particularly in State-level data
• Drive to obtain state-level data needed for SDGs• No monitoring report at Centre till 2005; hardly any at State level • Lack of adequate monitoring makes it impossible to make course-corrections
• Annual state-level report on SDGs suggested
4. Avoid sector bias and move to outcome (results based) approach• MDGs failed to adequately address cross-sectoral impacts and synergies• Accounting for them requires good coordination at outcome (goal) level• Would need appropriate organizational structure such as working groups• Cross-sectoral effects will be particularly relevant in the SDGs
• Trade-offs between growth and environment; social objectives and environment etc.
Coordination of child hunger elimination
Eliminating Child
Hunger
Guaranteeing family’s access to
food
Targeted child and maternal
heath interventions
Women’s development
Major lessons5. The MDGs focused on average accomplishment at the aggregate level and not on reaching all disadvantaged groups – SDGs must correct this• Such as addressing needs of SCs, STs and OBCs• Remote or undeveloped geographical regions• Low income groups• Women
• Disaggregating SDG indicators to address these is needed.
Major lessons 6. Pay attention to “drivers” of development• Economic growth – not in MDG structure (now rectified)• Basic infrastructure – not in MDG structure (now rectified)• Women’s development
2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.00.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
AP
BR
CG
GA
GJHR
JH
KA
KL
MP
MH
OR
PB
RJ
TN
UP
WB
AR
AS
HP
JKMN
MLNL
SK
TR
UK
f(x) = 0.0458113271163345 x + 0.340237402112469R² = 0.293410355769989
Growth and MDG Performance
Per Capita NSDP Average Growth Rate
MD
G P
erfo
rman
ce In
dex
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 3520
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
APAS
BRCG
GJ
HRJK
JH
KA
KL
MP
MH
ORPB
RJ
TN
UP
WB
f(x) = 1.50927371113788 x + 41.3953810725349R² = 0.581436720196355
Impact of roads on births attended
Kilometres of roads per 10,000 populationPr
opor
tion
of b
irths
att
ende
d by
skill
ed h
ealth
per
sonn
el
Major lessons7. Prioritize resources for SDGs – (now specifically stressed in SDGs)• Health and education expenditure remained below norms
• Attention not only to raising resources but also placing adequate priority on SDG sectors • Insufficient human resources
• Attention to developing cadre of trained personnel in education and health
8. Improve implementation of programs• A number of well designed schemes were poorly implemented e.g. National
Rural Health Mission; MNREGA
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 5000.25
0.35
0.45
0.55
0.65
0.75
0.85
Andhra Pradesh
Arunachal Pradesh
Assam
Bihar
Chhattisgarh
GujaratHaryana
Himachal Pradesh
Jammu & Kashmir
Jharkhand
Karnataka
Kerala
Madhya Pradesh
Maharashtra
Orissa
Punjab
Rajasthan
Tamil Nadu
Uttar Pradesh
Uttarakhand
West Bengal
f(x) = 0.000514788830303113 x + 0.444893227047285R² = 0.374307821019278
Performance of states on MNREGA 2012-13 and the MDG Performance Index
Proportion of rural households provided work as proportion of rural poor households (%)
MDG
Per
form
ance
Inde
x
ReferencesS. Chatterjee, M.Hammill, N. Kumar and S. Panda (2015). Assessing India’s Progress in Achieving the Millennium Development Goals: Key Drivers of Inter-State Variations. United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific, South and Southwest Asia Regional Office Development Papers 1502. New Delhi. September 2015.
United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific, Asian Development Bank and the United Nations Development Programme (2015). Making it Happen. Technology, Finance and Satistics for Sustainable Development in Asia and the Pacific. Manila and Bangkok, May 2015.
United Nations (2015). India and the MDGs Towards a Sustainable Future for all. UN India, New Delhi.
Thank You