editorial

BLOOD, SWEAT AND TEARS: To What Ends?

The process to formulate the post-2015 development agenda was unleashed upon the world in early 2013. In order to create an ambitious new global development agenda— which will influence national development strategies, global discourse, and purportedly, to be so transformational as to 'leave no one behind'—governments, NGOs, civil society stakeholders, UN agencies and intergovernmental bodies have been working relentlessly for the past two years in order to accomplish this aim.

In comparison with the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), which was often described as a top-down imposition by the UN on the developing world, the post-2015 process offered multifarious opportunities to influence the discussions and the negotiations through online mechanisms, national dialogues, regional meetings, and New York-based UN negotiations.

Concurrent processes around the post-2015 development agenda abound, such as the Financing for Development negotiations, the indicators and monitoring process by the Inter-Agency Expert Group on SDGs (IAEG-SDGs), and the creation of an accountability mechanism at various levels, including the High-level Political Forum (HLPF).

The end goal is, of course, to create a seamless package for development for the next 15 years. However, since these different discussions have been happening in parallel sessions, there are serious questions on the 'seamlessness' of this development package.

At this point, it is imperative to ask critical questions: Will too much participation and too many processes yield the same results as no process and no participation? Have we been conflating participation with decision-making?

Will this post-2015 development agenda be the catalyst for the change we wish to see in our countries and our communities? Even if we pare down our expectations to the bare minimum, will this development agenda enable our governments to think about and tackle the issues we face with the perspectives and principles we would desire them to? Are the concepts of equality, including gender equality, human rights, non-discrimination, and fundamental freedoms and liberties upheld in a manner that states cannot continue to ignore and side-step these in the name of development?

[G]enuine attempts to reduce inequalities will have to deal with the question of power imbalances in society: among countries; between corporations and individuals; between the few rich and the many poor; among men, women and transgender people; and between those in the centre and the masses on the margins. The grave and disparate inequalities are a result of grave and disparate power imbalances. Any development agenda that hopes to address inequalities must enable and empower individuals and organisations to check power.

The grave and disparate inequalities so obvious to all have now become a catch-phrase commonly used by member states, UN agencies and various development actors, including the private sector. However, genuine attempts to reduce inequalities will have to deal with the question of power imbalances in society: among countries; between corporations and individuals; between the few rich and the many poor; among men, women and transgender people; and between those in the centre and the masses on the margins. The grave and disparate inequalities are a result of grave and disparate power imbalances. Any development agenda that hopes to address inequalities must enable and empower individuals and organisations to check power.

Power imbalances are also the root causes of economic, political and social marginalisations. Those in power systematically through time seek to consolidate and maintain socio-cultural, religious, political, economic and, when applicable, military dominance. This results in the marginalisation of many different groups. Unequal economic development in the Global South regions has helped the rich and powerful further consolidate their economic, socio-cultural and political powers. Further marginalisation and disenfranchisement have ensued. The reticence and lethargy of governments to discuss and capture marginalisations due to gender and sexuality, amidst a host of other politically difficult issues such as migration, religious conservatism and fundamentalism, ethnic conflicts, foreign occupation, taxation and debts, demonstrates the inability or the disinterest of member states and the UN to find necessary solutions.

The reticence and lethargy of governments to discuss and capture marginalisations due to gender and sexuality, amidst a host of other politically difficult issues such as migration, religious conservatism and fundamentalism, ethnic conflicts, foreign occupation, taxation and debts, demonstrates the inability or the disinterest of member states and the UN to find necessary solutions.

For all of us who work in the intersections of gender, women's human rights, and sexual and reproductive rights, defining and maintaining international, universal principles and standards with regards our issues is fundamental. These standards are derived from the international conventions and binding agreements signed onto by our governments. Amongst these conventions are: Universal Declaration on Human Rights (UDHR); Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW); the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR); International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR); Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC); the Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities (CRPD); and the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families. In addition to these, our governments have also signed onto agreements from the major UN conferences, such as the International Conference on Population and Development Programme of Action (ICPD POA) and the Beijing Platform of Action (BPFA). Holding governments accountable to these standards has been a main strategy to reduce inequalities and underlying factors that cause economic, political and social marginalisation. Utilising human rights mechanisms and standards has also been a key strategy for checking power in all countries. In order to make governments accountable for delivering on the post-2015, maintaining these standards is essential, and the inclusion of these into the decisions and monitoring work of the HLPF is vital.

The focus of the post-2015 development agenda is on least-developed countries, landlocked countries, small island countries, countries in situations of conflict, and Africa. This shows that indeed this is a continuing agenda of 'developing' countries. However, it must not be forgotten that the middle-income countries demonstrate the ill-effects of development and the greatest inequalities in the world. In fact, more than three quarters of the world's poor (by income measures) live in countries classified by the World Bank as middle-income countries. This clearly demonstrates that poverty is not a result of lack of development, but is a result of unequal and fractured development. This begets the question—is this agenda actually going to reduce poverty and inequality? It is much-needed that this agenda change the way development strategies are going to be implemented in low-incomes countries, and catalyse change in the policies and programmes in middle-income countries to enable the distribution of the benefits of development in a just manner.

Equally apathetic has been the suggestion that reporting of governments towards achievement of the post-2015 development agenda to be entirely voluntary, and only involve government reporting. The lessons of the past have taught it is essential for government reports to be compared and contrasted with shadow reports as these provide critical information for recommendations. Already there are whispers that governments should not be made to report a minimum number of times in the next 15 years. Ideally, NGOs would like our governments to be reporting every 3-5 years, ensuring at least 3-4 reports within the next 15 years. After the considerable work of creating an agenda with the participation of all stakeholders and in-built consensus, it seems that member states may not want to be held accountable for achievements.

However, this is not a reflection of the post-2015 process alone. The global scenario has been plagued by a series of crises: conflicts between states and between peoples, disasters, and financial and governance Catch-22. Moreover, there has been a glaring lack of political leadership—at the national and the global levels—in order to harness these crises and provide adequate and timely remedial measures.

[I]t is an omission when any transformative agenda does not call at least for the assessment and audit, and if necessary, revamp and overhaul, of the institutions that seek to serve the people.

The post-2015 process evidenced the enormity of the challenges we face as a global community, and that current institutions that we have—from our local government authorities to the UN—are unable to tackle these effectively and efficiently. Hence, it is an omission when any transformative agenda does not call at least for the assessment and audit, and if necessary, revamp and overhaul, of the institutions that seek to serve the people.

We also need to look at the current democratic processes available to us as citizens. Are these processes serving to solidify existing power bases, or enabling governance and justice?

We have our work cut out for us for the next 15 years. We need to be able to form broad coalitions with peoples' movements across different sectors in order to check power more effectively and efficiently. We need to be able to form a coalition of governments, NGOs and UN agencies which continue to champion and set universal, high standards and benchmarks for development. While we can utilise the post-2015 development framework as a take off point for discussions, and to point out gaps in government implementation and achievements, it is evident that to create the #worldwewant, we may well have to roll up our sleeves and build it ourselves.

monitoring regional and global activities

MONITORING REGIONAL AND GLOBAL ACTIVITIES

COMMUNICATING THE TRANSFORMATIVE AGENDA

As we approach the final stages of negotiating the post-2015 development agenda, governments are discussing how to communicate the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) to the general public. During the 6th session of the Intergovernmental Negotiations (IGNs), H.E. Hiroshi Minami, the Ambassador of Japan, spoke of the need to communicate and explain the goals and targets to ordinary citizens.1

While communicating the SDGs is important, communicating and explaining the journey from Rio+20² to September 2015³ key asks to be included in the next development agenda, as well as what was won and what was lost on the way, is as important. ARROW, our partners and allies have been engaged in this crucial but often neglected aspect, starting from the Open Working Group (OWG) process.⁴ The modalities for most of these communications campaigns have been online and engaging with other media.

While advocacy and communications do not always overlap, the two are not mutually exclusive either. Media and communications campaigns are useful advocacy tools and spaces. This is even more so in spaces like the IGNs where access to member states can be very limited for CSOs and major groups, and there is a need for alternative and creative ways of sharing key asks and language recommendations with them.

Below are examples of two women-led, rights-based campaigns around the post-2015 agenda.

#SRHR4ALL in the #Post2015.⁵ ARROW has been calling for the inclusion of universal access to sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) in the post-2105 development agenda, including under ARROW's flagship of the #SRHR4ALL campaign.⁶ The campaign is based on the premise that 20 years down the road from the landmark International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD), many people, particularly the most marginalised, still lack access to SRHR. Regionally and globally, the statistics for maternal mortality ratio, adolescent birth rates, unmet need for contraception, and other SRHR indicators remain serious concerns.

The campaign's call to action is organised around a hashtag: #SRHR4ALL. Initially used by ARROW and partners only, the hashtag has gained immense popularity and is frequently used by fellow SRHR advocates, especially in efforts directed at the post-2015 development agenda.

#What Women Want in the #Post2015. The Women's Major Group (WMG), which consists of women's and feminist organisations and individuals from around the globe,⁷ has been consistently monitoring global and regional policy positions of the UN and member states around the Rio+20 outcome and the post-2015 development agenda. The group has been carrying out communications efforts through various platforms, including their website and social media and online platforms belonging to various WMG members from across the world.

With the onset of the intergovernmental negotiations this year, the WMG has been making a more concerted effort to mobilise their members to carry out a two-fold communications strategy, and ARROW has been actively leading and participating in it. On one hand, the work encompasses communicating the ongoing negotiations back to the WMG membership and netizens by posting live updates (mostly via Twitter) from the negotiations in New York, and highlighting the progressive, as well as regressive, language proposed by various member states. These messages are retweeted by WMG members, sometimes with country-specific commentary and analysis producing a multiplier effect. A good practice adopted by those live tweeting the negotiations is to rally behind friendly/ progressive member states by tagging them in supportive messages and encouraging them to maintain their positions.

On the other hand, the communication efforts are also aimed to convey key asks, proposed language and certain red flags8 to the member states through targeted messaging. For example, in June 2015, the WMG released ten red flags⁹ highlighting areas that need to be strengthened in the zero draft of the outcome document of the UN Summit to adopt the post-2015 development agenda. These were disseminated vigorously throughout the entire four days of the 6th IGN via an online campaign, “#WhatWomenWant in the #Post2015.”

A social media toolkit was shared with the WMG membership. While most of the content was in English, some translations were crowdsourced¹⁰ through WMG members. A twitter rally was held for an hour each morning where WMG members from around the world tweeted the sample messages, as well as country and region-specific messages, often tagging their respective member states.

Simultaneously, a photo campaign was carried out with WMG members sharing photos holding up messages containing key asks from member states. For synergy, on the on-ground advocates used the tag, “What Women Want” whenever they made an intervention during the IGN. The overall outcome was a holistic and effective communications of messages and asks to a wide array of stakeholders throughout the week.

Claiming Our Space. It is estimated that an average of 6,000 tweets are sent out per second globally¹¹ and these online communications efforts around the post-2015 agenda are but a tiny speck in this grand landscape. However, it is evident¹² that these efforts continue to reach their target groups, including the member states, and that the online space, as well as media and communications, would be a critical component as the implementation of the post-2015 development agenda commences later this year.

VOICE OF ASIA AND THE PACIFIC IN THE NEW DEVELOPMENT AGENDA

Solidifying CSO Voices in the Region

With a population of 4.2 billion people, Asia and the Pacific is a region that is extremely diverse in terms of wealth distribution and development. As the development world was gearing up towards discussions on Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) to replace the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), after the Rio+20 conference, CSOs in the region realised the need for a common platform that would best amplify and broadcast their voices in the global arena. The Asia-Pacific Regional CSO Engagement Mechanism (AP-RCEM) was formed in 2014 at the Civil Society Forum of the inaugural session of the Asia-Pacific Forum on Sustainable Development (APFSD). AP-RCEM is a platform that is initiated, owned and driven by CSOs to ensure that voices of all sub-regions of Asia and the Pacific are heard in intergovernmental processes at regional and global levels.

AP-RCEM came together again on 16-18 May 2015 in Bangkok, Thailand for a civil society forum focusing on Consolidating Peoples' Agenda for Development Justice in the Post-2015 Development Agenda. This also served as a preparatory meeting for CSOs attending the second APFSD convened by UNESCAP on 21-22 May 2015.

With 17 constituencies represented in RCEM, the meeting was instrumental in ensuring that the CSOs, while presenting one voice, were also effectively presenting the unique viewpoints of the diverse groups they represented. As part of the Women's Constituency, the Asian-Pacific Resource and Research Centre for Women (ARROW), together with its allies, ensured that sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) was expressly included in statements prepared for the APFSD.

Making a Case for the Inclusion of SRHR in the Development Agenda. To further drive home the point that development justice is not possible without the strongest language on women's rights and the inclusion of SRHR, ARROW carried out a side event at the CSO forum in collaboration with the Asia Pacific Alliance for SRHR (APA), IPPF South Asia and East Asia & Pacific Regions, and the Partnership on Maternal, Newborn and Child Health (PMNCH). ARROW Senior Programme Officer Maria Melinda Ando presented a strong case for why SRHR is pertinent in all discussions related to sustainable development in the post-2015 agenda (see quote). The side event was well covered by the media.1

The event also provided a platform for our Sri Lankan partner Sepali Kottegoda of Women and Media Collective to share challenges in the national context, while representatives from the migrant, PLHIV,² youth, people living with disability, and LGBTIQ³ communities highlighted and discussed SRHR issues related to their constituencies.

“SRHR are a set of interconnected human rights related to sexuality and reproduction of a person recognising international laws, international human rights and consensus documents, and based upon the principles of bodily autonomy and integrity ('my body and my rights'); right of self-determination; equality (amongst men, women, transgender and intersex people); and respect cultural diversity SRHR concerns all human beings. If we cannot control our own bodies, sexualities, or fertility, then we cannot also fully access other rights such as economic, social, and cultural rights ... SRHR is central in achieving gender equality, women's empowerment and in achieving sustainable development. Poverty, disasters, climate change and conflicts are also linked to SRHR. Moreover, SRHR is a smart investment for governments.”

Initial groundwork was laid for setting up of a thematic working group at the AP-RCEM for Gender, Sexuality and SRHR, which received support from other constituencies such as women, migrants, youth, PLHIV, urban poor and NGOs. It is envisioned that the SRHR Thematic Working Group will eventually function as a cross-constituent civil society platform with the aim of promoting holistic awareness of and increasing commitment on sexual and reproductive health and rights in Asia and the Pacific as a function of the RCEM.

Synergy between Roles of Member States and Rightful Space for CSOs. The Asia-Pacific Forum on Sustainable Development (APFSD) was convened by UNESCAP for soliciting Asia-Pacific regional input to the High-level Political Forum on Sustainable Development (HLPF) 2015. The theme of this year's session was “Strengthening integration, implementation and review for Sustainable Development in Asia and the Pacific.”

Attended by more than 400 participants, the 2-day forum clearly demonstrated the strength of CSOs in articulating the viewpoints and making relevant demands to be heard at the highest level of decision making and truly embodying the spirit nothing for us without us. While the final outcome document of the forum was lacking in capturing all points articulated by the CSO, it did expressly capture the need for gender equality as below:

Many participants also highlighted gender equality and the empowerment of women as major actors in ensuring sustainable development. In relation to the centrality of gender equality to sustainable development, the increased participation of women in the labour market and their access to decent work, their equal participation in policymaking processes and addressing their rights to basic services were highlighted.4

ENGAGING AT THE HIGH-LEVEL POLITICAL FORUM

The High-level Political Forum on Sustainable Development serves as the key United Nations platform on sustainable development. Labelled as the “apex of a global network of review processes” for the post-2015 development agenda, it is tasked with the follow-up and review of the implementation of the new development agenda and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). It is expected to foster “sharing of experiences, including successes, challenges and lessons learned, and promote system-wide coherence and coordination of sustainable development policies.”¹

Importantly, the HLPF, through UN General Assembly Resolution A/67/290, accords civil society a significant participatory role.² This role is expected to be reinforced in the outcome document of the post-2015 summit.

Given its relevance, ARROW participated in this year's HLPF under the auspices of ECOSOC, held from 26 June to 8 July 2015, at the United Nations Headquarters in New York. We made several interventions, highlighting Global South perspectives and issues from the Asia-Pacific region.

Maria Melinda Ando was a lead discussant at the moderated discussion on “Reaching Out to the World: Communicating the Post-2015 Agenda.” She represented ARROW, the Asia Pacific Regional CSO Engagement Mechanism (AP-RCEM) and the Women's Major Group. In her intervention, she emphasised that while communicating the post-2015 agenda is important, the various hurdles to participate and to make one's voice heard must also not be forgotten. This includes addressing gender inequality, and other social norms and power structures in our societies that silence the voices of women, girls, and other groups on the margins. She also brought up the point that when communicating the post-2015 agenda, we must all adhere to human rights, gender equality, and ethical principles and standards.³

Additionally, ARROW also spoke at three side events. In the first one, HLPF for the Future We Want, which was organised by the Division for Sustainable Development of UNDESA on 26 June 2015, Sai Jyothirmai Racherla spoke about our proposed indicators framework and the role of the HLPF. She also shared ARROW's regional initiative on post-2015 national level implementation at the side event, Building Effective Bottom-Up Partnership for Sustainable Development Goals, organised by Voluntary Association for Agriculture, General Development, Health and Reconstruction Alliance (VAAGDHARA) on 2nd July 2015. Lastly, Maria Melinda Ando presented ARROW and AP-RCEM's position on accountability and the HLPF at the side event, Integrating Three Levels of Accountability for a Robust and Effective Review Mechanism at HLPF, which was organised by the Centre for Community Economics and Development Consultants Society (CECOEDECON) on 1st July 2015.

The HLPF ended with a Ministerial Declaration affirming governments' commitment for “establishing a strong, universal, ambitious, inclusive and people-centred post-2015 development agenda that will build on the foundations laid and experiences gained during the Millennium Development Goals process, complete the unfinished business and respond to new challenges.”4 However, the modalities of how the HLPF will monitor the SDGs and the post-2015 development agenda have been left unanswered, and will have to wait for decisions from the Financing for Development in July and the Post-2015 Summit in September.

Next year will be the first year for HLPF to review the post-2015 development agenda. As such, it would be even more important for civil society, particularly women's groups from the Global South to engage and ensure that governments, UN agencies, and businesses are held accountable to promises made this year.

INTEGRATING SRHR IN THE POST-2015 SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT AGENDA

The United Nations, along with Member States and other stakeholders, is in the process of defining the post-2015 development agenda, which it proposes to launch during the September 2015 Summit. This development agenda is proposed for the next 15 years until 2030 and is seen as a successor to the Millennium Development Goals. Global processes have been in place at the UN since 2012, with member states taking the lead and with the participation from the Major Groups and other civil society stakeholders.

To ensure the SDG agenda incorporates gender equality and sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) in its implementation at the national level, the Asian-Pacific Resource and Research Centre for Women (ARROW) organised a regional meeting titled, “Integrating Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights within the Post-2015 Sustainable Development Agenda—Regional Strategising Meeting,” from 12 to 15 May 2015 in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. This regional meeting was organised to ensure that advocacy gains made at the global level are sustained and implemented at the national level not only in the areas of gender equality and SRHR, but also in the areas of accountability, means of implementation and financing.

Twenty-five partners participated at this meeting. They were from the following subregions and countries in Asia: Southeast Asia—Cambodia, Indonesia, Lao PDR, and Vietnam; South Asia—Bangladesh, India, Maldives, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka; and East and Central Asia—China, Kyrgyzstan and Mongolia.

There were also representatives from Africa— Curious Minds: Ghana and AIDS Accountability Initiative; and Latin America—ELIGE RED.

The meeting aimed to enhance national partners' understanding of the global post-2015 processes, especially around the themes of goals, targets and indicators; means of implementation; financing for development, and accountability mechanism. Other objectives include development of respective national level advocacy strategies and advocacy briefs to engage with the post 2015 process at the national level; and enabling national partners' active participation in the post-2015 processes at the national level.

Using the peer-assist methodology, this capacity enhancing meeting cum write-shop was able to develop draft national and regional advocacy plans and advocacy briefs. The draft advocacy briefs developed will be finalised and reviewed at the national level and will be used for national level advocacy.

Even as member states will gather and decide on the post-2015 agenda in September 2015, civil society needs to be prepared to ensure policy and programme implementation of SRHR and gender equality commitments at the national level. Only then can a sustainable development agenda be achieved.

FORTHCOMING KEY POST-2015 AND RELATED EVENTS

• Women's Forum: “Feminist Perspectives on the Third International Conference on Financing for Development”, 10 July 2015, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. https://wwgonffd.files.wordpress.com/2015/07/women_s-forum-on-financing-for-development_10-july-program.pdf

• Civil Society Organisation Financing for Development Forum, 11-12 July 2015, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. https://csoforffd.wordpress.com/

• Third International Conference on Financing for Development (FfD), 13-16 July 2015, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. http://www.un.org/esa/ffd/ffd3/conference.html

• Intergovernmental Negotiations on Post-2015 Development Agenda—Seventh and Eight Sessions, 20-24 July and 27-31 July 2015, New York, USA. https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/post2015

• UN Summit for the Adoption of the Post-2015 Development Agenda, 25-27 September 2015, New York, USA. https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/post2015/summit

• UN Climate Change Conference: 21st Session of the Conference of the Parties to the UNFCCC, 30 November-11 December 2015, Paris, France. http://www.cop21.gouv.fr/en

• 47th Session of the UN Statistical Commission (UNSC), 8-11 March 2016, New Yotk, USA. http://unstats.un.org/unsd/default.htm

resource

RESOURCES FROM THE ARROW SRHR KNOWLEDGE SHARING CENTRE

ARROW's SRHR Knowledge Sharing Centre hosts a special collection of resources on gender, women's rights, and sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR). It endeavours to make critical information on these topics accessible to all. To contact the centre, write to dc@arrow.org.my or arrow@arrow.org.my

Implementing the Sustainable Development Goals: Accountability, Monitoring and Evaluation

EuroNGOs. (2015). Tool kit: Accountability for the post-2015 framework. Brussels: EuroNGOs. Retrieved from http://www.eurongos.org/fileadmin/files/We_Do/Learning_and_training/EuroNGOs_Accountability_Toolkit_February_2015_24022015.pdf

This toolkit, developed by EuroNGOs, provides a set of core advocacy and knowledge products on accountability in the post-2015 development agenda. It makes accessible current discussions on accountability and the post-2015 development framework. It also enables readers to identify key areas and challenges in relation to accountability framework in the post-2015 agenda.

Fukuda-Parr, S. (2015). Post-2015: A new era of accountability? Retrieved from http://unstats.un.org/unsd/statcom/statcom_2015/seminars/post-2015/docs/Panel%201.3_FukudaParr%20.pdf

The Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) were criticised by many for failing to address the issue of governance and accountability as its “aid and exhortation” model only focused on national accountability and performance against indicators, and was not able to address structural irregularities. This report sheds light on the limitations of accountability mechanisms adopted by MDGs. It also advocates for an accountability framework, which emphasises the responsibility of agenda-setting bodies.

Independent Expert Advisory Group on a Data Revolution for Sustainable Development. (IEAG). (2014). A World that counts: Mobilising the data revolution for sustainable development. Retrieved from http://www.undatarevolution.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/A-World-That-Counts.pdf

There is no denying that data is the lifeblood of accountability and evaluation frameworks. Without the availability of effective data, providing the needed information on the indicators, conceptualising and implementing effective monitoring and evaluation programmes would become an impossible task. However, data needs improvement and needs to be documented to the highest level of detail required for decision-making by policy makers. This report entails an overview of the opportunities, as well as challenges presented by the data revolution. It also provides recommendations for data usability for sustainable development through proactive measures.

Overseas Development Institute (ODI), Plan International, & Office of the UN Secretary-General's Envoy on Youth. (2014). Young people's engagement in strengthening accountability for the post-2015 agenda. London: ODI. Retrieved from http://www.odi.org/sites/odi.org.uk/files/odi-assets/publications-opinion-files/9165.pdf

The need for an effective accountability framework in order to ensure that states honour the commitments made in the post-2015 development agenda has been widely acknowledged. However, accountability to 'whom' and for 'what' still needs to be defined. This paper argues that young people aged between 15 and 24 should be included as key stakeholders, not only within the goals and targets of the framework, but also in the post-2015 monitoring and accountability mechanisms. The paper also puts forward recommendations for meaningful participation of young people in ensuring effective implementation of accountability mechanisms at local, national, regional and global levels.

United Nations Development Group. (UNDG). (2014). Participatory accountability mechanisms for the post-2015 development agenda. Retrieved from http://www.unescap.org/sites/default/files/UNDG%20Paper%20Participatory%20Accountability%20Mechanisms%20P2015%20for%20Asia-Pacifi....pdf

Proactive and participatory accountability mechanisms can improve the credibility and effectiveness of the Post-2015 Agenda and make processes more transparent, more inclusive and more responsive to peoples' needs. While a global level accountability architecture is a key site to ensure that accountability principles are being followed, there is a strong need for national accountability mechanisms which will serve as a crucial foundation. The paper highlights key features of a successful post-2015 accountability system.

United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) & Centre for Economic and Social Rights (CESR). (2013). Who will be accountable? Human rights and post-2015 development agenda. New York & Geneva: OHCHR & CESR. Retrieved from http://cesr.org/downloads/who_will_be_accountable.pdf

In order to ensure that the post-2015 development agenda translates into tangible results, it needs to be backed up with a framework for accountability which clearly articulates who is responsible to whom and for what. This report makes a case for the need of an accountability mechanism which effectively and explicitly aligns goals with the binding obligations that states already have under various international human rights treaties in order to establish clear and measurable benchmarks.

World Vision International. (2015). Grassroots to global: Seven steps to citizen-driven accountability for the Sustainable Development Goals. Retrieved from http://www.wvi.org/united-nations-and-global-engagement/publication/grassroots-global-seven-steps-citizen-driven

In this report, World Vision International proposes seven key guiding principles to define citizen-driven planning and monitoring processes at local level. Once the development needs are identified and prioritised at the local level and its implementation are contextualised in a participatory manner, a robust accountability framework should be set up with foundations at the grassroots levels. Collaboration among key players and actors would also be important to ensure that policy targets are fulfilled. Citizen-generated information and data can provide critical information about the quality of service. In this context, governments would also need to create spaces for sharing of citizen-generated evidence. Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) can hence play an important role. Importantly, administrative and institutional remedies would be required to advance accountability.

Financing the Implementation of Sustainable Development Goals

Fonn, S., & Ravindran, T.K.S. (2011). The macroeconomic environment and sexual and reproductive health: A review of trends over the last 30 years. Reproductive Health Matters, 19(38), 11-25. doi: 10.1016/S0968-8080(11)38584-9

The quality and accessibility of public health services are directly dependent on resource allocation. How allocated funds are utilised and how services are prioritised can have an implication for the provisions of health services, including sexual and reproductive health services. A review of trends of the last 30 years, this report provides a review of factors which have influenced key decisions about resource allocation for sexual and reproductive health services across the world. It also examines the role played by donors in determining how services are prioritised and their lack of accountability.

High-Level Task Force for ICPD (HLTF). (2015). Policy considerations for financing sexual and reproductive health and rights in the post-2015 era. Retrieved from http://icpdtaskforce.org/resources/HLTFFinancingSRHRBrief.pdf

The commitments related to sexual and reproductive health and rights in the post-2015 development agenda will require increased and sustained funding. Despite the proven benefits of spending on investments on SRHR, underfunding of programmes to promote SRHR persists globally. That also explains why the core goal of achieving universal access to SRHR still remains unfulfilled. The focus of donors has remained on the provision of SRH services only, whereas a more holistic approach is needed in order to be able to meet the goal of universal access to SRHR. Broader investments and a multi-sectoral approach is the need of the hour. Additionally, national level financial plans for SRHR and tracking of resource flows for SRHR are also required.

Hill, P. S., Huntington, D., Dodd, R., & Buttsworth, M. (2013). From Millennium Development Goals to post-2015 sustainable development: Sexual and reproductive health and rights in an evolving aid environment. Reproductive Health Matters, 21(42), 113-114. doi: 10.1016/S0968-8080(13)42737-4

Using case studies from various countries, this paper provides an overview of the structural changes in development economic framework and its impact on policy making around provision of sexual and reproductive health services at national level. It also provides an insight into how a greater focus by donors was brought on by the MGDs, but at the expense of a broader sexual and reproductive health and rights agenda. It also calls advocates to claim inclusion of a broader sexual and reproductive health and rights agenda by linking it with all elements of sustainable development framework: gender inequality, education, population dynamics, but also urbanisation, migration, and climate change.

Olsen, S. H., Zusman, E., Miyazawa, I., Cadman, T., Yoshida, T., & Bengstsson, M. (2014). Implementing the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG): An assessment of means of implementation (MOI). Paper presented at ISAP Conference. Retrieved from http://www.iges.or.jp/isap/2014/PDF/IPSS_SDGs_conference_paper.pdf

The paper argues that more focus is needed to articulate, aggregate and convert diverse needs into the policies and to allocate and distribute resources, which are in compliance with those policies. The paper also provides an overview of existing literature and examines how the linkages between governance, sustainable development and implementation have been conceptualised. It also offers a critical overview of the same in MDGs. It outlines a framework for means of implementation that hinges upon three core features: articulation of needs; resource allocation and distribution; and monitoring and evaluation. Lastly, the paper argues for a similar criteria for both national level and global level MOI and governance frameworks.

Overseas Development Institute (ODI). (2014). Financing the post-2015 Sustainable Development Goals: A rough roadmap. London: ODI. Retrieved from http://www.odi.org/sites/odi.org.uk/files/odi-assets/publications-opinion-files/9374.pdf

This paper provides an overview of three main components of a global development financial model across different countries and areas for investment. It argues that the financial models for sustainable development goals should be made at the national level so that trade-offs and interdependencies across various funding types can be explored and the potential of public and private resources can be unlocked. It also provides an overview of the implications of such an approach at the global level. Lastly, the report looks into the role that multilateral development banks (MDBs) can play and sets outs four areas of reform, including systemic reforms of MDBs.

The World Bank Group. (2013). Financing for development: Post-2015. Washington, DC: The World Bank. Retrieved from https://www.worldbank.org/content/dam/Worldbank/document/Poverty%20documents/WB-PREM%20financing-for-development-pub-10-11-13web.pdf

In September 2015, heads of the states will agree on the Sustainable Development Goals, which is meant to revitalise the means of implementation as well as global partnership for development. This paper provides an overview of existing and emerging financial resources for development. It also provides insight on how to best support developing countries in harnessing diverse resources. The paper also entails discussion on issues of aid effectiveness and ways to provide smarter, more effective aid.

OTHER RESOURCES

Agarwal, D. (2014). Health in post-2015 development agenda: Deliver on health promotion. Indian Journal of Community Medicine, 39(1), 1-2. Retrieved from http://www.ijcm.org.in/text.asp?2014/39/1/1/126338

Bhattacharya, D., & Ali, M. A. (2014). The SDGs: What are the “Means of Implementation”? (Future United Nations Development System Briefing Papers). New York: Future United Nations Development System, CUNY. Retrieved from http://www.futureun.org/media/archive1/briefings/FUNDS-Briefing21-SDGsMoI.pdf

Bilney, S., Domingo, L., Rajivan, A., Roth, S., Shiroishi, Y., & Woods, B. (2013). Building development effectiveness post-2015: A results-based approach (ADB Sustainable Development Working Paper Series). Manila: Asian Development Bank. Retrieved from http://www.adb.org/sites/default/files/publication/30361/adb-wp-26-development-effectiveness-post-2015.pdf

Economic and Social Commissions for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP). (2014). Background note for Asia-Pacific Regional Consultation on Accountability for the Post-2015 Development Agenda. Bangkok: ESCAP. Retrieved from http://www.unescap.org/sites/default/files/Background%20paper_RCA_FINAL.pdf

Economic and Social Council United Nations (ECOSOC UN). (2014). Summary of the key messages of the General Assembly Interactive Dialogue on Elements for an Accountability Framework for the Post-2015 Development Agenda. New York: ECOSOC UN. Retrieved from http://www.un.org/en/ga/president/68/pdf/5202014Accountability_Framework_Dialogue_PGA_Summary.pdf

Friedrich Ebert Stiftung (FES). (2014). An urgent need for clarity: On the post-2015 development agenda and financing for development. New York: FES. Retrieved from http://library.fes.de/pdf-files/iez/global/10889.pdf

Green, D., Hale, S., & Lockwood, M. (2012). How can a post-2015 agreement drive real change? The policy economy of global commitments. United Kingdom: Oxfam GB. Retrieved from https://www.oxfam.org/sites/www.oxfam.org/files/dp-politics-post-2015-mdgs-revised-211112-en.pdf

Hulme, D., Savoia, A., & Sen, K. (2014). Governance as a global development goal? Setting, measuring and monitoring the post-2015 development agenda (ESID Working Paper No.32, University of Manchester). Retrieved from http://ssrn.com/abstract=2425238

Intergovernmental Committee of Experts on Sustainable Development Financing (ICESDF). (2014). Report of the Intergovernmental Committee of Experts on Sustainable Development Financing. Retrieved from https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/4588FINAL%20REPORT%20ICESDF.pdf

Lucci, P., Khan, A., & Stuart, E. (2015). Means of implementation and the global partnerships for sustainable development: What's in it for emerging economies? London: ODI. Retrieved from http://www.odi.org/sites/odi.org.uk/files/odi-assets/publications-opinion-files/9654.pdf

Overseas Development Institute (ODI), Deutsches Institut fur Entwicklungspolitik (DIE), European Centre for Development Policy Management (ECDPM), the University of Athens Department of Economics, Division of International Economics and Development & the Southern Voice Network. (2014). Financing and other means of implementation in a transformative post-2015 context. Retrieved from http://www.odi.org/sites/odi.org.uk/files/odi-assets/events-documents/5159.pdf

Overseas Development Institute (ODI) & United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). (2014). Where next for aid? The post-2015 opportunity. New York & London: UNDP & ODI. Retrieved from http://www.undp.org/content/dam/undp/library/Poverty%20Reduction/Development%20Cooperation%20and%20Finance/UNDP-ODI--Where-Next-for-Aid-the-Post-2015-Opportunity-FINAL.pdf

Overseas Development Institute (ODI). 2014. Governance targets and indicators for post-2015: An initial assessment. London: ODI. Retrieved from http://www.odi.org/publications/8159-governance-targets-indicators-post-2015-initial-assessment

Powell, J. (2015, March 26). Financing the future of 2015: Some hits and misses on the future of development finance. Retrieved from http://aiddata.org/blog/financing-the-future-2015-some-hits-and-misses-on-the-future-of-development-finance

Save the Children. (2013). Mandatory corporate reporting of non-financial performance: A potential indicator of the private sector's contribution to a post-2015 framework. London: Save the Children. Retrieved from https://www.savethechildren.org.uk/sites/default/files/images/Private_sector_transparency_briefing.pdf

The North South Institute (NSI). (2014). Measuring progress post-2015: An Assessment of proposals. Retrieved from http://www.nsi-ins.ca/publications/measuring-progress-post-2015/

United Nations Global Pulse. (2013). Big data for development: A primer. Retrieved from http://www.unglobalpulse.org/sites/default/files/Primer%202013_FINAL%20FOR%20PRINT.pdf

World Economic Forum (WEF). (2012). Big data, big impact: New possibilities for international development. Geneva: World Economic Forum. Retrieved from http://www.weforum.org/reports/big-data-big-impact-new-possibilities-international-development%20

World Health Organization (WHO). (2014). Sexual and reproductive health beyond 2014: Equality, quality of care and accountability. Geneva: WHO. Retrieved from http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/112291/1/WHO_RHR_14.05_eng.pdf?ua=1&ua=1

Yilmaz, S, Beris, Y., & Serrano-Berthet, R. (2008). Local government discretion and accountability: A diagnostic framework for local governance (The World Bank Social Development Working Paper Series). Washington, DC: The World Bank. Retrieved from http://siteresources.worldbank.org/EXTSOCIALDEVELOPMENT/Resources/244362-1193949504055/LocalGovernmentDiscretionandAccountability.pdf

SELECTED ARROW RESOURCES

Below are key ARROW publications from the past five years. All can be downloaded for free at http://arrow.org.my/our-publications/

2015

Varma, A. with Das, K. Sexuality: Critical to addressing poverty and food insecurity.

2014

ARROW. Sexual and reproductive health and rights in the post-2015 agenda: Taking their rightful place. (Avail. in Bangla, Hindi & Tamil)

ARROW. Sexual and reproductive health and rights beyond 2014: Opportunities and challenges.

ARROW. Setting the adolescent and young people SRHR agenda beyond ICPD+20.

ARROW. ICPD+20 Asia youth factsheet.

ARROW. Fulfilling women's right to continuum of quality care.

ARROW. ARROW resource kit on leadership and management.

ARWC & ARROW. Our stories, one journey: The travelling journal on sexual and reproductive health and rights.

Awin, N. Taking a broader view: Addressing maternal health in the context of food and nutrition security and poverty.

Racherla, S. & Dzhanaeva, N. Country profile on the status of sexual and reproductive health and rights: Kyrgyz Republic. (Also available in Russian).

Ravindran, T.K.S. What it takes: Addressing poverty and achieving food sovereignty, food security, and universal access to SRHR.

Turagabeci, P. & Bronwyn, T. Pacific young people's SRHR factsheet.

Woods, Z. Identifying opportunities for action on climate change and sexual and reproductive health and rights in Bangladesh, Indonesia and the Philippines.

Various authors. Country profile series on universal access to sexual and reproductive health. Available for Cambodia, China, Indonesia, Lao PDR (also available in Lao), Malaysia, Mongolia, Nepal, Pakistan, Philippines, & Sri Lanka.

Various authors. Country profile series on universal access to sexual and reproductive rights. Available for Cambodia, China, India, Indonesia, Lao PDR (also available in Lao), Malaysia, Nepal, Pakistan, Philippines, & Thailand.

2013

ARROW. (2nd ed.). Sex & rights: The status of young people's sexual & reproductive health & rights in Southeast Asia.

Ravindran, T.K.S. An advocates' guide: Strategic indicators for universal access to sexual and reproductive health and rights.

Thanenthiran, S., Racherla, S.J., & Jahanath, S. Reclaiming and redefining rights: ICPD+20 status of SRHR in Asia-Pacific.

Various authors. Reclaiming & redefining rights—Setting the adolescent and young people SRHR agenda beyond ICPD+20.

2012

ARROW. Thematic papers presented at the “Beyond ICPD and MDGs: NGOs strategising for sexual and reproductive health and rights in Asia-Pacific Region” and “Opportunities for NGOs at National, Regional and International Levels in the Asia-Pacific Region in the Lead-up to 2014: NGO-UNFPA Dialogue for Strategic Engagement.”

ARROW. The Essences of an innovative programme for young people in South East Asia.

ARROW. Proceedings of the regional meetings “Beyond ICPD and MDGs: NGOs strategising for sexual and reproductive health and rights in Asia-Pacific region” and “Opportunities for NGOs at national, regional and international levels in the Asia-Pacific region in the lead-up to 2014: NGO-UNFPA dialogue for strategic engagement.”

ARROW. Leadership experiences of young women in South East Asia: Reflections on advancing young people's SRHR agenda.

ARROW. Kuala Lumpur Call to Action: Beyond ICPD and MDGs.

ARROW & World Diabetes Foundation (WDF).

Diabetes: A missing link to achieving sexual and reproductive health in the Asia-Pacific Region.

Marin, M.L.S. International Labour Migration, Gender, and Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights in East Asia, Southeast Asia and the Pacific.

Raghuram, S. Reclaiming & redefining rights—Thematic studies series 5: Poverty, food security, sexual and reproductive health and rights—Integrating and reinforcing state responsibilities, integrating societal action.

2011

ARROW. Reclaiming & redefining rights— Thematic studies series 3: Reproductive autonomy and rights in Asia.

ARROW. Reclaiming & redefining rights— Thematic studies series 1: Sexuality & rights in Asia.

ARROW. Reclaiming & redefining rights— Thematic studies series 4: Maternal mortality and morbidity in Asia.

Ravindran, T.K.S. Reclaiming & redefining rights—Thematic studies series 2: Pathways to universal access to reproductive health care in Asia.

2010

ARROW. Understanding the critical linkages between gender-based violence and sexual and reproductive health and rights: Fulfilling commitments towards MDG+15.

ARROW. Regional overview—MDG5 in Asia: Progress, gaps and challenges 2000-2010.

ARROW. Briefing paper: The Women and Health Section of the Beijing Platform for Action.

ARROW & WHRAP. Making a difference: Improving women's sexual & reproductive health & rights in South Asia.

definitions

DEFINITIONS

Accountability:1 At its most basic, it means “ensuring that officials in public, private and voluntary sector organisations are answerable for their actions and that there is redress when duties and commitments are not met.”²

“In public policy contexts, accountability is generally understood as the obligation of those in authority to take responsibility for their actions, answer for them and be subject to some form of sanction if and when needed.³ It has a corrective function by addressing grievances and sanctioning wrongdoing as well as a preventive function, by identifying what is working and what needs to be adjusted.”³

“It is useful to think of this relationship as involving four distinct and sequential stages:⁴

• Standard-setting. Setting the behaviour expected from the 'accountee', and therefore the standards or criteria by which the 'accountee' will be judged.

• Investigation. Look if the 'accountee' has met the standards/criteria.

• Answerability. A process in which the 'accountee' is obliged to provide information about its decisions/actions and to justify them.

• Enforcement. A process in which the 'accountee' can be sanctioned for falling below the agreed standards.”⁵

Millennium Development Goals (MDGs): Eight goals that 189 governments agreed to at the Millennium Summit in 2000, which was meant to guide global development efforts in order to combat poverty and hunger, promote gender equality, end diseases like HIV, and provide universal primary education, amongst others. The goals were meant to be achieved by 2015.⁶

Post-2015 Development Agenda: Development priorities that need to be meet by the global community from 2016 to 2030, after the MDGs have ended. The United Nations has been in the process of defining the post-2015 agenda since 2012, with governments, civil society and other stakeholders.⁷ The new agenda will be launched at the UN Summit for the Adoption of the Post-2015 Development Agenda on 25-27 September 2015 at the United Nations Headquarters in New York.⁸

Sustainable Development: The most commonly cited definition is from the World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED) report: “Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. It contains within it two key concepts:

• the concept of needs, in particular the essential needs of the world's poor, to which overriding priority should be given; and

• the idea of limitations imposed by the state of technology and social organisation on the environment's ability to meet present and future needs.”⁹

Sustainable development has three essential and inseparable dimensions—economic, environmental, and social. The Outcome Document of UN Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20)¹⁰ mandated the development of sustainable development goals, which should address all three dimensions in a balanced way and consider their inter-linkages.

Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): Governments agreed at Rio+20,¹⁰ to begin a process to develop a set of sustainable development goals, which will build upon the MDGs and will form the basis of the post-2015 development agenda. The Open Working of the General Assembly on Sustainable Development Goals proposed a set of 17 goals and 169 targets¹¹ which are currently being discussed at the inter-governmental negotiations.

While all goals have SRHR interlinkages, those that have explicit targets on both are goals 3, 4, and 5. These goals and targets are listed in the article “Will the means justify the ends?” as well as in the Factfile.

factfile

ACHIEVING SRHR IN THE SDGS:

Proposals for Critical SRHR Indicators to Achieve SRHR Targets

Monitoring is a political exercise. Performance review is critical to ensuring accountability of governments to their citizens. Monitoring the implementation of international commitments pertaining to gender equality and women's health has been a key strategy of ARROW and her partners since it was founded in 1993.

ARROW and our partners have consistently monitored the International Conference on Population and Development Programme of Action (ICPD POA), the Beijing Platform for Action (BpfA), and the Millennium Development Goals. Of especial interest are the ICPD reviews in 1999,1 2004,² 2009,³ and 2012-2014.⁴ In 2009, we improved upon our indicator base and selected only cross-comparable ones, and applied these to 12 countries in the Asia-Pacific region.³ In the latest review, we expanded our monitoring to include 49 countries in the Global South regions of Sub-Saharan Africa,⁵ Latin America and the Caribbean,⁶ Middle East and Northern Africa,⁷ and Eastern Europe.⁸

The process of monitoring has involved assessing progress using a defined set of indicators, which were developed and refined primarily by ARROW in cooperation with women's organisations, researchers, activists, and academicians over time. These covered the areas of reproductive health, reproductive rights, sexual health, sexual rights, gender equality and health financing—all of which are critical to the full realisation of sexual and reproductive health and rights for all.

Monitoring is a political exercise. Performance review is critical to ensuring accountability of governments to their citizens.

The final draft of the outcome document of the Post-2015 Development Summit in September 2015 enumerates a global proposal with 17 sustainable development goals (SDGs) and 169 targets. Some of the goals (Goals 3 and 5) specifically discuss gender equality and sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights (SRHR).⁹

The Statistical Commission has endorsed the formation of the Inter-agency and Expert Group on SDG Indicators (IAEG-SDGs) and the first IAEG-SDGs meeting was held in June 2015. The process of developing the indicator framework for the SDG targets is currently ongoing and is poised to be endorsed at the 47th session of the Statistical Commission in 2016.

Global indicators selected need to be strategic, measurable and sensitive to enable us to chart progress in much-needed areas. Critical indicators which we feel will make an essential difference in the area of women's health and rights are given in Table 1. We also present indicators (highlighted) that are being proposed by ARROW and other SRHR organisations to provide a comprehensive list of indicators to be included in the SDG framework.

It is important that the indicators in the following pages are taken into consideration in the indicator framework for the SDGs being developed by the IAEG-SDGs to make it more meaningful for women.