ISPE EAG
INTERATIONAL
SOCIETY FOR POVERTY ELIMINATION ECONOMIC
ALLIANCE GROUP
Special Address to IMF 2016 Annual Research
Conference, Washington DC, 3 – 4 November 2016
Proposal on New Global Partnership Initiative for
Actualizing IMF Fit for 21st Century Vision
Introduction
The IMF, a Key Member Institution in the UN
System – UNO, WBG and IMF started its Annual Research Conference, ARC, in 2000.
The 2016 edition is the Seventeenth in the Series. Now is a good time to
evaluate the first 16 editions, to really understand what IMF is Doing Right
and How it could be significantly improved and what IMF is Doing Wrong and How it
could be corrected and in ways that help IMF and indeed the entire UN System –
UNO, WBG, IMF Delivery as One, that is the Pillar of the UN System – UNO, WBG,
IMF being Institution Fit for the 21st Century and Institution that
delivers of its Responsibilities in the Great Work towards achieving increasing
convergence between 2030 Agenda – AAAA, SDG, COP21 and Agenda 21 Visions
Intention and Reality in each Community in each of the 193/306 UN Member
States.
The Final Session on Economic Forum: Policy
Challenges after the Great Recession, is probably the most appropriate session
to take holistic look at points made in this Paper. However, it could be
helpful if all remaining Sessions in ARC 2016 really shift focus away from
abstract presentations and discussions to focus on real and complex National
Economy problems on the ground facing real and ordinary people on the ground in
each Community in each of the 193/306 UN Member States.
We highlight this Economic Forum Session because
the Topic assumes that the Great Recession is over and so there is a need to
focus on Policy Challenges Moving Forward. With due respects, our Study finding
is that the Great Recession is yet to Start hence the need to understand the
difference between getting out of Great Recession that has already occurred and
preventing a Great Recession that is yet to occur.
It is clear that the Fire Brigade effort in 2008
managed to somewhat contain a Great Recession but it was Symptoms that were
treated and so the diseases only got worse. As the disease is getting
increasingly worse, the probability of another Fire Brigade attempt containing
a looming Great Recession when it becomes Visible, may not succeed this time around
and the Result could be a Great Recession that make that of the 1930s Child’s
Play.
It is pertinent to note that increasing numbers
of Children, Youth, Women, Men and Elders in the UK are living in Victoria Era
conditions and the situation in the US is that increasing numbers of Children,
Youth, Women, Men and Elders in the UK are living in Jim Crow Era conditions,
with many not having access to Water and Sanitation Facilities and in some
Communities in the US today Children play in Sewage. The situation is urgent as
it is widespread in many Developed and Developing Countries in our World today.
This Paper set out ISPE/EAG Thoughts on New
Priorities and New Direction for IMF and indeed UN System: UNO, WBG, IMF;
Member States and CSOs/NGOs if Sustainable Solutions that effectively promote
and protect the Common Interest and Common Future of over 7 Billion People, especially
the over 2 Billion in both Developed and Developing Countries are to be found,
fully implemented with effective monitoring and evaluation of this implementation,
and on time to avoid total collapse of our Fragile Planet.
IMF
ARC History
The first Annual Research Conference
of the International Monetary Fund was held in Washington, DC, on November 9
and 10, 2000. This conference brought together academic scholars from many
institutions and young researchers in the Fund to present and discuss papers on
various topics of current interest to the IMF. The topics for this first
conference included monetary and exchange rate policy in crisis situations,
private sector involvement in crisis resolution, exchange-rate regimes and
currency unions, and effects of adjustment programs. This was a Mundell-Fleming lecture.
The second Annual Research Conference
of the International Monetary Fund took place in Washington, DC, on November 29
and 30, 2001. Speakers included scholars from universities and other research
institutions as well as young researchers in the Fund. This year's conference
had a focus on the economic consequences of large devaluations and currency
crises, stabilization policies in emerging markets, and the political economy
of economic reforms and IMF programs. This was a Mundell-Fleming lecture in honor of one of the pre-eminent scholars
of modern international finance, Rudi Dornbusch.
The third Annual Research Conference
of the International Monetary Fund took place in Washington, DC, on November 7
and 8, 2002. Speakers included scholars from universities and other research
institutions as well as young researchers in the Fund. The 2002 conference
discussed capital flows and global governance. This was a Mundell-Fleming
lecture.
The Fourth Annual Research Conference
of the International Monetary Fund took place in Washington, DC, on November
6-7, 2003 discussed capital flows and Macroeconomic Cycles.
The Fifth Annual Research Conference of the International
Monetary Fund took place in Washington, DC, on November 4 and 5, 2004. The
conference was intended to provide a forum for discussing innovative research
in international economics, undertaken both by IMF staff and by outside
economists, and to facilitate the exchange of views among researchers and
policymakers. The 2004 conference was devoted to Policies, Institutions, and
Instability, and their linkage to growth and crises in a global environment. This was the first Jaques Polak Lecture
in the Annual Research Conference Series.
The Sixth Annual Research Conference of the International
Monetary Fund took place in Washington, DC, on
November 3–4, 2005. The conference was intended to provide a forum for
discussing innovative research in economics, undertaken both by IMF staff and
by outside economists, and to facilitate the exchange of views among
researchers and policy makers. The 2005 conference was devoted to
Reforms. This was the second Jaques
Polak Lecture in the Annual Research Conference Series.
The Seventh Annual Research Conference of the International
Monetary Fund took place in Washington, DC, on
November 9–10, 2006. The conference was intended to provide a forum for
discussing innovative research in economics, undertaken both by IMF staff and
by outside economists, and to facilitate the exchange of views among
researchers and policy makers. The 2006 conference was devoted to
Capital Flows. This was the third Jaques
Polak Lecture in the Annual Research Conference Series.
The Eighth Annual Research Conference of the International
Monetary Fund took place in Washington, DC, on
November 15–16, 2007. The conference was intended to provide a forum for
discussing innovative research in economics, undertaken both by IMF staff and
by outside economists, and to facilitate the exchange of views among
researchers and policy makers. The 2007 conference was devoted to
Exchange Rates. This was the third Jaques
Polak Lecture in the Annual Research Conference Series.
The Ninth Annual Research Conference of the International
Monetary Fund took place in Washington, DC, on
November 13–14, 2008. The conference was intended to provide a forum for
discussing innovative research in economics, undertaken both by IMF staff and
by outside economists, and to facilitate the exchange of views among
researchers and policy makers. The 2008 conference was devoted to
Macro Financial Linkages. This was the fourth
Jaques Polak Lecture in the Annual Research Conference Series.
The Tenth Annual Research Conference of the International
Monetary Fund took place in Washington, DC, on
November 5–6, 2009. The conference was intended to provide a forum for
discussing innovative research in economics, undertaken both by IMF staff and
by outside economists, and to facilitate the exchange of views among
researchers and policy makers. The 2009 conference was devoted to
Financial Frictions and Macro Economic Adjustments. This was the fifth Jaques Polak Lecture
in the Annual Research Conference Series.
The Eleventh Annual Research Conference of the International
Monetary Fund took place in Washington, DC, on
November 4–5, 2010. The conference was intended to provide a forum for
discussing innovative research in economics, undertaken both by IMF staff and
by outside economists, and to facilitate the exchange of views among
researchers and policy makers. The 2010 conference was devoted to
Macro Economic and Financial Policies after the Crisis. This was the sixth Jaques Polak Lecture
in the Annual Research Conference Series.
The Twelfth Annual Research Conference of the International
Monetary Fund took place in Washington, DC, on
November 10–11, 2011. The conference was intended to provide a forum for
discussing innovative research in economics, undertaken both by IMF staff and
by outside economists, and to facilitate the exchange of views among
researchers and policy makers. The 2011 conference was devoted to
Monetary and Macroprudential Policies. This
was the seventh Jaques Polak Lecture in the Annual Research Conference
Series.
The Thirteenth Annual Research Conference of the International
Monetary Fund took place in Washington, DC, on
November 8–9, 2012. The conference was intended to provide a forum for
discussing innovative research in economics, undertaken both by IMF staff and
by outside economists, and to facilitate the exchange of views among
researchers and policy makers. The 2012 conference was devoted to
Labor Markets through the Lens of the Great Recession. This was the eight Jaques Polak Lecture
in the Annual Research Conference Series.
The Fourteenth Annual Research Conference of the International
Monetary Fund took place in Washington, DC, on
November 7–8, 2013. The conference was intended to provide a forum for
discussing innovative research in economics, undertaken both by IMF staff and
by outside economists, and to facilitate the exchange of views among
researchers and policy makers. The 2013 conference was devote to
Crisis: Yesterday and Today. This was
the ninth Jaques Polak Lecture in the Annual Research Conference Series.
The Fifteenth Annual Research Conference of the International
Monetary Fund took place in Washington, DC, on
November 13–14, 2014. The conference was intended to provide a forum for
discussing innovative research in economics, undertaken both by IMF staff and
by outside economists, and to facilitate the exchange of views among
researchers and policy makers. The 2014 conference was devoted to
Cross Border Spill Overs. This was the tenth
Jaques Polak Lecture in the Annual Research Conference Series and the
first to also be described as both Mundell-Fleming
Lecture and Jaques Polak Lecture.
The Sixteenth Annual Research Conference of the International
Monetary Fund took place in Washington, DC, on
November 5–6, 2015. The conference was intended to provide a forum for
discussing innovative research in economics, undertaken both by IMF staff and
by outside economists, and to facilitate the exchange of views among
researchers and policy makers. The 2015 conference was devoted to
Unconventional Monetary and Exchange Rate Policies. This was the eleventh Jaques Polak Lecture
in the Annual Research Conference Series and the second to also be described as
both Mundell-Fleming Lecture and Jaques Polak
Lecture.
The Seventeenth Annual Research Conference of the International
Monetary Fund took place in Washington, DC, on
November 3–4, 2016. The conference was intended to provide a forum for
discussing innovative research in economics, undertaken both by IMF staff and
by outside economists, and to facilitate the exchange of views among
researchers and policy makers. The 2016 conference is devoted to Macroeconomics
after the Great Recession. This was the twelfth
Jaques Polak Lecture in the Annual Research Conference Series and the third
to also be described as both Mundell-Fleming
Lecture and Jaques Polak Lecture.
Rethinking the ARC
The Agenda for each Annual
Research Lecture does not appear to have any Role for the Individual that
Lecture was intended to honor. Given IMF Image in Countries across the World,
and IMF Score Card in the Design and Delivery of Policy, Program, Project
Interventions, 3PIs and 3PIs Training as One in the work towards achieving IMF
Vision in each of the 193/306 UN Member States, should an objective International
Development Cooperation Profession not ask, what really has the ARC achieved in
the past 16 years? And How have these achievements help IMF Executive
Management and Governing Council achieve increasing convergence between IMF
Vision Intention and Reality in each Community in each of 193/306 UN Member
States? Can clear and correct answers to these questions be found without
Rethinking ARC and in ways that answer the following Big Questions?
As part of Rethinking
ARC, consideration should be given to the desirability of continuing to devote
each ARC towards honoring a specific Individual compared to desirability of
giving Innovation and Creativity Awards to good ideas and pertinent suggestions
that have been demonstrated and seen to demonstrate that these Work at
Community, Sub-national, Country, Sub-regional, Regional and Global levels within
the topic of the ARC for that year and also more spirited effort needs to be
made to ensure that as from 2017 ARC fundamental issues of Diversity,
Perspectives, Competences and Inclusion are meaningfully addressed and in ways
that effectively correct related gaps, flaws and failures in the past 17 ARCs’.
Big Questions
The ARC over the years discuss annual topics cross
cutting within essentially 4 Themes – Macroeconomic Policy, Monetary Policy,
Reform and Recession.
The Big Questions are What Has the ARC Outcome in past
16 years achieved? If IMF Internal and External Publics do not actually learn
lessons from flaws and failures of past 16 editions of ARC, will the same
mistakes not be made in the next 16 editions of ARC starting from the 2016
edition? Can our Fragile Planet afford the ultimate consequences of IMF
Platforms such as ARC being empty rituals contributing little or Nothing
towards effectively addressing real and complex National Economy problems
facing the Ordinary Citizen in each Community – Rural and Urban in each of the
193/306 UN Member States? Can IMF continue with business as usual instead of
business unusual and parroting change instead of practicing change? Noting that
ARC was Designed as Platform for discussing Innovative Research being undertaken
within and outside IMF? That is Can IMF continue practicing Academic Research
that is Abstract and essentially aimed at advancing the frontiers of knowledge
instead of practicing Development Research that is Practical and essentially
aimed at achieving significant improvements in critical contemporary Measures
of Service, Speed, Quality, Costs and where necessary revenue?
Overarching World
Problems
Poverty, Hunger, Insecurity/Terrorism and
Climate Change are the most urgent problems facing our World today and demand
National Leaders and World Leaders work SMARTer to continuously improve
collaboration, cooperation, cohesion and coordination within North South and
South South Multi Stakeholder Platforms, MSPs, that effectively link each Community
in each of the 193/306 Member States to UNO Headquarters New York, WBG
Headquarters Washington, IMF Headquarters Washington, FAO/IFAD Headquarters
Rome and ILO Headquarters Rome.
Members of the MSPs should come from Decision
Makers and Management Staff on Member States Governments – Executive,
Parliament, Judiciary at all levels; UN System – UNO, WBG, IMF Decision Makers
and Management Staff at Headquarters, Regional Offices and Country Offices and
CSOs/NGOs Decision Makers and Management Staff at Headquarters, Regional
Offices and Country Offices sides and the activities of the Master MSP and MSPs
should cover Political, Cultural, Economic, Financial, Social, Environment,
Peace, Security, Religious, Moral, Legal, Technical Dimensions of AAAA, SDG,
COP21, Agenda 21 in all UN Member States.
The above Big Questions need to be clearly and
correctly answered in the context of real and complex overarching World
problems on the ground in each rural and urban community in each of the 193/306
UN Member States.
Reforming the UN
System – UNO, WBG, IMF to be Fit for the 21st Century
The UN System – UNO, WBG, IMF have Central Role to
Play if National Resilience, Mitigation, Adaptation Plan, NRMAP-Ag
(Agriculture) Vision this is Integral Part of NRMAP Vision, that is integral part
of UN System New IDCR, that is integral part of AAAA Vision, SDG Vision, COP21
Vision and Agenda 21 Vision, is to be designed and delivered from Community to
Global levels. Records show that several UN Declarations in 2015 and 2016
underlined this fact. Some have specific provisions calling on UNDESA to
Re-engineer itself. The reality is without appropriate help from External and
Internal Consultants with minimum certain levels of Hard and Soft Competences,
UNDESA cannot deliver on this responsibility. Also UNDESA Re-engineering that
is not integral part of other UN System Entities Re-engineering is not likely
to achieve much in the work towards achieving the 2030 Global Agenda by target
date.
We suggest Re-engineering 8 UNO Entities: UNDP –
Poverty and Governance; UNICEF – Children and Family Welfare; WHO – Health,
Lifestyle and Wellbeing; UNEP – Climate Change and Environmental Protection;
FAO – Food, Agriculture and Nutrition; ILO – Entrepreneurship and Employment;
WTO – Commerce and Trade and UNODC – Crime and Corruption and 8 UNO New York
Headquarters Entities – UNSC, OPGA, EOSG, UNCEB, ECOSOC, GA Committees, UNDESA,
UNDPI, WBG Select Entities; IMF Select Entities, that is Integral Part of UN
System: UNO, WBG, IMF Delivery as One, DaO Driving Transformation to make each
UN System Entity an International Institution Fit for the 21st
Century.
UN System New International Development Cooperation
Reform, IDCR Multidisciplinary Professionals Community of Practice
The current UN System: UNO, WBG, IMF IDCR relies
heavily, sometimes exclusively and sometimes disproportionately on Trained
Economists. The fundamental issues underlying root problems in each of the 9 NRMAPs
(Climate Change and Agriculture) Components – Agriculture; Ecosystem and
Biodiversity; Water; Health – Plant, Animal, Human; Tourism; Infrastructure;
Energy; Humanitarian; Institutional and Systems Reform that is Integral Part of
Sustainable Solutions to Development, Diplomacy, Defense, Data, Democracy and
Elections real and complex problems on the ground in each of the 193/306 UN
Member States are well beyond what only Trained Economists can handle and that
explains why working HARDer is not delivering Better Performance and Results in
IMF and indeed other UN System: UNO and WBG Entities.
To achieve continuously improving Performance and
Results in design and delivery of UN System: UNO, WBG, IMF new IDCR that is
integral part of reinforced Global and National Collective Action for achieving
NRMAP that is integral part of 2030 Agenda – AAAA, SDG, COP21, Agenda 21, there
is a need to meaningfully involve balanced mix of Multidisciplinary
Professionals from Arts, Humanities, Sciences, Engineering, Medicine; that is
Academics, Professionals and Practitioners whose collective expertise,
perspectives and diversity are adequate to help Stakeholders in specific Community
to Global Location Context grapple effectively with their unique UN System:
UNO, WBG, IMF New IDCR Policy, Program, Project Intervention, 3PI and 3PI
Training as One Challenges.
World Leaders and National Leaders in each of the 3 Major
Blocks – Member States; UN System – UNO, WBG and IMF and CSOs/NGOs need to
recognize that there is no way Trained Economists alone can provide all of the
answers to all of the New NRMAP-Ag, New NRMAP and UN System New IDCR that is
integral part of 2030 Agenda – AAAA, SDG, COP21, Agenda 21 real and complex
problems on the ground from Community to Global levels and that for Best
Results, there is a need to include all relevant Multidisciplinary Academics,
Scientists, Arts, Engineering, Humanities, Medicine: Professionals and
Practitioners.
UN System: UNO, WBG, IMF New IDCR Capacity Building
In the UN System:
UNO, WBG, IMF New IDCR, Policy Makers and Decision Makers need to recognize
that Effective and Efficient Capacity
Building needs to be on 3 Levels:-
- Individual:
Hard Competences – Learning and Skills and Soft Competences – Character,
Courage, Discipline and Mindset.
- Institution:
Systems and Processes operating at minimum certain levels of performance
and productivity to support Individuals to deploy Hard and Soft Competences
acquired in their day to day work.
- Society:
Political, Cultural, Economic, Financial, Social, Environment, Peace,
Security, Religious, Moral, Technical and Legal Space for Institutions to
Thrive on Chaos.
in each of the 3
Major Blocks of Stakeholders in the New IDCR Processes that is Integral Part of
the AAAA, SDG, COP21, Agenda 21 aligned and harmonized with Community
Development Plans and Country Development Plans in each of 193/306 Member
States are: Member States; UN System – UNO, WBG, IMF and CSOs/NGOs.
Our Study Finding is
that there are Research and Knowledge Gaps in each of the 3 Major Blocks that
need to be filled. To achieve this, there are Capacity Building Gaps in each of
the 3 major Blocks that also needs to be filled and without delay, if there is
to be increasing convergence between UN System: UNO, WBG, IMF New IDCR Vision
Intention and Reality that is integral part of work towards achieving
increasing convergence between NRMAP Vision as well as AAAA, SDG, COP21 and
Agenda 21 Visions Intention and Reality in each Community in each of the
193/306 Member States. Also, Capacity Building Challenge is not only on
Developing Countries side.
These Capacity
Building realities on the ground challenges World Leaders and National Leaders
in each of the 3 Blocks to Individually and Jointly find ways and means of
continuously improving Collaboration, Cooperation, Cohesion and Coordination
from Community to Global levels, because the threat of Climate Change in
Agriculture and remaining identified New NAP 8 Components are real and failure
to come up with credible Community to Global Climate Change Mitigation, Resilience
and Adaptation Sustainable Solutions Framework could have ultimate catastrophic
consequences for our fragile Planet.
UN System: UNO, WBG, IMF New IDCR Interventions – Selecting Preferred
Consultants
The UN System – UNO,
WBG and IMF Entities have standard guidelines for selection of Consultants.
However, the UN System – UNO, WBG, IMF Procurement Process needs to appreciate
the difference in regular Consulting Services Procurement such as Financial
Audit where standards exist and qualified Service Providers deliver to these
standards and so any Pre Qualified Consultant can deliver equally on the
Assignment, therefore NO HARM is done in selecting the Lowest Financial
Proposal to Definite Quantity Contract and Reform Consulting Services
Procurement.
In Reform Consulting
Services Procurement, such as Policy Reform where no standards exist and
Innovation and Creativity are Keys and so all Pre Qualified Consultants cannot
deliver equally on the Assignment, therefore MUCH HARM is usually done in selecting
the Lowest Financial Proposal, if this does not coincide with the Highest
Technical Proposal. Thus, the selection of Preferred Consultant that
consistently Deliver Good Reform Policies, Programs, Projects, continues to
pose major Challenge for UN System Entities and Member States.
The New IDCR that
would help UN System: UNO, WBG, IMF achieve increasing convergence between NRMAP
Vision that is integral part of 2030 Agenda – AAAA, SDG, COP21, Agenda 21
aligned and harmonized with Community Development Plans and Country Development
Plans in each of 193/306 UN Member States needs to have New Procurement
Processes, with New Rules that effectively respond to this difference and in
ways that ensure Accountability is effectively promoted and protected through
ensuring that each Preferred Consultant deliver on promise made in their
Technical Proposal. This way Preferred Consultants who consistently deliver
flawed or failed Technical Proposals are no longer rewarded with renewed
Patronage and Procurement Commissioners and Managers who consistently select
Preferred Consultants who consistently deliver flawed or failed Technical Proposals
are sanctioned.
New IMF ARC Series – Acid Test of Credibility
The Acid Test of
Credibility of the New ARC Series is How it Delivers from Community to Global
levels:-
- Better Agriculture Crops, Livestock,
Forestry, Fisheries and Aquaculture Information Services, Cooperatives
Services and Commodity Markets
- Better Innovation and Creativity in
Climate Change Resilience, Mitigation and Adaptation Solutions Management
as well as in the Optimization of Climate Change Gains and Minimization of
Climate Change Losses.
- Better Trade, Aid, Debts, Anti Corruption
and Anti Terror Solutions Management
- Better Multi Stakeholder Partnerships for
Driving Policy, Program, Project Interventions, 3PIs and 3PIs Training as
One within (1) – (3)
New UN
System: UNO, WBG, IMF Vision – Paradigm Shifts
It is clear that in the work towards transforming UN
System: UNO, WBG, IMF into Institutions Fit for the 21st Century,
the UN System needs to be Reformed within a New UN System Vision. In the work
towards achieving increasing convergence between New UN System: UNO, WBG and
IMF Vision, Mission and Mandate that effectively reinforce UN System - UNO,
WBG, IMF Delivery as One, as the UN System work better towards achieving 2030
Agenda - AAAA, SDG, COP21, Agenda 21 Visions by 2030 Target date, there is a
need for UN System: UNO, WBG, IMF Internal and External Publics to have genuine
recognition that; our world today needs a paradigm shift from Talking and
Thinking to Action and Accomplishments for Results. That is at the community
level, at the sub-national level, at the country level, at the sub-regional
level, at the regional level, and at the global level, we all need to make
these things happen:
a) jointly making paradigm shifts from working in
silos to working intersectorially in synergy;
b) from multiple
approaches to common approaches that continuously improve convergence,
alignment and harmony;
c) from business
as usual to business unusual;
d) from
parrotting change to practicing change;
e) from academic
research aimed at advancing frontiers of knowledge to development research
aimed at significant improvement in critical contemporary measures of service,
speed, costs, quality and where necessary revenue;
f) from talking
and thinking to Action and Accomplishment.
A platform
such as the IMF 2016 Annual Research Conference and similar Platforms in IMF as
well as in remaining UN System Entities: UNO and WBG, is a Global Public Good
that helps all parties engage in dialogue and agree on way-forward actions.
One Worldwide Approach
We note that there are
different approaches, visions, models and tools available to each country to
achieve NRMAP in all its 9 Components including Agriculture, Infrastructure,
Health – Plant, Animal, Human etc; AAAA; SDG; COP21 and Agenda 21, in
accordance with its national circumstances and priorities as well as its own
development context. However, if there is to be continuously improving
collaboration, cooperation, cohesion and coordination in the design and delivery
of Policy, Program, Project Interventions, 3PIs and 3PIs Training as One, a
need arises for United Community to Global Visions whose implementation and
evaluation is built upon One Worldwide Approach that is a Common and Systemic
Approach for improving Ownership, Alignment, Harmony etc that has clear
Principles, Instruments / Tools corresponding to each Principle, Practices and
Database. The New UN
System: UNO, WBG and IMF IDCR
Vision needs to coincide with such United Community to Global Vision and needs to effectively connect
each Community in each of
the 193/306 Member States to UNO Headquarters New York, WBG Headquarters
Washington, IMF Headquarters Washington, FAO/IFAD Headquarters Rome and ILO
Headquarters Rome.
3PCM is an Advance One Worldwide Approach that is sufficiently all
inclusive, all embracing and ambitious to meet the implementation as well as
evaluation demands of an all inclusive, all embracing and ambitious SDGs, that
is essentially the over-arching 2030 Global Agenda and which in reality includes
NRMAP-Ag, NRMAP, AAAA, COP21 and Agenda 21.
Inclusion and
Participation
We note with both interest and concern that since
inception in 2000 to date, there has been no Black or Chinese Chair, Presenter
or Panelist in any of the 17 ARC’s. Can there be such level of discrimination
in the ARC Series, and the outcome of the Arc’s be expected to meet the
yearnings and desires of Ordinary People in Rural and Urban Communities across
our World today.
We took up the matter with the present ARC Team and
were informed that the Calendar had been irrevocable set as at the time of our
request.
Transparency and
Accountability
The unshakeable fact is that there is culture of “Omarta”
in the UN System: UNO, WBG, IMF and that that of WBG is worse than that of UNO
and that of IMF is worse than that of WBG. Whereas UNO and WBG have Visible
Offices and UNO has Marked Vehicles; IMF uses Secret Offices that is essentially
an Outpost catering to the Needs of Missions on the ground in Countries. In the
circumstance it is easy for any IMF Staffer who moves from Government Offices
to 5 Star Hotels to be callous in Policy Recommendations and insist on strict
implementation on the grounds that the greater the pain and misery of the Poor,
the more the physical demonstration that the Policy Recommendation is working.
IMF will be doing itself and our World Great Good
should it maintain Open Offices like UNO and WBG Entities. This way even the
most stone hearted IMF Staff who is living with the People and sees first hand,
the Development Impact of his/her Policy Recommendations, will find it
especially difficult to remain indifferent.
It is pertinent to note that IMF cannot show any
Country it had taken from Crisis to Leading World Economy as evidence that its
Policy Recommendations work. On the contrary, evidence abounds of Countries
that rejected IMF prescription and went for alternative therapy and have become
Leading World Economies. A key outcome from 2016 ARC can and should be the firm
commitment of IMF Governing Council and Executive Management to hold IMF Staff
accountable for Policy Recommendation and give Reward for those that Work and
are seen to Work for the Poor in the concerned Countries and give Sanctions for
those that Do not Work and are seen not to Work for the Poor in the concerned
Countries.
Way Forward
Innovation and Creativity are Keys as we face
Community to Global Challenges of Modernization and Climate Change in the 21st
Century.
The correct answers to SDG, AAAA, COP21 etc How
questions could be found first, in selecting One Worldwide Approach, and second
in establishing Pilot Programs to test good ideas and pertinent suggestions
harvested from Global Consultations and Scale Up Programs at National, Regional
and Global levels for ideas and suggestions that Pilot Programs identify as
Working.
As long as Stakeholders continue to use multiple,
sometimes divergent Approaches and as long as ideas and suggestions cannot be
tested to determine what works and how it could be expanded and what is not
working and how it could be corrected, it would be uphill task achieving
increasing convergence between New UN System: UNO, WBG, IMF Vision Intention
and Reality.
2016 ARC could help find sustainable solutions to
identified real and complex International Development Cooperation problems on the
ground, should:
1.
This Paper be
circulated to all Facilitators and Participants at ARC 2016 and points made
appropriate to each Session discussed.
2.
All good ideas and
suggestions harvested from ARC 2016 be articulated into 2016 ARC Outcome
Document.
3.
IMF Governing Council
and Executive Management genuinely commit and be seen to commit towards full
implementation as well as effective monitoring and evaluation of the
implementation of the 2016 ARC Outcome Document.
Conclusion
In the work towards achieving the 2030 Agenda Vision
ambitions by Target date, fundamental issues that ought to have been settled by
end 1st quarter 2015, that is, 6 months before World Leaders
endorsed the historic document are still outstanding in 4th quarter
2016, that is, 13 months after the SDGs have been endorsed.
There are Bright Prospects of Success, should UN
System: UNO, WBG, IMF entities genuinely commit towards implementing this New IDCR
and should Stakeholders in 3 identified Blocks willingly join and actively
participate in the New IDCR Activities in ways that promote and protect the
Common Interest and Common Future of Citizens in all UN Member States.
Contact:
Director General
International Society
for Poverty Elimination / Economic Alliance Group
Akure – Nigeria, West
– Africa.
M: +234-8162469805
Email: nehap.initiative@yahoo.co.uk 3 November 2016.
