ISPE EAG
INTERATIONAL
SOCIETY FOR POVERTY ELIMINATION ECONOMIC
ALLIANCE GROUP
Focused Points for
ING Meeting Organizers and Participants Consideration and Appropriate ACTION:
Part 1
Summary
We at NEHAP / ISPE / EAG
commend all on UN Member States, UN System including WBG and IMF and MGoS sides
working towards Design and Delivery of Global Goals – AAAA, SDG, COP21 Outcome
and Agenda 21 Aligned and Harmonized with National Development Plans, NDPs that
can achieve Vision Ambitions by 2030. Giant Strides have been made but much
more remains to be done. The starting point is recognition by Governments,
Stakeholders and UN Family Organization that What questions have been over-answered
and that How questions need to be more Professionally tackled and in ways that
bring Whole of World Thinking to Bear towards the Sustainable Solutions to
Whole of World problems. To achieve this IGN Meetings need to better address
the following Focused Points set out in this 2 Part Supporting Papers Series. In
Part 1:-
1. Revolution 2030
Design and Delivery of Global Goals and National Goals
– revised AAAA, SDG, COP 21 Outcome, Agenda 21 etc aligned and harmonized with
NDPs’ that will be successful on sustainable basis greatly depends on Design
and Delivery of Revolution 2030, a set of Interlinked, Interconnected and
Interdependent Primary Revolutions: Water, Agriculture, Enterprise, Government,
Applied Research, Attitudinal and Behavioral Change, Data, Digital and other
Primary Revolution as Health, Education, Nutrition, Justice, Anti Corruption,
Security, Peace and other Secondary Revolution Driving all Global Goals Aligned
and Harmonized to NDPs in each UN Member State.
2. MSP 2030
Design and Delivery of Revolution 2030 that will be
successful on sustainable basis greatly depends on Design and Delivery of a Master
Multi Stakeholder Platform, MSP for all Global Goals Aligned and Harmonized to
NDPs in each UN Member State and MSPs’ for each Action Agenda Item within
revised AAAA, SDG, COP21 Outcome, HLPF Retreat Outcome, ECOSOC Retreat Outcome
etc Aligned and Harmonized with NDPs’ in each UN Member State.
Introduction
This is a 2 Part Supporting Paper Series that
we recommend are read together.
In ISPE / EAG Working Paper on Achieving
AAAA, SDG and COP21 Outcome Document Vision and Words with Action Agenda by
2030 in 193 (over 300) UN Member States Parts (1) – (8), we articulated AAAA,
SDG, COP21, Agenda 21 How questions and suggested ways and means of finding sustainable
solutions to these questions, fully implementing these solutions with effective
monitoring and evaluation of this implementation in each Community in each
Local Government in each of the 193 (over 300) UN Member States. The UN
circulated Part 2 of the Working Paper on this Link:
We urge Managers and
Decision Makers on UN Member States especially Powerful Developed and Developing
Countries; UN System including WBG and IMF and MGoS especially Powerful
CSOs’/NGOs in Developed and Developing Countries sides in UN Headquarters New
York, as well as at Local, Sub-national, National, Sub-regional, Regional and
Global levels, to individually and jointly recognize urgent need to shift focus
away from talking and thinking as well as on problems and blame and shift focus
towards action and accomplishment as well as on solutions and opportunities.
The reality is that these authorities though intend positive change and
business unusual as basis for achieving AAAA, SDG COP21, Agenda 21 Vision
ambitions aligned and harmonized to National Development Plans, NDPs’ by 2030
Target date in each of the 193 Member States but practice is yet to deliver
positive change as it is still essentially business as usual in the AAAA, SDG,
COP21, Agenda 21 aligned to NDPs’ processes.
Paradigm Shifts
The above paradigm shifts underlined urgent need for Policy Makers and
Decision Makers on UN Member States, especially Powerful Developed and
Developing Countries; UN System including WBG and IMF and CSOs'/NGOs'
especially Powerful Developed and Developing Countries Institutions sides to
JOINTLY address all fundamental issues we consistently raise and without further
delay.
The reality is One Day Delay may the One Day too Long, given Worsening
World Problems of Terrorism, Migration, Hunger, Poverty, Environment,
Corruption, Unemployment, Underemployment, Unemployability on the ground in
various Communities in both Developed and Developing Countries. It is true that
some Giant Strides have been made but much more remains to be done if
Sustainable Solutions at levels adequate to achieve increasing convergence
between Global Goals Vision Intention and Reality are to be Designed and
Delivered in each Community in each Local Government in each of the 193 (over
300) UN Member States.
Urgent Need to Face
New Direction and Adopt New Priorities: IGN Meetings Response?
We at NEHAP/ISPE/EAG believe that the UN Family Organization
including WBG and IMF is supposed to be the Apex Global Platform for Global
Collective Action for Political & Cultural Stability, Economic &
Financial Stability, Social & Environment Stability, Peace & Security
Stability, Religious & Moral Stability and that achieving this greatly
depends on achieving increasing convergence between revised AAAA, SDG, COP21
Outcome Document and Agenda 21 that is each Vision and Words with Action;
Aligned and Harmonized with NDPs’ of each of 193 (over 300) UN Member States
that includes Interlinked, Interdependent and Interconnected Political Vision,
Economic Vision, Environment Vision, Enterprise Vision, Education Vision and
Solidarity Vision from Village to Global levels. This is clearly not the case
at the moment. All root problems responsible need to be correctly identified
and solved as soon as possible if each UN Family Organization Entity is to be
an Institution fit for the 21st Century.
UN Retreat April
2016 – Moving from Saying to Doing
The UN Retreat April 2016 presents a fresh opportunity to
consider implication of continued over-answer to What questions while avoiding
or evading answer to How questions, even in events specifically organized to
find correct answer to How questions.
We are concerned that Resolutions / Proposals
like the Parent Resolutions / Proposals – SG Synthesis Report December 2014, SG
Data Revolution Report November 2014, AAAA July 2015 and SDG September 2015, SG
Follow Up and Review Report January 2016 etc are Vision and Words without Action;
they answer What and Why questions but evade answer to How, Who does What, Who
Pays for What, Sanctions and Enforcement questions.
There is urgent need to take fundamental issues
of revised AAAA, SDG, Agenda 21, COP21 Outcome etc aligned and harmonized with
NDPs’ Implementation as well as Monitoring & Evaluation from Village to
Global levels more seriously.
It is pertinent to note that answer to
What question is about SAYING and this is easy and answer to How question is
about DOING and this is ESPECIALLY Difficult because it requires KNOW HOW and
it is either you have it or you don't.
Facing Unshakeable
Facts and Realities on Ground in World As Is?
The Migration Component of the ongoing Europe Crisis
underline urgent need for State Actors and Non State Actors in UN Headquarters
New York as Agents; their Principals in their World Headquarters and Home
National Governments in 193 (over 300) Member States and UN Family
Organization, including WBG, IEG-WBG and IMF Executives at Global and Regional
levels to face unshakeable facts and realities on the ground in World as is and
not as any stakeholder, no matter how powerful wish it to be.
It is not helpful for European Countries to be
building border fences and repatriating refugees. It is helpful for them to
correctly identify all root problems through correct diagnosis and come up with
correct prescription, surgery and recovery management. For example - What is
the contribution of agriculture subsidy where a cow gets US$ 2 per day but over
2 Billion poor people live on less that US$ 2 per day? What is the contribution
of subsidies that contribute to overfishing and
illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing? What is the contribution of
accommodating illicit financial flows in Europe Banking System?
Europe is grappling with about 1
million migrants and is unable to cope. What happens if unwillingness and or
inability to effectively address these root problems result in 10 million or
100 million migrants? What are the implications for such magnitude of Migration
for Europe Security – National and Regional? Can these root problems be
effectively and efficiently addressed without village to global stakeholders
adopting / adapting points we make in our submissions?
If UN Executives do not know why
AAAA, SDG, Agenda 21, Data Revolution Report, Synthesis Report is each Vision
and Words without Action; they will not know how to make AAAA, SDG, Agenda 21,
Data Revolution Report, Synthesis Report Vision and Words with Action.
ISPE / EAG suggestion that Synthesis Report
How questions be answered before Final Synthesis Report in Official 6 UN
languages are released, even if release is delayed by two weeks to 15 January
2015, was ignored. These are facts that need to be faced so that their root
problem could be professionally tackled and in Global Interest.
Over 1 year after releasing Synthesis
Report, its Recommendations – particularly One Worldwide Approach, Business
Unusual etc have not been implemented by UN Headquarters or 193 (over 300) Member
States. The result is that fundamental issues settled in the Synthesis Report
remained contentious in FfD / AAAA and SDG processes leading to World Leaders
endorsing AAAA in July 2015, SDG in September 2015 and COP21 Outcome Document
in December 2015 that is each Vision and Words without Action and answers to
How questions are still being sought after endorsement of AAAA and SDG.
As long as points made in our
submissions are not effectively addressed by Decision Makers – Governments of
193 Member Countries and Executives of UN Family Organization Entities, finding
correct answers to UNSDS 2015 Outcome,
AAAA, SDG, COP21 Outcome, Agenda 21 etc aligned and harmonized with NDPs’ How
questions and in ways that help achieve Global Goals by the 2030 Target date in
each Community in each of 193 (over 300) UN Member States could be a mirage.
The Report of the ongoing Global Consultations to find
answer to UNSDS 2015 Outcome, AAAA, SDG, COP21 Outcome, Agenda 21 etc aligned
and harmonized with NDPs’ How questions is expected to be released by UN
Secretary General in December 2015 and to be discussed by ECOSOC in March 2016.
If the point that answer to UNSDS 2015 Outcome, AAAA, SDG, COP21 Outcome,
Agenda 21 etc How questions is best found in DOING, then One day delay in adopting
existing sustainable solutions is One day too long.
It is pertinent to note that in finding correct answer
to UNSDS 2015 Outcome, AAAA, SDG, COP21 Outcome, Agenda 21 etc aligned and
harmonized with NDPs How questions New York and Non New York based State
Actors, Non State Actors and UN Executives appear to focus on Sustainable
Development Model they are interested in, rather than Sustainable Development
Model that is in Global interest. This is a major problem that reinforced
disconnect between each Community in each of the 193 (over 300) Member States
and UN Headquarters New York.
However, these New York based State Actors, Non State
Actors and UN Executives are Agents. The Principals are on State Actors side –
3 Arms: Executive, Legislature and Judiciary of 2 – 4 Tiers of Government in
193 Member States; Non State Actors side – Family, Banks and other Financial
Institutions, NGOs’ / CBOs’, Traditional Institutions, Religious Institutions,
Academic Institutions, Media Institutions, Formal Private Sector, Informal
Private Sector, Trade Groups / Trade Unions and the Agents need to Jointly
focus on Sustainable Development Model that is in Global Interest.
To achieve this the Gap between Political Leadership
we have in each location – Village to Global and the Political Leadership we
need to correctly answer UNSDS 2015 Outcome, AAAA, SDG, COP21 Outcome, Agenda
21 etc How questions, fully implement these answers with effective monitoring
and evaluation of this implementation need to be filled without delay.
Please find extracts of Book on How to
Lobby by Felxi Dodds and Michael Struss
Selected Quotes
Quote 1
"Business as usual, government as usual, and perhaps even protest
as usual are not giving us the progress needed to achieve sustainable
development. Lets see if we can't work together to find better paths
forward."
Paul
Hohnen
Former Strategic Director for Greenpeace
Comment
It will be recalled that this is Business Unusual Approach that is
Integral Part of One Worldwide Approach is Major Recommendation of SG Synthesis
Report December 2014. Had this and remaining Recommendations in this important
SG Report been fully implemented in 2015, would AAAA July 2015, SDG September
2015 and COP21 Outcome Document December 2015 not have been Vision and Words
with ACTION?
Quote 2
"Vision without action is merely a dream. Action without vision just
passes the time. Vision with action can change the world!"
Joel Arthur Barker
President of Infinity Limited
Comment
There
should be no more delay converting AAAA, SDG, COP21 Outcome, Agenda 21 that is
Vision and Words without Action into revised AAAA, SDG, COP21 Outcome, Agenda
21 etc aligned and harmonized with NDPs that is Vision and Words with Action.
Hard Law and Soft Law
..... perhaps
it would be useful to understand that the difference in general is between soft
law (e.g. Declarations and Plans of Action) and hard law (e.g.
Conventions). Hard law means that a government can potentially be held
accountable for the [in]action while soft law is aspirational.
Comment
The
current free wheel approach to Global Goals is unhelpful. There should be clear
distinction between Hard Laws and Soft Laws and there should be clear mechanism
for promulgation and enforcement of these Laws and in ways that effectively
cover all Action Agenda Items in revised AAAA, SDG, COP21 Outcome Document,
Agenda 21 etc aligned and harmonized to NDPs in each of the 193 (over 300) UN
Member States.
Understanding the Nature of Effective Lobby in National and
International Development Cooperation
The UN
events mentioned above had tens of thousands of stakeholders in attendance.
Governments at times worried about the number attending, thinking that all of
them would be lobbying! The reality is that the number of individuals actively
lobbying at a global meeting is relatively small, something we hope this book
will change. There are several reasons for this. People attending are actually
there for a number of motives other than lobbying. These include sharing
experiences, organizing partnerships or just learning how the intergovernmental
process operates. These can all be very valid and important activities for
their organisations, provided that this is why they were sent.
Participation in a UN event is not
a substitute for working at local, national or
regional levels on any issue. Rather, it is a very useful complement to the
work done at other levels. It provides information on what your government is
saying at the international level, and provides an important global forum for
communicating concerns of constituencies at home.
Comment
There is much to be gained should stakeholders on UN Member States, UN
System and MGoS sides get the Continuous Training and Retraining each require
to demonstrate Good Lobby Practice in their day to day work.
CSD Mandate
…… the CSD Mandate set up by the
General Assembly identified the importance of stakeholders. The CSD's Mandate
(Resolution 1993/207) is:
1. To monitor
progress on the implementation of Agenda 21 and activities related to the
integration of environmental and developmental goals by governments, NGOs, and
other UN bodies.
2. To monitor
progress towards the target of 0.7% GNP from developed countries for Overseas
Development Aid.
3. To review the
adequacy of financing and the transfer of technologies as outlined in Agenda
21.
4. To receive and
analyse relevant information from competent NGOs in the context of Agenda 21
implementation.
5. To enhance
dialogue with NGOs, the independent sector, and other entities outside the UN
system, within the UN framework.
6. To provide
recommendations to the General Assembly through the Economic and Social Council
(ECOSOC).
As
can be seen three of the above six (those indicated by italics) relate to responsibilities
of stakeholders as well as governments.
Comment
We
are informed that CSD was closed down in 2012 and replaced by HLPF.
What is
the CSD Mandate Scorecard, 23 years after: On Scale 1 – 4; 1 Excellent, 2 Good
3 Poor 4 Woeful? It is clear, that Stakeholders (MGoS on both Developed and
Developing Countries sides) and Governments (on both Developed and Developing
Countries sides) each Score 3 – Poor implementing CSD Mandate in past 23 years.
It is
also clear that no one Individual, Institution or Government has all the
answers to all of the World’s real and complex problems on the ground and that
it would be much easier achieving Global Goals Vision Ambitions in each
Community in each of 193 (over 300) UN Member States if Stakeholders and
Governments CSD (HLPF) Scorecard by 2030 is at least Score 2 – Good. This will
demand Business Unusual Approach that is Integral part of One Worldwide
Approach.
This
will also demand that all whose good ideas and pertinent suggestions are
included in any IGN Meeting Report; SG Report; Global Vision Report must be
meaningfully involved in the implementation as well as the monitoring and
evaluation of the implementation of the accepted ideas and suggestions.
Improving Dialogues Development Impact and Development Effectiveness
The
idea of these dialogues was adopted and promoted by Stakeholder Forum, who had
been active in Habitat II, at the UN General Assembly in October 1996. The
General Assembly was discussing the framework for the 19th General
Assembly Special Session (UNGASS), which would take place in 1997 to review
implementation of the UNCED outcomes. The idea presented to the General
Assembly was that each Major Group (stakeholder group) would be asked to report
at the Second Preparatory Committee (PrepCom 2) what they had achieved in
implementing Agenda 21. The General Assembly agreed to this in November 1996
and asked each of the stakeholders to prepare for half-day dialogue sessions.
Again,
one of the problems was that these were held while the negotiations were
happening and governments sent low level representation, if any at all.
Nevertheless the idea of holding stakeholder dialogues at future CSD meetings
was agreed and was written into the CSD’s next five-year work programme.
Another advancement at UNGASS was the recognition given to the nine stakeholder
groups, who for the first time ever were each given a slot to address the Heads
of State section of the meeting.
In
1998 the topic for the dialogues was agreed as "industry". The then
Director of the UN Division on Sustainable Development, Joke Waller Hunter,
brought together the International Chamber of Commerce and the World Business
Council on Sustainable Development, the International Confederation of Free
Trade Unions and the CSD NGO Steering Committee. Under her leadership a new
formula was agreed. This included the breakthrough that the negotiations would not take place parallel to the dialogues
but would occupy the first two days of the CSD. The first dialogue had only
three stakeholder groups participating, i.e. industry, trade unions and NGOs.
Each stakeholder group was to consult and produce a starting paper on the sub
themes of:
a.
Responsible Entrepreneurship
b.
Corporate Management Tools
c.
Technology Cooperation and Assessment
d.
Industry and Freshwater
These
papers were distributed as UN background papers before the CSD Intersessional
in March that year, so that Governments would have time to reflect on them as
they discussed each issue for the first time. One of the more important
by-products of this approach is that it caused ‘peer group’ review within each
of the stakeholder groups. Most of the stakeholders worked on a four level
preparation:
1)
Two people, usually one from a developed country
and one from a developing country, would do an initial draft.
2)
The stakeholder group coordinator – usually a
staff person with the stakeholder coordination body – would liase with those
interested in reviewing the paper. These reviewers would have a gender and
regional balance.
3)
The paper would be circulated to those members of
the stakeholder group with interest in that particular issue. A time limit
would be set for feedback to be submitted.
4)
The original authors would revise the paper and,
time permitting, it would go out for a further round of consultation.
Another
important outcome was that comments that could previously only be made to
governments in the corridors could now be made in a ‘creative’ forum, where
reasons for and against were given and challenged, all as a part of the
official process. Some governments enjoyed this role reversal and the
opportunity of being able to put stakeholder groups under the microscope about
their position. However, some governments were unhappy with the idea that they
had to listen to stakeholder groups and saw this as an encroachment on
governmental negotiating space.
The
eventual success of the dialogues was in part due to the successive CSD Chairs,
starting with the then Philippine Minister of the Environment, Cielito Habito.
He challenged the stakeholder groups on their positions and led the sessions to
become a very vibrant exchange between and among stakeholder groups and
governments. This led to the birth of the first really dynamic model for
stakeholder engagement in an ongoing UN process.
The
outcome from the 1998 dialogues was the setting up of a multistakeholder review
of voluntary initiatives. Sadly, the follow-up did not deliver the quality that
had been expected from the suggestion. There were many reasons for this, but
the critical one was that there were no funds committed to facilitate a review
other than a workshop in Canada. For the review to be successful reasonable
financial support was needed for the three stakeholder groups participating, as
well as for the initiative’s Secretariat.
The
outcome from the 1998 dialogues was the setting up of a multistakeholder review
of voluntary initiatives. Sadly, the follow-up did not deliver the quality that
had been expected from the suggestion. There were many reasons for this, but
the critical one was that there were no funds committed to facilitate a review
other than a workshop in Canada. For the review to be successful reasonable
financial support was needed for the three stakeholder groups participating, as
well as for the initiative’s Secretariat.
The
third year of the dialogues addressed Tourism and to ensure better focus the
NGO CSD Steering Committee suggested that the supporting papers should not
exceed four pages and should adopt the following structure:
a.
Problems
b.
Solutions
c.
Institutional responsibilities
d.
Possible partnerships
Comment
It
is clear that the overarching Lessons Learnt in Design and Delivery of
Dialogues over the years is that No Lessons have been Learnt. The authors have
identified some of the Best Dialogue Ideas that Worked in the past. There is strong
need to adopt and adapt these ideas that Worked in the Past and in ways that
suit current realities.
The
suggested CSD (HLPF) Supporting Papers Structure could be reinforced by a
Correct Diagnosis, Prescription, Surgery and Recovery Management, DPSRM
Mechanism within One Worldwide Approach to National and International
Development Cooperation.
Improving Multi Stakeholder
Platforms, MSPs’ Meetings Outcome
Multi
Stakeholder Platform, MSP meeting needs to identify levels of agreement and
disagreement; focus dialogue on building compromise for improving alignment and
harmony within areas of disagreement; issue outcome as letter to governments to
enable MSP outcomes to be drawn into negotiations.
The
active involvement of the 1999 Chair Simon Upton, then New Zealand Minister for
the Environment, during the preparatory process played a critical role in
another successful dialogue. Through his office a meeting was convened in
London, under the chairing of David Taylor of the New Zealand government, where
representatives of all the stakeholder groups were brought together at the end
of March to identify their level of agreement and disagreement. This helped to
focus the dialogues and increase the areas of agreement.
The
other significant breakthrough that Simon Upton achieved was issuing the
outcomes from the dialogues as a letter to governments at the beginning of the
second week, which enabled their outcomes to be drawn into the negotiations. It
is unfortunate that this approach has not been taken in the following years, as
dialogue outcomes have not been easily brought into the negotiations.
The
outcomes of the CSD dialogue sessions have been important in setting up ongoing
multistakeholder work. It has also helped build trust between stakeholder
groups. In all, an enormous leap in stakeholder group involvement in the United
Nations. Instead of the work and expertise of the stakeholder groups being part
of a sideshow, or being confined to the corridors, they were now finally seeing
their work incorporated into the preparations for the negotiations – helping
government's make better informed decisions.
The idea
of dialogues has started to appear in other UN processes, such as the Forum on
Forests, Financing for Development, and United Nations Environment Programme
(UNEP) Governing Council, as well as in meetings of the Food and Agricultural
Organisation (FAO) and Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC). One of the
problems is that different UN bodies are using the term ‘dialogue’ to mean
different things. Therefore stakeholders coming into a space are very confused
about what is expected of them. During 2001 Stakeholder Forum made significant
attempts to try and create some norms and standards, by looking at twenty or so
dialogue processes around the globe and producing a guide on how best to
approach stakeholder engagement
Governments and Stakeholders need to
recognize that AAAA, SDG, COP21 Outcome and Agenda 21 as is remain mere Vision
and Words without Action. To achieve Ambitions of these Global Visions and on
Target 2030 date, there is urgent need for revised AAAA, SDG, COP21 Outcome
that is each Vision and Words with ACTION with Sound Communication Strategy or
Living Strategy for full implementation of each Action Agenda Item in each
Vision Document; and effective Monitoring and Evaluation of this Implementation
in each UN Member State Entity; UN System including WBG and IMF Entity and MGoS
Entity at Local, Sub-national, National, Sub-regional, Regional and Global
levels.
Comment
To achieve increasing convergence
between revised AAAA, SDG, COP21 Outcome Document, Agenda 21 etc aligned and
harmonized with NDPs’ Vision Intention and Reality in each UN Member State
Entity, UN System Entity and MGoS Entity, there is urgent need to Design and
Deliver Master MSP for the entire Global Goals and MSPs for each Action Agenda
Item in each of the Global Goals and National Goals.
MOVING FORWARD
Do World Leaders, UNDESA, EOSG, UNGA, ECOSOC, HLPF and
Partners recognize that correct answer to all AAAA, SDG, COP21 Outcome
Document, HLPF Retreat Outcome Document, Agenda 21, FAO Conference on Hunger
and Poverty Action Plan etc How questions lie in the DOING? That without
immediately:-
1.
Appointing
Reform Adviser and Global Coordinating Consultant on AAAA, SDG, COP21 Outcome
Document, HLPF Retreat Outcome Document etc Policy Coherence, Coordination,
Collaboration and Cooperation for Sustainable Development, P4CSD to UNGA,
ECOSOC, UN Security Council and HLPF and Partners
2.
Selecting
One Worldwide Approach
3.
Establishing
Mater Multi Stakeholder Platform, MSP and MSPs for each Action Agenda item
Village to Global, VtG
4.
Establishing
Multidisciplinary Professionals Community of Practice on Poverty Elimination
and Environmental Sustainability as VtG Platform for all relevant existing and
new Disciplines
5.
Addressing
issues of Trust, Silos, Honesty, Thinking, Solidarity, Attitude, Behaviour,
Communication etc VtG
6.
Connecting
each Community in each Local Government in each of the 193 (over 300) Member
States to UN Headquarters New York
7.
Establishing
VtG Mechanism for Correct Diagnosis, Prescription, Surgery and Recovery
Management
8.
Establishing
VtG Policy, Program, Project Interventions, 3PIs and 3PIs Training as One
9.
Establishing
VtG Mechanism for Ownership, Harmony, Alignment, Accountability, Transparency,
Transformation, Leadership, Learning, Results and Participation (Citizens and
Stakeholders), OH2A2T2LRP
10. Establishing VtG Mechanism for Policy
Coherence, Coordination, Collaboration and Cooperation for Sustainable
Development, P4CSD
11. Establishing VtG Mechanism for Master
Collaborative Research Support Program, CRSP for each Action Agenda Item
It will be uphill task achieving increasing
convergence between UNSDS 2015 Outcome, ECOSOC Retreat 2 Outcome, AAAA, SDG,
COP21 Outcome Document, HLPF Retreat Outcome Document, Agenda 21, FAO
Conference on Hunger and Poverty etc Vision Intention and Reality. If these
Visions are not achieved by 2030 Target date, the ultimate consequences for our
Fragile Planet could be catastrophic.
About ISPE /
EAG
Lanre and colleagues have for over twenty years
made great sacrifices, demonstrated uncommon zeal and exceptional patriotism in
continuing constructive engagement of relevant sub-national, national and
international stakeholders, to jointly focus on comprehensive systemic
solutions to our real and complex national political, economic, social,
security, cultural and religious problems on the ground.
In this period
we have been working spiritedly towards helping to make Nigeria, Africa, UK,
Europe, US and World Hunger and Poverty history and in record time. In this
period also, our Lanre Rotimi (Nigerian) and Dr. Hellmut Eggers (German) have
created 3PCM, Policy, Program, Project Cycle Management Approach to Benefits
focused National and International Development Cooperation – the most advance
such Approach in our World today. 3PCM has been tried and tested, the Biggest
Test so far in NIPOST 2000 – 2001.
3PCM uses
Living Strategy or Communication Strategy and so it is Dynamic and continuing
to improve daily. Glorious Heights reached by NIPOST at the time has NEVER been
equalled even when NIPOST later received Technical Support from Netherlands /
Dutch Postal Administration. We have built considerable expertise, experience
and exposure in Nigeria, UK and EC that bring Whole of Nigeria, Africa, UK,
Europe, US and World Thinking to bear in finding practical solutions to all
identified complex systemic problems in Nigeria, Africa, UK, Europe, US and
World, fully implementing the solutions and effectively monitoring and
evaluating this implementation in ways that achieve increasing convergence
between National and Global Development Cooperation Goals and Targets Intention
and Reality and on scheduled dates.
International Society for Poverty Elimination,
ISPE, Volunteer Organization, is a Member of Economic Alliance Group, EAG. Some
other EAG Members include:-
1. AR &
Associates Limited, Strategy and Development Cooperation Consulting Firm –
Research, Planning, Statistics, Implementation, Monitoring, Evaluation,
Assessment, Learning, Results, Advocacy.
2. EAG - CLEAR,
Centre for Learning in Evaluation and Results, Evaluation Organization
3.
EAG - CDPM, Centre for Development Policy
Management, Research Organization
4.
EAG – FTS / FFS, Farmers Training School / Farmer
Field School, Food and Agriculture Organization
5.
EAG – ETS / EFS, Enterprise Training School /
Enterprise Field School, Entrepreneurship Development Organization
6.
EAG – PSA / PSE – Public Service Academy / Public
Service Exchange, Public Administration Organization
EAG has in the
past 25 years spent over US$3 Million (N1.2 Billion) to Develop the 3PCM
Approach as well as its National and Global Development Cooperation Practical
Solutions under Blended Volunteer Services and Commercial Services Arrangement
within which we provided the Nigeria Federal Government alone Consultancy
Services worth over UK Pounds 10 Million (N6 Billion) Free of Charge. This is
Evidence that we do not have purely Commercial Interest but are Motivated by
Service to Humanity as the Best Work of Life, hence two of our Slogans – Let Us
Work Together to Benefit Together and …Building a Brighter Future as we
Configure our World.
Conclusion
In this Paper and earlier Papers we have
raised serious issues of serious business that deserve the serious attention of
World Leaders, 193 Member States, UN Family Organization and Partners from
Village to Global levels. Each day delay in addressing these fundamental issues
is one day too long.
There is urgent need for concerned
authorities in the UN System, 193 (over 300) Member States, UN System including
WBG and IMF and MGoS sides to individually and jointly recognize that
continuing Business as Usual doing the same old things in the same old ways and
is most unlikely to yield desired new Results.
We strongly urge concerned authorities in
the UN System, 193 (over 300) Member States, UN System including WBG and IMF and
MGoS sides to individually and jointly recognize that without facing new
direction and adopting new priorities; without adopting Business Unusual doing
new things in new ways, the expected new Results will remain Mirage.
To achieve New Results on Successful and
Sustainable basis, World Leaders need to demonstrate genuine commitment towards
the full implementation with effective monitoring and evaluation of Synthesis
Report, Data Revolution Report, Digital Revolution, Agric Revolution,
Enterprise Revolution, Government Revolution, Applied Research Revolution,
Attitudinal and Behavioural Change Revolution, other Primary Revolutions,
Education Revolution, Health Revolution, Housing Revolution, Financial
Inclusion Revolution, Risk Management Revolution, Anti Corruption Revolution
and other Secondary Revolutions driven by Genuine UN Family Organization,
including WBG, IEG-WBG and IMF Delivery as One, DaO.
We urge World Leaders, UN Family
Organization Executives and MGoS Executives to consider stopping ongoing
searching for Sustainable Solutions exist.
Reference
1. How
To Lobby by Felix Dodds and Michael Struss 2003
2. Select
ISPE/EAG Working Papers
Contact:
Director General
International
Society for Poverty Elimination / Economic Alliance Group
5, Moses Orimolade
Avenue,
Ijapo Estate,
Akure, Ondo State,
Nigeria.
M: +234-8162469805
Email: nehap.initiative@yahoo.co.uk 21 February 2016.
No comments:
Post a Comment