The Millennium Development Goals: A Dashboard for Humanity

Online, October 8, 2010 (Newswire.com) - My first job in international development was to assist the writing of the Plan of Action to Combat Desertification - for presentation to the first U.N. Conference on Desertification in 1977. Like all these conferences intended to mobilize action, we had a global advisory group of distinguished experts to guide us. It was a memorable moment when one of them, after reviewing a near-final draft of the Plan of Action, looked me in the eye and said, "Great analysis, but these are the same recommendations we've been making for the last fifty years."

What's different about the Millennium Development Goals? Why does anyone expect the MDGs to mobilize global action that will make a real difference?

First of all, they are more than a laundry list of unrealistic recommendations to governments, like the typical U.N. conference outputs. They are SMART objectives: specific, measurable, attainable, relevant and time-bound.

Take a look at this simplified list of the MDGs:

1. Reduce the proportion of people living in extreme poverty by half between 1990 and 2015
2. Enroll all children in primary school by 2015
3. Make progress toward gender equality and empowering women by eliminating gender disparities in primary and secondary education by 2005
4. Reduce infant and child mortality rates by two-thirds between 1990 and 2015
5. Reduce maternal mortality ratios by three-quarters between 1990 and 2015
6. Provide access for all who need reproductive health services by 2015
7. Implement national strategies for sustainable development by 2005 so as to reverse the loss of environmental resources by 2015.

These are derived from the agreements and resolutions of the world conferences organized by the United Nations in the first half of the 1990s (an eighth objective was later added to encourage cooperation between countries both providing and receiving aid).

When you think of all the problems in the world that we hear about in the media, this is a surprisingly short list. That is the genius and the courage of the MDGs. They focus on the few changes most likely to make a world of difference.

Secondly, there has been surprisingly widespread and sustained public attention to the MDGs. More than the U.N. or governments, social activists and media have embraced and promoted the MDGs because they set reasonable priorities and insist on getting the job done, and soon. The MDGs are about pressing needs and solutions that we can both feel and think are urgent and doable. We can get our minds around them.

This public attention has pressed aid organizations of all sizes and shapes to show how their work contributes to the MDGs. While Freedom from Hunger's strategic direction was more or less set a good decade before the MDGs were announced, we quickly embraced the MDGs. This is because our work with microfinance, education and health is focused on the poorest women and families and thereby contributes directly to achievement of the first six MDGs, but especially to the first MDG-those living in extreme poverty are the chronically hungry poor. However, other organizations pursuing other but still important work in international development understandably have objected to being forced into line with a relatively narrow set of objectives. This is the downside of setting priorities for development-important issues don't make the short list.

In New York, the world just celebrated the tenth anniversary of the announcement of the MDGs in 2000 (hence the label "millennium"). That by itself is remarkable. I've never before seen international development goals remembered, much less celebrated ten years later. Columnists in The New York Times, ranging from Nicholas Kristof's "Boast, Build and Sell," to Bono's "M.D.G.'s for Beginners ... and Finishers," reflected on the value of the MDGs, evidence of progress, and what still needs to be done (yielding to the temptation to offer their personal recommendations).

World observers who take the long view (like 50 years) won't become lazy cynics just because the goals haven't been reached and almost certainly won't be reached on deadline-because there has been real progress. In the world now, compared to the world in the immediate post-WWII decades, far fewer young children die each year from preventable causes, medical care is much more available, per capita food supply has increased despite rapid population growth, and average family size has tumbled worldwide.

Even in the past year, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the U.N.'s findings, 925 Million in Chronic Hunger Worldwide, estimates that "the number of people who will suffer chronic hunger this year is 925 million-a drop of 98 million from 1.023 billion in 2009." Would this improvement have happened without the MDGs? Probably. Will the MDGs be achieved on time? Probably not. Is the world community, including people like you and me, doing more constructive work for the betterment of humanity because of the MDGs? Very likely. Is the world still deeply troubled and flawed? Absolutely. Are people better off than in previous generations? Yes, in many respects. Will people be better off in 50 years? There is a good chance, if we don't just throw up our hands and indulge in global self-pity.

Remember that optimism is a much more productive state-of-mind than pessimism. And it is easier to be optimistic when we have a short "to do" list that we can believe is SMART. That is the great strength of the MDGs. The prospect that these "goals" won't be met on time exposes us to the ever-present risk of world-weary cynicism. That is the great weakness of the MDGs.

To counter that risk, think of the MDGs like the dashboard of your car. It highlights a few (not all, which would be too confusing) key indicators of the car's performance-road speed, gas level, engine temperature. Our dashboard is right in front of us (like the media attention to the MDGs), so we are reminded of what is important to pay attention to.

And by paying attention to these crucial indicators, and taking the action they demand of us drivers, we are much more likely to get to our destination.

Christopher Dunford, Ph.D., President, Freedom from Hunger, has over 30 years of rural development experience in Africa, Asia, Latin America and the United States. Chris speaks and writes for international audiences on the impacts of microfinance, on measurement and management toward social objectives, and on the integration of microfinance with education in small business management and health protection. Please visit www.freedomfromhunger.org for more information.