Menu
Ireland's political and cultural magazine
August/September VILLAGE
co-operation sector. Their influence over
the Post- process is particularly evi-
dent. A report by the Global Policy Forum
on “Corporate Influence in the Post-
Process” documents the influence that a
small number of very powerful multina-
tional companies and business associations
are having. Many of the same corporations
involved in the Post- negotiations are
also involved in economic sectors that are
in conflict with human-rights defenders in
developing countries.
The Global Policy Forum report identi-
fies how the Post- process has become
a key moment for re-ordering the interna-
tional agenda along the lines of the ‘Global
Redesign’ advocated at the World Economic
Forum. ‘Global Redesign’ would place busi-
ness at the heart of global governance
processes.
The influence of business on the fram-
ing of the Post- process is potentially
subversive of legitimate processes of
accountability. This influence blocks out any
hope of transformative approaches. As Leo
Pingeot writes in the Global Policy Forum
report: “The growing corporate engagement
and corporate influence on the Post-
discourse entail considerable risks and side-
effects. They relate, on the one hand, to the
messages, problem analyses and proposed
solutions, and on the other hand to the pro-
moted governance models”.
Private companies have a role to play
in building a more sustainable future.
However, they tend to advocate for volun-
tary rather than binding agreements, and
public-private partnerships rather than
publicly-funded programmes. They focus
on growth, market-based solutions and
new technology as the solution and fail to
recognise that it is exactly this model that
got us to where we are today. If there is to
be any value in the Post- framework,
far greater transparency from multination-
als about their aims and methods is needed,
including their motivation in supporting UN
initiatives. The imperatives are too impor-
tant to risk indulging their undermining. •
Lorna Gold is Head of Policy and Advocacy with
Trócaire.
S
INCE mid- talks have been
going on under the auspices of the
UN to decide what will replace the
Millennium Development Goals when they
expire in . The new development frame-
work under discussion is to be universally
applicable across all countries, rich and
poor. This could be described as an exercise
in ‘fixing the world’. The sheer scope of this
has resulted in feverish ‘issue competition’
between different groups rather than work
on a genuine transformative agenda.
In , global leaders had signed a
Declaration on key priorities for the new
millennium. Almost by accident, this
Declaration was translated by UN civil serv-
ants into the eight Millennium Development
Goals. They became the framework which
drove international efforts to eradicate pov-
erty in the developing countries through the
s.
The new global agenda is to serve as a
comprehensive framework of objectives
to achieve human development and ensure
environmental sustainability. The talks are
now entering a critical phase, with inter-
governmental negotiations due to begin in
earnest during the UN General Assembly in
September.
This post- exercise is fraught with
danger for those who believe in a just and
sustainable world governed by human rights
standards. What exactly is the new frame-
work expected to do? It was one thing to have
a set of eight indicative global goals which,
however rudimentary or flawed, formed
a rallying point for international action.
Nobody, for example, can argue that it is not
better for donors to be directing aid to eradi-
cating HIV/AIDs than funding Kalashnikovs.
It is a whole other matter to have seventeen
goals and targets.
There are proposals to include goals on
governance, equality and gender equality.
The Irish government has played a significant
role in ensuring that these more intangible
goals are included as objectives in their own
right and not just as enablers.
However, strong human rights approaches
are notable for their absence from the “Open
Working Group Report” which will eventu-
ally become the basis of a text for negotiation.
Overarching issues of participation, empow-
erment, non-discrimination and equality
are seen as tangential to the ‘real’ business
of delivering and measuring tangible out-
comes. Systemic, underlying structures of
economic inequality and exclusion, such as
tax justice, have been relegated to a section
on “means of implementation”.
Major multinationals are playing a much
more powerful role within the development
Corporations tend to advocate
for voluntary not binding
agreements, and market-based/
new-technology solutions
“
UN’s replacement
for its Millennium
Goals must embrace
overarching, as well as
specific, imperatives
and be wary of
corporate influence.
By Lorna Gold
Fixing
the world
UN INTERNATIONAL
