Go forward by going back

Damning words from Bill Easterly:

The United Nations today issued its Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) Report 2009. To make a long story short, the accompanying press release says:

The assessment, launched today by UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon in Geneva, warns that, despite many successes, overall progress has been too slow for most of the targets to be met by 2015.

Let’s face it: it’s over. The MDGs will not be met…

The MDGs warrant a world of merit for ambition and for providing a set of goals that the development community can target. However, the inability to . Development, expecially at the micro-level is not linear. Every project or program faces stops and starts, right turns and left. However, like the peak on the horizon everyone will reach it at a different time, following their own path. The development community can provide a better map and, maybe giving a lift to some countries, but to set a global expectation for achieving a goal in unison is to set expectations with ambition, not lucidity.

Easterly’s point about the lack of ownership over the MDGs is vivid.

WHO is to blame for missing the MDGs? Advocates enthusiastically advertised that 189 leaders signed the Millennium Declaration in 2000, but that was actually a sign of weakness rather than strength. Does an agreement have teeth when EVERYONE agrees – including many oppressive governments who had no more interest in alleviating poverty than in promoting Brussels sprouts? And if the agreement is broken, how can you find WHO is to blame, when 189 leaders (not to mention dozens of international organizations and NGOs) are COLLECTIVELY responsible?

I am optimistic that, in many settings, the combination of more stable governments, promotion of trade, and learning through development project experimentation ARE leading to an improved groath and development trajectory in poor countries.

Easterly doesn’t not want to give up on development just because the MDGs might not be met in all parts of the world. It would be a shame if this were to happen. But measuring of our work in development on grand plans and ambitious goals should not be the arbitor of success or failure.