Required adaptation by institutions, structures and individuals

17 Feb - 17 Mar 2015
Go back to 2015 ECOSOC Theme: Managing the transition from MDGs to SDGs: What it will take

This discussion is now closed. Thank you for your participation.

  • What types of changes and adaptation in institutions and structures will be needed at the national, regional and global levels to facilitate a smooth transition to a post-2015 era? What are the necessary corresponding changes in the roles and responsibilities of all partners?
  • To what extent are existing global institutions and policy frameworks ready to adopt and implement a more integrated approach to development? What adjustments may be needed to ensure that governments, the UN system and other partners respond to the universal and unified agenda and deliver equitable results for everyone?
  • What are the institutional and individual capacities required to facilitate a smooth transition from the MDGs to the SDGs?

Comments (84)

John-Mary Kauzya • Chief of the Public Administration Capacity Branch in the Division for Public Administration and Development Management, UNDESA at UNDESA from United States Moderator

Dear Colleagues,

I wish to warmly welcome you to the thematic window on “Required adaptation by institutions, structures and individuals,” which is an integral part of the 2015 ECOSOC e-discussion taking place 17 February to 17 March 2015. This theme addresses a very important aspect of the 2015 ECOSOC theme on managing the transition from the MDGs to the SDGs, with the all-important question of “What will it take?”

Adaptation by institutions, structures and individuals will be critical for ensuring a smooth transition from the MDGs to the SDGs, and is built into the goals themselves, such as in Goal 16 to promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels.

It is also a topic of intense interest among the members of the United Nations Committee of Experts on Public Administration. The Committee will take up this and other matters at its upcoming session in New York in April.

As moderator of this thematic window, I encourage you to reflect on the challenging questions of this thematic window and contribute your thoughts and insights, supported by concrete examples, of the types of changes and adaptations in institutions and structures that will be needed at the national, regional and global levels to facilitate a smooth transition to a post-2015 era.

I invite you to join the conversation and look forward to a fruitful and stimulating discussion.

Sincerely,

John-Mary KauzyaChief, Public Administration Capacity BranchUNDESA Division for Public Administration and Development Management

Dosse SOSSOUGA • Executive Director at UN SDGs NGO Major Group d'or Africa: Amis des Étrangers au Togo: ADET from Togo

En parlant d'adaptation, je parle de réformes mentales, legislatives, institutionelles pour le développement durable:

 - Réformes  Mentales: changement de mentalité et de comportement de la population par l'éducation et la sensibilisation

-  Réformes legislatives: renforcement et création des lois pour cadrer avec les ODD par les autorités parlementaires et création de services contentieux sur les ODD à la justice.

- Réformes instiononnelles: Elle part du système des Nations unies jusqu'aux gouvernements en passant par les organisations internationales, régionales et la société civile.

Ici il suffit d'avoir en face de soi les objectifs des ODD et dégager les départements pour y faire face .

Bien sûr, les problèmes de ressource humaine et de formations sont indispensables pour s'accorder cette mutation des OMD aux  ODD.

Nirmalan (not verified)

I do not read, write or speak french but I used google to translate what you have written and I am very very pleased with what google showed me. I am very glad to meet you.

I too work on "Mental reforms: change of mentality and behavior of the population through education and awareness" and I work towards "Mass Perceptual Modification". I strongly suspect that it was mass perceptual modifications that were used in the middle of the last century in order to consolidate the Dominant Dualistic Perceptual Paradigm and the consumerist approach and that these same methods employed differently can facilitate the emergence of the Unitve Perceptual Paradigm with its promise of a credible civilization and goal for eh species Homo sapiens.

I enjoyed reading your post and am inspired by the knowledge that there are more people working along these lines.

 

Best wishes and kind regards.

Nirmalan

 

Nirmalan (not verified)

I continue to advocate the formulation, initiation, support and sustenance of processes aimed at generating the following sustainable and resilient species support and survival systems and their supply chains in order to allow as many individuals and communities to adapt and survive.

1.Power Generation Systems 2.Communication Systems, 3.Food & Agricultural Systems 4.Waste Recycling Systems 5.Manufacturing and Transport systems, 6.Social Support Systems, 7.Training, Education and Research Systems, 8.Health Systems, 9.Surgical and Medical Systems 10.Planetary Guidance Systems.

I also advocate the generation of large cloud based platforms (Virtual Survival Platforms- VSPs) on which the knowledge and technologies developed, and data gathered by the species homo sapiens be stored and access to it enabled and that Geographical locations be developed to house the material components of this system securely and ensure its protection and maintenance (Geographical Survival Platforms – GSPs).

I also advocate the generation of sustainable and resilient communities supported by and dedicated to the servicing and constant development of all of the elements mentioned above.

Nirmalan (not verified)

What types of changes and adaptation in institutions and structures will be needed at the national, regional and global levels to facilitate a smooth transition to a post-2015 era? What are the necessary corresponding changes in the roles and responsibilities of all partners

The single most important change required is the recognition of the functional capacities of the network that are not present in the hierarchical pyramid and the generation of a global network of persons who have made the shift from the Dominant Dualistic Perceptual Paradigm (DDPP) through which the world appears as a collection of discrete things and autonomous entities both created as well as coming to an end within time and space, to the Emerging Unitive Perceptual Paradigm (EUPP) through which the world appears as a process that has neither beginning nor end and life appears to be a myriad perceptual vortexes generated by this process in order to perceive potential pathways to its being becoming and non being; which network can function as a species wide perceptual process for the species Homo sapiens and as a planetary guidance system for the planet Earth.

The network as an organizational principle will have to supersede the hierarchical pyramid, which is currently dominant, and will have to enmesh and guide the pyramids towards the realization of the perceptions that arise from the network.

While the hierarchical pyramid generates authoritarian intolerance, coercive and often violent and murderous oppression and pervasive gender bias, the network facilitates tolerance and inclusiveness.

Partners will have to perceive themselves anew as facilitators rather than as dictators who through the control of financial flows insist, demand and secure compliance to their institutional objectives rather than facilitate the embodiment of inspiration and the realization of perceptions.

 

To what extent are existing global institutions and policy frameworks ready to adopt and implement a more integrated approach to development? What adjustments may be needed to ensure that governments, the UN system and other partners respond to the universal and unified agenda and deliver equitable results for everyone:

At present interest in synthesis appears to be confined to individuals and does not seem to have any support at the level of institutional structures. The organizational principle of the network is not widely recognized and is not recognized in law. Its operating principles are therefore not recognized either and there is not much interest in studying them or using them.

The continued limitation of access to the UN and its bodies to those who have internalized the Dominant Dualistic Perceptual Paradigm and its concomitant organizational principle of the Hierarchical Pyramid and the careful isolation of all those who have made the transition to the Emerging Unitive Perceptual Paradigm from financial flows that fund research and development will ensure that the UN continues with “business as usual”. Everyone appears to be VERY happy with the continuation of this status quo.

 

What are the institutional and individual capacities required to facilitate a smooth transition from the MDGs to the SDGs

Ensuring that the few persons on the planet who have made the transition from the DDPP to the EUPP have access to the resource that they require in order to make inputs to and influence the strategic function of the global developmental process.

Even if this is not done the continued strategic marginalization of these people and the carefully concealed and subtle censorship of their output must cease immediately.

Dosse SOSSOUGA • Executive Director at UN SDGs NGO Major Group d'or Africa: Amis des Étrangers au Togo: ADET from Togo

 Nous avions proposé des réformes législatives, des réformes mentales et des réformes institutionnelles. les quelques personnes qui ont fait la transition de la DDPP au RAPE dont vous parlez doivent obéir à ces trois types de réformes pour bien faire le travail.

Dosse SOSSOUGA • Executive Director at UN SDGs NGO Major Group d'or Africa: Amis des Étrangers au Togo: ADET from Togo

You know,

The MDG has 8 goals and the SDG has 17 goals. It means that many things are in the Sustainable development agenda. So every body must do reforms before responding well to the post 2015 goals.

NGO: ADET proposes this organigramm to civil society and recommend to governments to create department in Ministries to adapt government approches to the implementation of the sustainable development goals.

Aden ALI • Operations Specialist at UNDP

I am not sure if it is the right time for the World Leaders to come together for an urgent meeting and discuss to shape a new “international order” as part of upholding international security and peace.  For example, all national and international institutions should be reformed in such a way that they can contribute to the promotion of democratic values around the world. Because of the deteriorating situation and deepening crisis in most parts of the world is indicative of the inherent  shortfalls of our international system. International and national leaders should be held accountable to meet their responsibilities with emphasis on cooperation and diplomatic hard labour.

World leaders should agree on new methods of reconciliation and cooperation on equal terms rather than hegemony.

Dosse SOSSOUGA • Executive Director at UN SDGs NGO Major Group d'or Africa: Amis des Étrangers au Togo: ADET from Togo

The are doing it already. But some no.

Clyde Israel (not verified)

 

  • An economic system which resuluts in equal opportunity with partners leading by example.
  • Global agenda is fragmented with each institution primarily concerned with its own success and failure.  Adjustments are underway - progress is slow but steady.
  • Focus on development agendas - education, health and resource control.  This will open up doors to progress, eg. the break down of trade barriers to economic development; and the development of R&D.
Nigel Anthony Reading RIBA LEED GA (not verified)

What if we mixed Confucian top-down with Californian bottom-up? 3Ms: Monitor, Manipulate, (De) Monetise with Engine & Brake feedback to better map natural ecosytems like a forest or coral reef? Asynsis principle-Constructal law. Law of Nature 2B Law of Man solution 4 Rio+20 goals: Sustainable Development to become a fundamental Human Right. Please check out the About section.https://www.facebook.com/Asyntopia http://about.me/asynsis 

GEORGES RADJOU (not verified)

Friends, Thank you for the opportunity to add my group values to the meeting. These new institutions are expected for sometimes since the World summit on information society in the 2 agendas (Tunis 2005 and Geneva 2003) with the big data and the digital revolution. These processes are clearly satisfactory if driven with agility for balancing the past development and going beyond for new window or opportunities claimed by SDGs and the Road to dignity with descent work, Zero poverty rate...Development is about freedoms.

Ashwini Sathnur • Capacity Development Expert at United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) from India

Institutions and structures at the national, regional and global levels need to initially build awareness regarding the disability sector. People/ institutions must understand the needs of disabled people. Also assess the capacity and potential of minority/ disabled/ marginalized sections of society. Once a positive assessment report is obtained about the disabled, methods of employment must be undertaken. If the disability is life-long, then technological solutions must be identified for provision to those disabled persons. This procedure would require a transformation of processes in technology/ management in business organizations and civil society organizations. In order to modify the entire turnover, and bring about a change in the ecosystem, political will and commitment is essential. Policies for inclusive growth must be adopted so that there is a uniform process acting at the national level. This prevents unsuccessful/ chaotic processes to be passed by the individual business organization. And for uniformity across all nations - at the international level, inclusive development agenda is created. This enables the nations with similar socio-economic context to achieve the Inclusive Development agenda - which is the Post-2015 Development Agenda. This is hence disability-friendly enabled at the international level [ by United Nations ].

Priscilla (not verified)

For change to be embraced by the various different institutions then show of evidence is important to why the transition, what will be different and how this would support in attaining the set goals. As the  states/ Regions are all at different stages in the attainment of the MDGs then why the transition and not an extension of the MDGs period should be very clear for buy in. Therefore a Regional and National level information structure will be important to ensure a common understanding. Since the implementation approaches for the MDGs and needs varied, it will be essential to advocate for the change through the ones that have delivered results (good practices) that are sustainable.

Training and necessary resources (human and financial) would then be required to ensure the transition in particular at the regional and country level including too at the community level (this is in assumption that the global level stakeholders are trained). A programme management unit that will ensure that all the essential steps/phases that countries/regions should adhere to including partnership/legal commitments/resources  should be in place at national level or the least at Regional levels. The same unit should support the govts to come up with frameworks that would enhance the transition and the implementation of the SDGs process Thank you.

SALAMATU GARBA • Executive Director at WOMEN FARMERS ADVANCEMENT NETWORK- WOFAN

Absolutely Priscilla. some of the MDGs are weakly implemented as such more institutional support will be needed to upscale strategy and a strong regional and national advocacy led team will have to be put in place- Take MDG 7 for instance, at what stage are we? how much access to water do we have? how about rehabilitation and maintenance?how much is invested into sanitation? 

WAPK Nishantha (not verified)

Dear AllVery crucial parameter for this paradigm shift is knowledge on the planetary boundaries and equilibrium of the ecosystem.

all policies (local & international ) should be changed based on the SDGs. political intervention is very crucial and global policy on waste management (solid waste , liquid waste , waste water, gas, hazardous & other wastes), energy management , food , land , water and industry intergraded management system .

all should adopt to the climate change naturally and artificial comfort should be diminished.

medicine and chemical utility should be minimized for the sustainable generation.  

 

Ulrich Graute (not verified)

What types of changes and adaptation in institutions and structures will be needed at the national, regional and global levels to facilitate a smooth transition to a post-2015 era? What are the necessary corresponding changes in the roles and responsibilities of all partners?

THE UN SHOULD MAKE BETTER USE OF CAPACITIES AVAILABLE OUTSIDE OF THE UN 

For instance, the Regional Studies Association (http://www.regionalstudies.org) founded 50 years ago as a learning society of academics and practitioners in urban and regional research and development has a treasure of about 1000 institutional and individual members who fill several per-reviewed journals with their findings. Where does the UN make use of these and other resources?

In Europe, the EU Commission just has held in Riga its second joint seminar together with RSA as a political and academic debate on the Future of EU Cohesion Policy. For complex solutions there are often no simple answers and the best way to find them is by joining efforts between UN and academia and to develop longer-term partnerships. This inspires academic work and generates research output, which is more likely to take into account demand as identified by the UN.

 

THE UN SHOULD GIVE A STRONGER VOICE TO CITIES

When member states launched the process for the Post-2015 Development Agenda with one set of Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) statements on the future role of cities were rather bold:

-       UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon’s said at the ‘Cities Leadership Day’ in Rio de Janeiro Brazil on 21 June 2012: “The road to global sustainability runs through the world’s cities and towns“.

-       The High-Level Panel of Eminent Persons on the Post 2015 Agenda concluded in its Report: “Cities are where the battle for sustainable development will be won or lost“.

-       One of the other key reports – the one of the Sustainable Development Solutions Networks (SDSN) of 2012 – described it this way: „Metropolitan areas and local governments will be at the center of decision-making and therefore need to be empowered,…

In spite of these bold statements, there is little activity to put them into practise and there are obvious questions including the following:

  • What responsibility and degree of engagement will be expected from cities?
  • Does this responsibility and engagement should focus on the above quoted Urban SDG or are cities expected to share also responsibility for the implementation of other goals like SDG 1, 3 or 4 on poverty, health and education?
  • Will governments in all Member States adapt national urban policies and provide a legal framework, financial and human resources to shoulder the workload at the local level?

 

To what extent are existing global institutions and policy frameworks ready to adopt and implement a more integrated approach to development? What adjustments may be needed to ensure that governments, the UN system and other partners respond to the universal and unified agenda and deliver equitable results for everyone?

THE UN NEEDS A TRANSFORMATION

A reform of the UN System as ambitious as the agenda of the SDG would be appropriate. It’s not realistic to expect that the UN System as it has developed over the last 70 years is ready to coordinate efficiently and effectively the achievement of SDG. At the same time and having in view all obstacles it is not realistic that a major reform of the UN System would take shape in the upcoming years. In this context, thinking big about institutional reform doesn’t require thinking about a new institution. Instead, we need to consider a gradual transformation of the bureaucratic tanker UN into a leaner and faster boat, which is more flexible.

The system of incentives should be reviewed and adapted. The founders thought that by granting competitive salaries and benefits they would get a guarantee for excellence in service delivery. The salaries and benefits are not related to the quality of performance. Thus, it is at times difficult to expect that staff delivers more than average output. The solution should not be a reduction of salaries and benefits but a mechanisms which better links performance and rewards.

 

What are the institutional and individual capacities required to facilitate a smooth transition from the MDGs to the SDGs?

EXTERNAL SUPPORT AND INTERNAL CAPACITY BUILDING

UN bodies as they exist currently have to face the double challenge of closing MDG and launching SDG (not talking of the other crises and emerging issues). In this situation they need temporarily additional support by academia, cities and other external expertise and workforce. And they need it know because we are already in 2015!

In addition, the UN should foster excellent internal training programme like the Management Development Programme and develop additional tools to build human capacities to cope with the ambitious agenda of SDG. If we know one thing from the Rio and MDG processes: Sustainability doesn’t happen. It has to be developed and we have to learn the how to do step by step. UN managers are needed as leaders in this process, but the quality of leadership is not defined by their salaries and benefits but by their performance according to the OHRM profile of an effective manager. 

In a similar way, public administration at the national and sub-national level needs to be developed.

Kevin Chima (not verified)

Managing the transition from MDGs to SDGs involves alot. Sustainable development requires a total strategy that will redefine the means of achieving success in practice. Let us start by looking at the global economy versus sustainable development. The global economy is an interconnection of various national economies. Constructively it is a 360 degree economic wheel plying on the path of sustainability under a time axis of 8760hrs/annum. Various institutions, businesses, government,civil societies and the people are all involved here using different policies,mindsets, plans, actions, research agenda and management strategies to drive the global economy to achieve sustainability or unsustainability.One of our major question is and should be, is the global economy sustainable? I think we all would agree that the global economy currently is becoming more unsustainable full of risk and uncertainties that affects global lives and economic activities.We should also note that failure to achieve global sustainability with respect to time will worsen the situation, flaw our efforts and waste our resources in the pursuit to achieve a global sustainable environment.Coming down to what it will take to pursue SDGs and the post 2015 genda:1] A global institution like the UN is a vibrant platform in the pursuit of these agendas.2] A global economic solution engine is highly required to speed up the sustainability process. This global economic solution engine will be capable of setting the nuzzle to interconnect both the required change in policy choices and mindset for an integrated agenda, required adaptation by institution,structures and individuals, partnerships for the implementation of the SDGs and the post 2015 agenda, Network for monitoring sustainable development solutions and many more road maps to handling the transition to the required SDGs.However, what the world and the UN need is a radical idea that has the wisdom and capacity to transform the unsustainable state of the global economy and make the world a better place for all. This can be possible through phases of mutually benefiting agreement creating a shared vision of the world we want.To cutt short the rigorous search process of the UN[DESA] towards finding ways of managing the transition to SDGs and the post-2015 agenda, i will suggest a 10 year electro-economic/world system dynamic research in the form of EM/389 Global Economic Solution Engine to be used by the UN as a tool to not only drive sustainable developement but also a tool to reconfigure the tired and worn out global economic system. This tool has the ability to generate a susbsystem of the global economic system that can be easily accessed, monitored and controlled.I am willing to share this great vision and discuss it further if i am called upon. I will also be willing to work as a pilot expert in its full development and implementation among world nations.Kindly visit for brief insight on EM/389 Global Economic Solution Engine @ www.rexlumen.org

Kevin Chima (not verified)

The global economic wheel represents the global economy made  up of its frame which represent the global economy structure, various spokes representing various economies and a hub representing the center of connectivity[ie inter trade and capital flows]The various spokes[economies] are sitting at different points on the wheel which means various economies of the world function from different location points but within a global Economy.[within the wheel]. These various spokes[Economies] are made up of the Y = A X + B equation components[ which is Y= Development funds, A = human resources, B = Natural/Mineral resources and X = State of the economy].This equation components translate to reflect lives[well being] and economic activities that intersect at a point of connectivity known as the hub.[ Defining an interconnected world]. Our equation reflects but not the least; National Budget[funds], Education, Social Stability, natural/mineral resource development etc.Now each individual country solves its equation [Y = AX+ B] to transform its economy and achieve sustainability[ ie using different policies, planning/management strategies, actions etc]ie   Y = AX+ B      SUM Y = SUM AX+ SUM B      Y SUM 1 = A SUM X + B SUM 1      SUM Y+1 = A+B SUM X+1which can be;  A+B SUM X+1/ SUM Y+1     ............................Sustainable path.Judging in real terms, some economies have their equation thus;  A+B SUM X+1/SUM Y+1     while some economies have their equation;  A+B SUM X-1/ SUM Y+1      ............................Unsustainable path.[ SUM means Summation]Having these two equation scenarios in our global economic wheel,to achieve a sustainable future will be difficult.Now what do we do here?First, there is every need for global economic integration to reflect the global economic wheel.There is need for the international communities to adjust various national policies and also support the process of an effective planning/management strategies for these economies.There is also need for a global economy watch mechanism that will be able to timely identify point of economic slack.These and many more should be put in check.N/B: Altogether will enhance global economic cooperation and foster coordination among nations in the pursuit to achieve a sustainable future.To achieve this a partnership platform is highly necessary to involve both government, institutions, policy and decision makers, businesses, stakeholders, civil societies and the people. The laws of economic compatibility and comparative advantage will go a long way to bring about success in achieving the SDGs and 2015 agenda.  

GEORGES RADJOU (not verified)

Friends,

In the AMR 2015 ECOSOC Review is it a grievance to quote US President Barack Obama about Africa, when he said there are well informed stakeholders with good mindsets, but what is lacking are the institutions. Without institutions not only in Africa, all countries we go no where. There is still a need for more institutions even in best developped countries for example for Peace, security and development.

Also, the question cities is important. How do we brand cities? for example, we want to attract peoples, resources, for cities, while we all know that there are as much cities and peoples in the countrysides and rural areas and a need for data revolution and information societies. Also, Megapoles can look as much as heteropoles depending of lenses (and institution organizations: top down or bottom up). My viewpoint, there should be relevant and less pyramidal institutions, particularly with crises and they are as much stakes to promote rural areas as attracting the world populations (where 50% of the world population will be located by 2050 with small and medium businesses that are in need of claims too.

As President Holland coming in Davos said, climate changes will affect 190 millions peoples in these global cities (more than 10 millions  inhabitants). Shaping mindsets, is shaping brands too and claims and adaptating to future water atmospheric and related hazards  and challenges that could strike in a more important way densely popualted areas where everybody is flocking today, because of the claims (maybe?), while the countrysides and rural areas could be and harbour of peace and a source of development -and risk free. So, it would not be business as usual with these future estimates of climatic refugees when sea rising and temperature increase will be a threat everywhere.

New institutions should be anticipartory, participatrory, connected (cities and rural areas) and not reacting in an usual way.

New institution should be risk sharing societies, and people participations, and obvioulsy telling frankly to peoples who are creating their risks, and responsibilities. This is a claim for more transparency, accountability, rules of law, and developement and rights, education to sustainable development. Also, a real desire of willing to change.

Lanre Rotimi (not verified)

Dear All,

Thank you moderator and contributors on this thread.

Now more than ever before, there is urgent need to undertake reforms in the UN Family, UN Programs, Funds etc and World Bank Group, IMF etc and Non UN Family Members e.g. EU and EC etc and in ways that create National and International Institutions fit for the 21st Century. These Reforms are both Technical and Political.

My view is that such Reforms are best executed within Primary Revolutions – Agriculture Revolution, Government Revolution, Enterprise Revolution, Data Revolution, Applied Research Revolution, Attitudinal and Behavioural Change Revolution and other Primary Revolutions as well as Nutrition Security Revolution, Food Security Revolution, Health Revolution, Education Revolution, Financial Inclusion Revolution as other Secondary Revolutions.

My view is that there are enough Resources – Influence, Science, Technology, Innovation, Fund, Manpower and Spiritual  to successfully undertake required Reforms in each Community (Village to Global) in our World today and in ways that help achieve increasing convergence between International Development Cooperation Goals and Targets e.g SDG (MDG 2)

If the Moderator accept to rearrange the questions in ways that better focus the contributions, this dialogue could make significant contribution to Reforming our National and International Institutions in ways that help achieve increasing convergence between Final Push to achieve MDG by 2015 and Post 2015 Development Agenda Vision Intention and Reality.

Jihène Malek (not verified)

we are following actually the transition from the Universal Millenium Goals to Sustainable development goals, institutions and individuals need to adapt. more projects for capacity building of employees are needed target to the technical skills need to facilitate the transition to the sustainable development goals. In addition , also the public need to adapt new strategies , programs and why not call for a restructuring of departments as introducing evaluation and monitoring unit , strategic planification unit and sustainable development department related to the kind of institution goals . Also , we need to learn from the previous experience of Universal Development Goals implemented and waht about the faillure , limits and why some actions didn't have a good impact. Individuals also need capacity building as training session , exchange program , more participation in the high committee levels, session to disucussion, etc.

Dr.Priya Prabhakar • Policy Reformation and Right to Development at Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) from India

It is seriously high and the right time for the world to realise the reality, Reformations in papers and recommendations in policies never matched or complimented each other. Till now, we have been descended with the scopes and spirit of the imperial rule, “Live, adjust and adapt to what is facilitated”. Neither the commons nor the governing officials realised the need to orient and reform the pattern of the world inline with human rights because of this descent in mindset and environment of imperialism. If analysed with reality, we can understand that even in imperialism, there were authority to foster regulated growth and living but imperialistic attitude in the name of democracy has led the world to a state of anarchism - “absence of government or a state of lawlessness”. 

The foundational purpose of governance was to regulate the opportunities of individuals according to their skill and inline with the resources of the region and to recognise their contribution and include the outcome of the opportunity facilitated as their wedge in the circle of social and global development. Human rights in Universal Declaration of human rights and the articles in the Constitution of the nations are drafted to enable this pattern of facilitation. Understanding and adapting human rights to its core purpose is essential.

DEVELOPMENT THROUGH HUMAN RIGHTS: 

FROM FACILITATORS POINT OF VIEW: For development to be purposeful, holistic and wholesome, it is indeed important that the developmental goals in the agenda are approached in the way human rights have been addressed in the declaration of human rights. When we take a look at the article drafted in the universal declaration of human rights we can find that it has been addressed to the global citizens “individually” and therefore, true and flawless development can be accomplished only we consider and include development of every single individual, individually rather than being collective or in groups. 

Development also depends on the approach the facilitating bodies take with regards to its facilitation of opportunities. It is important for government to analyse how fair and inclusive they are in facilitating opportunities and policies rich in human rights. It is important to check whether we include and recognise facilitation of all possible opportunities that human rights would enable. It is also important to decide on what we recognise as human rights, is it fighting out from deprivation or enabling an environment that is free from all deprivation. Approaching human rights in the former pattern makes us to sustain the world while the later form of approach enables us to progress and prosper genuinely. And it is truly the second form of approach that were dealt and vested through the Universal Declaration of Human rights. 

When we say human rights is universal where does the national and international standards of human rights come from? When it is universal where did the rights for “groups” come from, like rights for the people with disabilities, rights for the children, rights for the under-developed, minority right, Asian rights, African rights, European Rights, American Rights, Australian rights, from where did all these come from and for what? The formation of groups were because of the priority and recognition the government gave to majority. Government is not for majority but for all equally, the political and the social instability and inequity was due to this categorisation of majority and minority, to understand the deviation we first need to cognise ourself of what is government, government is enabling regulated facilities to all its citizens individually according to their needs. It is not about authorising or controlling the facilities and functioning of the region and its resources , be it, human, natural or financial resources. Policy must be to facilitate and formulate all opportunities that satisfies the characters of human rights without any restriction or limitation. It should not force people to encapsulate their living and functioning with what it facilitates through its decision and discussion. Why do we standardise opportunity by averaging or bringing the world to median? What about the factors or life that is above and below this line? Aren’t they included in our agendas of development or in its plan of action? 

When the Universal Declaration clearly says it to be “HUMAN” RIGHTS, it is people’s right, individual right of the human beings, isn’t it as simple as that? Individual specific right to life and development is the heart of equitable and inclusive development that can enable us to accomplish holistic or wholesome growth.

FROM BENEFICIARY POINT OF VIEW: Beneficiary, the citizens must first understand what is human rights, human rights is not an right to privilege or honour, human rights is the right an individual of this world has to the opportunities that would enable him/her to satisfy his/her responsibility towards the globe as an individual and the member of the family, society and the world as a whole he/she belongs to.

Secondly, people must understand the individualistic nature of human rights. It is a wide spread and widely accepted fact that no two individuals are alike, even the twins. This factor of heterogeneity is the heart and soul of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, when we look at the article of the UDHR, we can find it to be addressed to the global citizens, individually. By this, it enables both the facilitators and beneficiaries of human rights to approach it individually so that no one in this world is left behind deprived. 

Now, what happens when we don’t look into the purpose and principles of the activity we do? When we ignore the purpose of an activity we do, we will get deviated from the core and, the destination we chose to reach through our activity will remain unaccomplished, eternally. When we want to reach a destination, we should travel in the path that leads to the destination. 

We often complaint government being at flaw and fault, did we ever think what responsibility or possibility citizens have in the functioning of the government? Be it any form of government, governance is for the people of the region and not about the authority or the power of the ruler. When we look at the purpose of instituting government, it was to regulate the functioning, opportunity, living and resources of the region to progression and prosperity progressively. Think, what would the world be if it was to access the resources and living without any regulation for the self-desires and wishes. It would be a mess. It is only to regulate this aspect in a progressive and equitable way, government was instituted.

Understanding the constitution and the fundamentals of the government and other facilitating organisation is important, so that we could orient and get facilitated with opportunities that could set everything in the world in accordance to its purpose. Do we ever know, even as a common citizen, we have a place in the governance? With technological advancements, now participating in the governance is easy with a single click. 

What does the individualistic nature of Human Rights and Constitution mean to us? The individualistic nature enables every single individual to be individually “social” and socially “individual”. Individually social means opportunities or factors that enables an individual to be with humanity without an attitude of negative selfishness. Socially individual means the opportunity or factors that enables society to consider and treat every single individual, individually, without grouping them collectively. 

When an individual is both socially individual and individually social, he/she is always with the values of “self” that is social and in society they are with their individuality that doesn’t intersect or hinder with that of the other, without enabling any scope for comparison or averaging. This ensure development for all and social environment that accepts, includes and encourages people for their individuality. 

So we must understand that the development, growth or opportunities to development are available and accessible for all equally. It is important that the citizens concentrate on their own growth, sharing their responsibility to the world without concentrating on that of the others.

What we normally do when we see someone connected to us grow and to take leaps? We find ways to pull them down and don’t rally focus on what possibilities we have to grow and leap. This kind of mindset is common and unfortunately is a greatest betrayal one could do to the world and the humanity that hinders social prosperity.

We always see profession as a means to earn living, but actually our growth is connected to the growth of the world and therefore all the growth or development that an individual accomplishes through his/her living is his/her fair share in the growth of the world that facilitated his/her living.

So, for development, human rights is important and especially, it is important for human rights to be individual specific that doesn’t tie opportunities and facilitates of two different individuals. Opportunities to growth, prosperity and serenity to all is open, individually, without any intersection, restriction or hinderance but with due regulation that checks the approach and facilitation to be rich in the principle of human rights. 

Finally, coming to protection of Human Rights. Every single individual of this world is an human rights promoter. It is not human right activist, it is human right promoters. Human rights is not about fighting or to prove the dominance or authority over the components of the world. It is not about forming groups and protesting against each other or against the government. It is about promoting the spread and existence of human rights through claiming opportunities for life and development individually by all citizens according to their needs, interest, ambition and skills. 

THE WORLD SHOULD URGENTLY BE BOUGHT TO THE REALITY, HUMAN RIGHTS IS ALREADY EXISTING, DONT FIGHT FOR IT, IT IS ALREADY VESTED TO US SOME 65+YEARS AGO, WE JUST NEED TO SEEK AND PRACTISE IT. 

CITIZENS MUST UNDERSTAND THAT THEIR LIVING IS NOT JUST ABOUT THEIR LIFE AND GROWTH BUT ALSO ABOUT THE WORLD THEY LIVE IN AND ARE CONNECTED WITH.

THEY MUST ALSO UNDERSTAND THAT, THEY HAVE DUE PLACE IN GOVERNANCE AND HAVE ALL POSSIBILITY TO SEEK OPPORTUNITIES FOR LIFE AND DEVELOPMENT, INDIVIDUALLY. THEY MUST UNDERSTAND THE NEED TO ACCEPT AND VALUE THE WORLD AS IT IS, WITHOUT BRINGING IT TO AN AVERAGE STANDARD OR MEDIAN. 

Dr. Timothy Barker (not verified)

There are many potential aspects relevant to this discussion from the adoption of open, transparent social structures to the need to be as realistic as possible when setting achievable goals for these societies. However, ultimately - I believe - the most crucial aspect is that we need to work TOGETHER to help achieve any goals. Unilateral actions have no place in such globally pressing concerns. Overall we need to end the desparate clamouring for ideoligically based supremacy around the world and collaboratively design our common futures without discrimination of any kind. Conflict is the current enemy of any flavour of relevant multilateral actions. Hence, today, I focus on the eradication of ALL conflict and work towards a future where we come together to solves the many crises we can witness around our fragile planet...

Megan McHargue (not verified)

Hello!
Sorry for joining the conversation so late and for the late reply to your post- but I really wanted to take this opportunity to show my support for your point! I think in different areas, such as here in the United States, where there is a lot of policy debate and focus (especially on sustainability, environmental issues, etc.) where states/areas are enacting policies that are only applicable to their certain region rather than working together as a whole in order to make real change. While bringing about legislation in small areas can certainly make a difference, it is absolutely vital that we all start working together in order to meet future goals, as well as to do things like ensure resources for future generations. Also, with debate going on about what to do in developing countries when it comes to things like rainforest preservation and population growth, it is important to look at humankind and human history as a whole to find solutions that force us all to work together in a way that will benefit everyone, and not just first world and westernized countries. Also, it is important to make sure responsibility for sustainability is something places on all individuals and regions, not just ones that can afford it or ones that are growing rapidly as we speak.

Again, I really appreciate your post and as an Environmentsl Studies student, I really resonate with your point about the necessity for widespread cooperation and participation to make these and future goals successful!!

Lal Manavado • Senior Advisor at undefined from Norway

Learning about the importance of environment from history. I agree with you that one can learn a good deal from cultures outside Europe about thinking of our habitat as our home with all its appealing and troublesome aspects. But here, we run into a great difficulty. I do not know of any single area of today's world whose culture has not been affected by social values of West European origin, be it the marxist ideology, religion, or commercial practices. As none of those influences have upheld the supreme necessity of our environment for the very possibility of our existence on earth, most of the traditional cultures have lost their original notions concerning the importance of our habitat. So, if we should learn from them, we have little choice than to study  the previous travellers who were fortunate enough to visit those parts of earth while they were stil verdent, and the traditional life went on, more or less in harmony with nature. Of course, not all of those writers were either objective or even tried to understand what they saw without trying to interpret them according to some fashionable, but untenable theory. Fortunately however, there are a few whom one can read with great pleasure and profit. But none of them are natives of the area involved. I would like to mention that even at the end of 18-hundreds, there were several people who were aware of the terrible effects of environmental degradation in Europe, and some took concrete action to mitigate it. It would be 'politically incorrect' to say this, but it remains a confirmable fact, viz., Kaiser Wilhelm II  initiated an extensive planting of conifers on the north eastern boarder of German empire to shield the country from Siberian winds and to enhance agriculture (vide "Kaiser's Memoirs'). The reclamation of Carmarge, the arid slopes behind French Riviera by a Scottish visionary through plantation of pines, etc., are some other examples. Lal Manavado. From: notification@unteamworks.org [mailto:notification@unteamworks.org]Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2015 9:41 PMTo: Lal ManavadoSubject: [World We Want 2015] Megan McHargue student from United States commented on the Discussion "Required adaptation by institutions, structures and individuals"

Dr. Abdulghany Mohamed • from Canada

Dear Colleagues,

Greetings to all!

Many thanks to the moderator and participants for your engaging ideas!

 I’ll delve into only one of the given questions in this post, viz.:

What types of changes and adaptation in institutions and structures will be needed at the national, regional and global levels to facilitate a smooth transition to a post-2015 era? What are the necessary corresponding changes in the roles and responsibilities of all partners?

To begin with, I surmise that the term “institutions” is hereby conceived/applied in its dual usage; i.e., institutions as “organizations” and institutions as  “formal and informal rules, monitoring and enforcement mechanisms, and systems of meaning that define the context within which individuals, corporations, labour unions, nation-states, and other organizations operate and interact with each other” (Campbell, J. L., [2004] Institutional Change and Globalization, Princeton, Princeton University Press, p.1).

On such a view, I wish to suggest that the types of institutional change that may be required in the upcoming phase will include the introduction of reforms to existing institutions as well as the introduction of new ones. To be sure, these changes will vary from society to society (jurisdiction to jurisdiction). Generally, I posit that changes will most likely be introduced at multiple levels to:

(a)    enable the transition from MDGs to SDGs in such a way that the gains made from implementing the MDGs are sustained/safe-guarded;

 

(b)   facilitate the effective/successful implementation/realization of the SDGs by way of:

(i)      fostering domestic and international collaborative efforts;

(ii)    conflict resolution (domestically and internationally;

(iii)   minimizing implementation barriers; and,

(iv)  shaping/influencing behaviours, preferences, capacities and strategies of key actors;

 

(c)    help lay the foundation for post-2030 negotiations/strategizing.

To the extent that institutions are not idea-less (i.e., they are imbued with values, beliefs), institutional change may be necessary if and when existing institutions do not reflect the requisite values/norms to implement the SDGs. For example, institutions in the era of SDGs will be required to engender, inter alia, human dignity. As such, institutions that undermine this value will be the target of reforms to align them with the new regime. Similarly, various jurisdictions will, in one way or another, have to reform or introduce new institutions geared towards gender equality not only because gender equality is one of the goals of the SDGs but also because it is a critical ingredient in realizing other goals.

 

Furthermore, it is important to note that institutional change is invariably a socially/politically contested process stemming from the fact that institutions: (a) do reflect and indeed serve particular (material/non-material) interests, and that (b) institutional change may re-calibrate the balance of power.  As such, reforms will be shaped by multi-level dynamics and therefore manifested differently -- spatially (across societies) and temporally (throughout the duration of the SDGs). It is also crucial to remember that institutional inertia is not uncommon. As such, institutions can survive (and linger on) even when they engender sub-optimal results.  And, even when institutions change, they tend do so in a path-dependent way (both when path-dependency is a constraint as well as when it is enabling) precisely because “the composition of new institutions tends to interact with and carry forward key elements of existing institutions, including their incongruities and asymmetries” (Cortell, A. P. (2006) Mediating Globalization; Domestic Institutions and Industrial Policies in the United States and Britain, Albany, NY., State University of New York Press, p.12)

Lastly, as regards to the roles of the various stakeholders, I believe that institutional changes that will accompany the implementation of the SDGs will also lead to changes in the roles of some extant actors/stakeholders.  For instance, a holistic/integrated approach to SDGs implementation will of necessity require actors emphasize coordination and institutional inter-facing. Moreover, the transfer of policy ideas, exchange of best practices, and adaptation of emulated strategies/techniques will require that actors multi-task by simultaneously playing a variety of roles.

In sum, implementation of the SDGs will be accompanied by institutional changes/adaptation. Undoubtedly, the types of changes will be manifested and undertaken differently given the diversity of socio-political-economic systems around the world. In short, institutional reforms will be necessary because institutions matter. 

All the best! Looking forward to reading your reactions and your great insights!

Abdulghany Mohamed  

GEORGES RADJOU (not verified)

Friends,

From expereince, BIRD dominant viewpoints for SDG1, 2, 3 (formely MDG1) i.e. Poverty reduction and SDG4 (formely MDG2) Education: About these institutions:

I have read a number of comments in the reviews one cannot deny the difficult task ahead, because of the physical and human geogrphical differences in the regions of the world concerned. However, BIRD wants to ensure the group supports to United Nations for an excellent job and contribution to these goals cited above with simple (but not simplistic) tools that have perfectly (but not sufficiently worked due to world comlexities to fill gap, but i.e. financial crises,...others). Post 2015- SDGs can help to close it now,

I am 540° agree with reviewer and assessors or evaluators of there specific development contexts and situations, however, the power of the school institution and the kitchen instituion as 2 social, economic, cultural, institutions have been proven in the past has the most reliable, low cost, and performing organization that can deliver an outstanding contribution to the achievement of peace and security through socialization. While the schools (or the kitchen) are remaining pivotal in teaching and food supply , there are indeniabily a reflexion to be posed on the adaptations to school and kitchen according to the organization in a system, which is more mature in term of facilities and access to learning and cooking. Tomorrow, we will have more opportunites to lifelong learning, with internet and MOOCs, and also,a s the food ingeniosity is improiving greatly, new cooks like teachers are perfectly capable to be the pillar of the road to dignity in education and hunger reduction (how do you eat grass-hopers, is still unknown today, by most of us, and it a wonderfull sources of proteins, when comparing to the need to save water. New schools and kitchensc an facilitate the transitions from MDGs to SDGs and so be an opportunity rather than a threats to business monopolies and knoweldges, as well a way to re-assess or re-appropriate the natural capital, and restore the confidence in the harmony with nature. Thanks, Georges BIRD.

John-Mary Kauzya • Chief of the Public Administration Capacity Branch in the Division for Public Administration and Development Management, UNDESA at UNDESA from United States Moderator

I thank everyone who has contributed to this discussion since it was launched last week, and look forward to hearing more. The contributions to date have been wide-ranging and engaging, making it quite a task to synthesise them but I will try.

 

There seems to be a general agreement that institutions, conceived as organizations as well as formal and informal rules of the game at national regional and global levels, will have to adapt in the transition from implementing MDGs to SDGs.

The nature and magnitude of the adjustments in institutions, whether through creating news ones or just reforming existing ones, will not be uniform everywhere. They will depend on the context at national, regional or even global levels. While the SDGs are universal, implementing them will be pursued in context-specific ways.

Given the emphasis on integration embedded in the SDGs, institutions will have to be readjusted or created to prioritise capabilities for coordination, collaboration, partnerships, and holistic approaches.

In the context of diversity, institutional behaviour will have to be accommodating of various ideologies and context-sensitive to be able to cater for diversity nationally, regionally and globally.

Institutional capacity development will be key to ensure smooth transition to implementation of SDGs which will necessitate new knowledge, new skills, new approaches, networking, and changing mind sets. Implementing SDGs will have to go hand in hand with capacity development efforts including institutional reforms, organizational restructuring, advocacy and sensitisation, training, etc.

The implementation of SDGs will need to adopt a human rights approach and the concerned institutions will have to adapt to work holistically within a rights-based approach.

New or readjusted institutions will have to be participatory, anticipatory, connected, collaborative, more transparent, accountable and willing to change in light of changes in circumstances.

 

 

One institution that might adapt and reform is the United Nations, starting with a vote by the General Assembly to establish a proposed United Nations parliamentary assembly with a mandate to reform the UN by developing a world constitution to replace the UN Charter, which in turn might enable the creation of a democratically elected world parliament. Most countries vote locally and nationally. As global citizens we should be able to vote at the global level as well, and foster democracy, justice, prosperity, security and sustainability everywhere in the world.

 

The media is undergoing a rapid, uncontrolled change, especially with the growth of social media. While it is necessary and proving useful for social media to promote interaction – rapid and almost instant interaction - mainstream media which provides well thought out and often well researched information and opinions that can guide policy and institutional reform should not lose out.

 

My own observation is that most readings of intergovernmental discussions of successful implementation of commitments (e.g., MDGs, plan of action for LDCs, etc.) refer to the need for capable institutions as if capable institutions are an obvious talisman for success in implementation. Where does the capability of institutions reside? To me this is critical. The answer from most comments seems to indicate norms, rules, regulations, laws and structures. But how do these come about? And once they are in place, how do they get dynamised to effect implementation?

 

We need to bring on board very strongly the issue of leadership and human resource capacity. Institutions do not work themselves. Leaders and people in these instructions work and implement commitments such as the ones we are talking about. Transformative leadership is going to be critical to the success of implementation of SDGs. Transformative leadership will engineer the necessary changes in institutions. It will transform individuals in their mindset and capabilities, it will transform organizations and institutions, and it stands chances of transforming societies. It must be recalled that there is a symbiotic relationship between leadership and institutions where by leaders engineer institutions and institutions guide the operations and behavior of leaders. How will transformative leadership and human resource capacities come about in the transition from MDGs to SDGs?

Lastly most postings have referred to institutions as if they are synonymous everywhere. There is need to interrogate ourselves on which institutions. Of a legislative nature? Of executive nature? Of judicial nature? Of coordination and collaboration nature? At local level? At national level? At regional level? At global level? Answers to all these questions will produce a labyrinth of institutions that cannot be lumped into one stream of discussion.

 

John-Mary Kauzya

Dosse SOSSOUGA • Executive Director at UN SDGs NGO Major Group d'or Africa: Amis des Étrangers au Togo: ADET from Togo

Thank you for your remarcs. Leadership, human resources end there engagment, instititonal reforms, relislative reforms, excecutive nature reforms, judicial reforms ( create a section for the sustainable development concerns, coodination at national level( CIVICUS or ECOSOC can accredite an CSO and Government administrative) , at regional and international level (CIVICUS can accredite organisations); NGO: ADET proposation for national institution model attached. and a global institution model attached

:

Priscilla (not verified)

Tailoring the programme cycle to the SDGs would enhance institutional adaptation. Implementation of programmes should be based on sustainable thinking, and supported by a strong Monitoring, evaluation and learning framework. Global and Regional programme units that would work with National level institutions for technic support and where feasible financial resources would enhance implementation of good practices.

Education for sure at both formal and informal institutions is necessary, but standards should be set to ensure inclusion of common and crucial elements in the curriculum.

Sensitizing the national /regional level policy makers, the political wing/parliamentarians on what they endorse in important, at times we expect them to take leadership or to allocate National resources on issues that may not even understand. A lot has been learnt from the MDGs implementation and the lessons should be used to make the SDGs achievable. Thank you.

Dosse SOSSOUGA • Executive Director at UN SDGs NGO Major Group d'or Africa: Amis des Étrangers au Togo: ADET from Togo

 Bon conseiller

Adriaan Kamp- Founder Energy For One World (not verified)

 

Very well phrased. I like this positive progressive approach to our new shared challenge!

Dr.Priya Prabhakar • Policy Reformation and Right to Development at Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) from India

UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS is the world constitution, there can be no other document that could progressively include the heterogeneous factors and quality of the world, simultaneously keeping the functioning and progress of the world united without leading to inequities and disparities. 

Democracy is not about choosing representatives but about representing the views and needs of individuals to the facilitating organisation or institution. Democracy is not the right to vote but the right to participate. As said, discussions in social media and liberated scope of communication that has faster and wider reach must be included in the functioning of governance. Democracy - anything “by, for and of the people”. 

Why democracy took the form of RIGHT TO VOTE? It is because of the lack of technological advancements then. When the world decided to become independent and democratic, it was not ready and prepared to take that transformation. Even in the minds of people, democracy and independence was not about the inclusive governance but an governance that is dominated and dictated by the native.  We all meant and practised Freedom, independence, democracy and republic, only in this way. Only because this urge for power, we all fought for independence, at a time where, there was limited facilities and scopes for truly establishing democracy.                    

Therefore, in the period where the governance was approved to be democratic and republic, the world did not have an appropriate environment or facilities needed for the transition and hence it resulted in anarchism; the principle of governance by practice and facilitation was different from that was adopted and ratified by by papers  as its fundamentals. This was the reason for adapting democracy and republic in the way that was possible and enabled by the environment of advancing world. We reformed the government with intermediate structures and practices that appointed representatives from local regions to represent the needs, suggestions and decisions of public. In the flow of time, the entire functioning and representation got deviated from people to party. Today, representation in legislative assembly and parliament is made in support of the party and to the directives made by the party, to which the representative belong.  

Reforming or reorienting this deviation just needs the government to liberate the participation of the public in the governance. Today, as discussed, technology has advanced in leaps and bounds, that it enables us to restructure the governance completely inline with the true principles of democracy and republic fundamentals. Now, everyone could participate in the governance being at their own place without much hardships and complications. Government must adapt to the advancements that could holistically reform their functioning and facilitations, in line with their purpose and fundamentals. Even in the era of internet, government officials should not demand or expect individuals to visit in person to register their grievance, opinion or suggestion. Even though, facilities and opportunities for e-governance is enabled to all governments, its efficacy and facilitations are limited by the restrictive mindsets of the governing officials. On one hand, it is the dominating mindset of the governing officials and personnels that got trained to the monarchic pattern and on the other hand, it is the stereotyped for the routine and procedures. Even though we could find adaptation in functioning with the high level officials, government personnels, who form the lower structures of the hierarchy are very rigid and dominant to the dictating pattern of governance. Unfortunately, in some nations, where the class strata was followed or practised, aggressively, the same mindset is being descended to governance. The foundational cadre of personnel, look up to their higher officials and set them in high and inaccessible place. Unfortunately, irrespective of the job responsibility, everything in the department is directed and dominated by the assisting personnels. From who could meet the official to the communication that could reach the officials, everything is decided and controlled by them. It is in this place, there are high possibility for corruption to occur. Corruption - is not about the money, but about the quality of service and the satisfaction of job responsibility. Anything that would corrupt the quality of service or the job responsibility of an personnel or official is corruption. For example, money given to process a file faster is not wrong, it is not corruption but money given to ignore a petition of others or money given to hold back other’s file from processing for self benefits is corruption. 

To filter and orient all these shortfalls, e-governance was introduced, but even here the flow of communication is what was followed in the routine. Any communication received through mail, is printed by the secretary, filed and forwarded to the concerned official through papers. A redressal process that would take a day’s time, virtually, will take month’s time to get redressed by papers. 

Again, since the procedure of redressing is in the routine pattern, all the shortfalls that were intended to reformed & regulated is left unaddressed. When it takes month’s time, petitioner would call up to the department, and here they would be demanded to visit the office in person. Inspite of all facilities and technology, citizens and officials are forced to undergo hardships and complication for the non-adaptivity of interim personnels or structures. Therefore, we need to observe how far the advancement and facilities, facilitated are adapted in the functioning, practically and must regulate or orient the mindsets of the factors and components of all institutions in order to get adapted to the changes or advancements, holistically. 

“My own observation is that most readings of intergovernmental discussions of successful implementation of commitments (e.g., MDGs, plan of action for LDCs, etc.) refer to the need for capable institutions as if capable institutions are an obvious talisman for success in implementation. Where does the capability of institutions reside? To me this is critical. The answer from most comments seems to indicate norms, rules, regulations, laws and structures. But how do these come about? And once they are in place, how do they get dynamised to effect implementation?" 

The need for successful implementation only needs the instituted institution to be capable. 

Where does the capability of Institutions reside? The capability of the institutions, reside in the fundamentals that was principled and drafted to enable the functioning of the institution in line with the vision and mission of the institutions. It is important that every individual once they are placed within the structures of an institution must get oriented towards the vision and mission of the institution.  It is to be understood that, the very minute, an individual is placed in an institution, they are no more an independent individual but they are an structural part of the institution whose functioning and contribution is not independent but a wedge of the institution’s structure. For example, from the point, where I started contributing to the organisation of United Nations, I am no more Dr.PriyaPrabhakar who has the autonomy or independence to dominate and work for my self will and wish, but, I am a Dr.PriyaPrabhakar, who is a policy reformer and a wedged participant of the Right to Development sector. All my activities, thoughts and contributions should be inline with the responsibility of my designation. I must practise and spread the principles of my organisation and designation. Any recognition I get, is not alone my personal recognition but the recognition of my organisation and its fundamentals that enabled me to contribute things worth for the recognition. It is definitely not that I shouldn’t enjoy life, but that enjoyment or relaxation I take shouldn’t corrupt my responsibility or the fundamentals of my designation. 

This difference should be understood, there is a very small line between the professional and personal life, the genre of responsibilities differ but the approach and principle is one, “wellbeing”. Everywhere and in all work you do, you can very well find factors and components that are complementing and corresponding to the principles of your responsibility. We need to understand the purpose. Once, when every single individual get adapted to the structure they form in an institution, dynamiting the fundamentals for effective implementation is easy. From individual to the government every wedge their living and functioning in the circle of universal development. Both the fundamentals and goal are one and universal, its only the approach and route that differs, the intersection part of the venn is common and only the circle of factors clubbed to form the venn differs. 

We need to bring on board very strongly the issue of leadership and human resource capacity. Institutions do not work themselves. Leaders and people in these instructions work and implement commitments such as the ones we are talking about. Transformative leadership is going to be critical to the success of implementation of SDGs. Transformative leadership will engineer the necessary changes in institutions. It will transform individuals in their mindset and capabilities, it will transform organizations and institutions, and it stands chances of transforming societies. It must be recalled that there is a symbiotic relationship between leadership and institutions where by leaders engineer institutions and institutions guide the operations and behavior of leaders. How will transformative leadership and human resource capacities come about in the transition from MDGs to SDGs?

First of all, we must understand that, leadership doesn’t grant self based autonomy, it grants autonomy to facilitate the principles of the fundamentals. Leadership is not about being in power or the grant vested to control a group of individuals for the self wish and desires. It is first to realised and accepted that the world doesn’t need new fundamentals, it is important that we follow the adopted fundamentals enabling new different opportunities and facilitations life and development. The same holds true to innovations, Innovations is not developing or creating an entirely new thing, it is about discovering and inventing things by integrating two interlinked or interconnected concepts or fundamentals. 

“AUTONOMY INLINE WITH FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES”, Transformative leadership must remember this baseline, because for adaption, it is either lack of autonomy in governance or lack of fundamental principles in autonomy that is creating hindrance or complications in transformations and reformations. Transformative leadership with this tagline can bring in inclusive and equitable transition of Developmental goals without any disparities. 

Lastly most postings have referred to institutions as if they are synonymous everywhere. There is need to interrogate ourselves on which institutions. Of a legislative nature? Of executive nature? Of judicial nature? Of coordination and collaboration nature? At local level? At national level? At regional level? At global level? Answers to all these questions will produce a labyrinth of institutions that cannot be lumped into one stream of discussion.

Even though the factors discussed here are not synonymous; having the same meaning, they are interlinked and have a common purpose - “ Holistic and Universal Wellbeing and development”. 

They all are mandated to function on the universal fundamental that were framed and adopted for the universal wellbeing and development. That is, Legislative institutions make law based on the fundamentals according to the needs of the region and its people, that are enacted by the executive institutions and regulated by the judicial institutions. Institutions at local, regional, national and global level are collaborated with the legislative, executive and judicial institutions (government) to co-ordinate their functioning and outcome to the universal wellbeing and development.

Therefore institutions, structures and individuals need to adapt Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Constitution in their functioning and living to enable the world to accomplish, holistic, equal and equitable development. The world must be cognised to the purpose of each activity it does that would co-ordinate the entire functioning of the world to a unified goal and vision. This co-ordination is important to unify and connect the components of the world to reach holistic development. When there is no co-ordination between the components, the world will be like Islands that cannot be venned to serve the purpose. 

Andrea Young (not verified)

In fact, it is correct, it is not lack of money or structure, we need to put the Human Rights Constitution in practice and (re)enforce its principles so that all citizens are included, and one possibility would be the access through technology available.It seems that all the time (in our history), power and different interests are considered mandatory, trying to find an excuse not to act in accordance with the principles.

Adriaan Kamp- Founder Energy For One World (not verified)

Agreed!! 

Lal Manavado • Senior Advisor at undefined from Norway

An observation to Andrea Young To be a 'defender of the faith', has never been a way to impress, or to be popular. Having said that, I can now disagree with what you say about our already having the means towards a better world. The difficulty is, nobody seem to like the only possible rational answer to the following question:  Better for whom? The implied answer to this question is the foundation on which people want to build a better post-2015 world. With one exception, that implied answer is, for people. This is accepted as axiomatic, nay even more! So, we have seen this homocentric thinking showing itself in the abstract as a variety of rights, and in  concrete terms as policy goals and intruments needed for their formulation, and even some technical examples. What is sad about this line of thought and what it has spawned in the real world, is that it bears within itself the seeds of deprivation. Athens may have been the mother of 'democracy', but at one point in her history, she contained more slaves than citizens. Magna Carta is held to be the result of a praiseworthy endeavour. But, it was a successful result of an effort by the barons for the barons, and not for plain Mr. Smith. Bolshevik revolution was purported to create a secular paradise for the workers. But all the way to the fall of Bolshevik system, comrade Ivan on the street was very much less equal to the comrades in the politburo with respect to income, food, housing, clothing, etc. There is no single 'mature democracy' in the world where a considerable number are poor and deprived, and live under unacceptable conditions, not only by the individual country's standards, but also by those of some poorer countries. Can we then honestly say, we have the means to a better world for all? I submit the failure of our current systems stems from their homocentricity. It is human, human, human, and human adnauseum, as though we have the sole right to exist on earth. Even if one is fool enough to believe that, it is strange that many refuse to acknowledge our total dependence on other living on earth for our own continued existence. It is a complex network of inter-dependencies, whose nature may never be fully understood. But, we still have the capacity to comprehend its outline, which is more than sufficient to convince us that we cannot rationally  plan the future well-being of human kind without planning that of our environment at the same time. The present notion of 'economic growth' logically excludes this inclusive approach. Moreover, it entails a progressive deterioration of our environment, and deprivation. I think what we need is not economic growth a la mode, rather the notion of economy as a tool serving individual humans within one's chosen culture in a way that does not harm others and our common habitat. Moreover, it will serve the individual to satisfy one's reasonable needs. Current economy does not serve reasonable needs of an individual, for it enables some to gain control over  huge pool of resources that may sufficiently  meet the reasonable needs of a nation. In a world with finite resources, this is grossly unfair, unless the much vaunted declaration of human rights also implies the right to unlimited wealth! I think it is possible to make things better, but at every level, we are imprisoned by the jargon and rhetoric, and of course other motives,  we seem to be circling the same old ground, but to different tunes. Will we ever dare to break out of it? Lal Manavado. From: notification@unteamworks.org [mailto:notification@unteamworks.org]Sent: Sunday, March 15, 2015 5:16 PMTo: Lal ManavadoSubject: [World We Want 2015] Andrea Young researcher from Brazil commented on the Discussion "Required adaptation by institutions, structures and individuals"

Andrea Young (not verified)

Dear Lal Manavado, 

In my reply, I never mentioned faith or any religion. I did not defend parties, economic systems or even economic theories and their specificities. What I advocate is that all human beings should be able to access their rights (safe housing, health, respect, equalitarian justice) and it is necessary to know these rights (basic education is necessary).

Most of population is not aware about the Constitution of their own country,because there are interests involved. In all its historical quotes that you mentioned, or most of them, knowledge has always been in the hands of few (intellectual, commercial/industrial investors and politicians); never been fully available and, mainly, it has never been properly implemented.Unfortunately, humans beings dominate this planet, we consider ourselves intellectually superior. Of course, the natural environment could be preserved when or if people (in general) could understand that their rights are bound by principles of respect for others. There are limits even to the exploitation of natural resources. We can not explore nature and human beings as if they were just obtained wealth and slaves (as in the period of colonization in Brazil, or many countries in Africa, Asia, etc ...). I agree with you....I didn´t understand???

 

Lal Manavado • Senior Advisor at undefined from Norway

Dear Andrea Young, For the most part, we are in agreement. My main point is that as long as world population continues to increase (it's time it stopped) and competition for gain (power, money or resources) is the driving force behind our economy, we cannot adequately feed the current 800 million hungry and 1000 million malnurished in the world today )according to FAO), let alone provide them adequate shelter, education, health care, etc. The reason is simple. Too few own too much of the world resources quite legally. I am not advocating a UN sponsered Robin Hood act! Rather I am pointing out the mathematical impossibility of using the rest of the world's resources to alleviate the sufferings of the deprived. Yes, to counter this objection, a usual move is to advocate 'private-public' partnerships. It seems ideal, but is it? Say that the public partners will be happy if they can break even after their 'investment'. Let us assume public partner puts in X and the private one the same amount, X. So in this realistic endeavour, 2X is invested in some activity to help the deprived so that their living conditions become a little more tolerable even though still inadequate. Let us say this requires the deprived to receive the amount of resources worth 25% of X. This is rather moderate. Now if the public sector makes no profit, it wants its X back. Private sector partner will certainly want at least 25% on its investment. At this rate, investors will invest 2X, and will want 2.25X in return. But, where can the deprived get that 25% of X? Most likely from the intermediate group, i. e., those who possess an undue share of wealth and the deprived. How long can this go on without the intermediate group beginning to feel  their standard of living decline? This is already a complaint in the affluent countries. Add to this rising world population, then the outlook becomes grimmer. That's why I talk about zero population growth, and the adaptation of economy serving man to enhance one's quality of life with reference to civilised cultural norms as the way out. I am not a historian, but I think Brazil  had a unique colonial experience in that Portugal did not exercise any rigid control over Brazilian affairs, and Brazilian economy actually became far more robust than that of the mother country. As far as I know, no other colony managed to do that during the colonial era. Lal Manavado.From: notification@unteamworks.org [mailto:notification@unteamworks.org]Sent: Monday, March 16, 2015 1:08 PMTo: Lal ManavadoSubject: [World We Want 2015] Andrea Young researcher from Brazil commented on the Discussion "Required adaptation by institutions, structures and individuals"

Dr.Priya Prabhakar • Policy Reformation and Right to Development at Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) from India

To be honest, Yes, we have the means to a better world for all, as said, to find and practise this means for a better world, we’ll need to break our mindset from looping the same song in different tunes and look behind the scopes of routine as in what the fundamentals adopted facilitates and opportunates the world by its principles and through its purpose.

We concentrate purely on human beings, because, it is only the human activities that can be engineered manually, all other component of the world responds to the activities of human beings. 

Nature’s functioning or evolution cannot be engineered by man, it is the only factor that is out of human’s control. It is because of this, the reformation and facilitation is concentrated towards orienting human activities progressively, so that the response or impact that it creates with the environment could also be corresponded to progressive development. 

Serenity and tranquility is nature’s native quality, its evolution or response is unpredictable, when we try to engineer it in one way, it will adjust its evolution in other way because the depth and the completeness of nature is still away from the human’s understanding. 

“I think what we need is not economic growth a la mode, rather the notion of economy as a tool serving individual humans within one's chosen culture in a way that does not harm others and our common habitat”

Article 29 of UDHR says the same: (1) Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full development of his personality is possible.

(2) In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society.

(3) These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.

So don’t we have the means that would enable better world for all?

“Moreover, it will serve the individual to satisfy one's reasonable needs. 

Article 25: (1) "EVERYONE" has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.

Article 23: (1) "EVERYONE" has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment.

(3) "EVERYONE" who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection.

Current economy does not serve reasonable needs of an individual, for it enables some to gain control over  huge pool of resources that may sufficiently  meet the reasonable needs of a nation. In a world with finite resources, this is grossly unfair, unless the much vaunted declaration of human rights also implies the right to unlimited wealth!”

 Article 30: Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein.

 Article 29: (2) In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society.

 (3) These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.

It is true that Universal Declaration of human right implies the right to unlimited wealth. But the facts behind this facilitations must be understood, the access to unlimited wealth is not facilitated for the power or to the rich but to all individual through an opportunity for them to contribute. Individuals participate, contribute their skill in multiplying the development or outcome and then take a share due for their contribution. This opportunity to contribute in unlimited through UDHR by which the share received also multiplies facilitating all a chance for unlimited wealth and prosperity. Unlimited Wealth is in no way opportunated in unhealthy or through unjustified means. 

On the other hand, UDHR doesn’t limit the resource to be counted as finite but it multiplies the resources through liberation and integration, enabling the world with superfluously gain that would satisfy the needs of all, equally. 

What you recommend as reform is what is facilitated by UDHR as fundamentals. 

Therefore, we have means to a better world for all, but its practicality depends on our perception and how far we include these means, true to its purpose, in our functioning and facilitation. 

Adriaan Kamp- Founder Energy For One World (not verified)

Dear Dr.Priya Prabhakar Policy Reformation and Right to Development,

Thank you - for sharing these observations.

Very good!

I specifically like your observations on e-Government, transformative leadership and building organizational capabilities.

They are on - the dot!

In terms of moving away from the more bureaucratic to the more transformative (inspired) leadership- to progress and transit from MDG to SDG (or the "whole")  - perhaps - the following words on Leadership   may help/add to your observations.

I hope it does.

In the open

Leaders and Leadership today is a challenging experience. As we move “beyond the glass ceiling into the corner office” all our acts, moves and decisions are seen and observed – not only by the own team, the company- but also by the stakeholders, the media and more and more in the eye of public and opinion.

Leadership today, and if we want to do this in style- is to “live and breath” in the open.

To be transparent. To be whole.

The “alignment” between Company needs, the organisation, the role and the self – is essential in order to perform best. The temptation to grow own ego or self-belief (in intuition, being right, etc) – not in the least fuelled by an inner circle of supporters, can be detrimental.

To that end, and organizational dynamics has proven this time and time again- leadership today is an art.

As much as leadership is about the abilities to manage large organisations, it’s also a path of inner wisdom and personal growth.[1] To be able to look with mild and wise eyes to the situation we are in.

Not all leaders have had the chance to mature themselves in this way- before they have worked themselves in a position of power or influence.

Modern day leadership asks and invites us to combine a couple of talents and characteristics:

To be compassionate and warm in relationships, as well as being able to overlook and steer the business, it’s  performances and deliveries- at times – as an army general overlooking the battle field- when times are tough- or asks for change.

So- this “hard and soft”in leadership- call it “situational leadership”- is an essence of being able to stand the test of times, and being able to drive the business forwards.

It’s quite subtle and needs leaders who can work fully and wholly with “heart, mind and soul” in the business.

Add to that the complexities, the tempo and dynamics of business today, and especially also the complexities in the energy sector- and you understand that we are looking at   some very special abilities and skills.

To train, nurture and reflect on “our state of being” when in leadership becomes hence an essential element for success.

We, at  – and our advisors – are offering this gift. To be close and intimate with you- and to help you – in your leadership- creating the conditions for you (and your inner circle) for success.

Managing self

Our journey into leadership may start with the self. By making a start (or an attempt) to understand the self better, our conscious and unconscious patterns of thoughts and behaviors, we may rise to the challenge of becoming a little bit more aware of our own perspectives- an thus of others. Interesting research has been done by the Mayo Clinic team in the US. A team of psychologists, doctors, therapists are working here to better understand the difference between happy people and the not so happy people. The results of their (scientific) findings has been the source of the book written by Dan Baker: “What happy people know”. The basic difference between happy and not-so-happy people is in the functioning and ways of the brain and thought processes: either thinking (and thus speaking and acting)  out of compassion (love) or of a higher brain response or from a more reptilian brain (fear). You can’t mix or fix those two themes in one brain, and the good news further is that we can train our minds (and beings) to become much more compassionate: creating positive acts.  Another form by which this message is given to people, and potential leaders, is by spiritual leaders such as e.g. the Dalai Lama.

Finally- today’s neuroscientists seem to agree that regular meditation (or attentive focus) can help to grow more awareness and awakening of ourselves. To grow our capacity for compassion and understanding.  To grow our conscious mind more into unconscious area’s of our mind. To be more at peace and ease with whatever is. To better understand and see the Ego- The self.  For a professional, who wants to excel in Leadership in her or his profession- the invitation is to find the own ways of nurturing and doing this. This can be through sport, culture, family, nature,  through religion, spirituality or other means  – as long as this inner source of energy, wisdom and content is being nurtured and kept whole..

Why is this of such an importance?

Whenever we are confronted or expose ourselves to dynamic environments, with large uncertainties and change- this strong inner-self will be the source of balance within. Especially in the last lonely mile (every project or business seems to have a period of crisis where the leader is thrown on his or her self), at headwinds or when the going gets tough..

 

Managing others

Ever since the great construction works of the past, human mankind has found and defined organizational forms by which great achievements could be made. Mobilizing 1000’s and 1000’s of people, materials and goods – and in accordance with a plan (or blueprint) for the realization of something big.

In order to achieve these great projects (or wars- the military is another great example of learning how to master an army in extreme (uncertain) situations), men created organizational hierarchy and functions (roles) by which individuals had to work and abide by.

For periods when there was time, but also for situations when there was duress or stress.

Our modern day corporate and governmental organizations much resemble this core principle. A hierarchical form by which there is a leadership for (urgent and important or strategic) decision making at the top, and executive (or operational layers) for realization. Next to that- each and every organization has it’s own culture or DNA. In each (professional) organization, people are hired in to do or execute roles. Dis-harmony (or trouble) rises when either the organization, role or person hired for that role s not are aligned.

That’s when we see trouble in real life. In boardrooms, but also in project or business units.  The whole is not any longer attuned or in flow. There is friction.

To have an eye for the constitution and constellation of the tri-pod: organization, role and person is a leadership role. To understand whatever, or whomever needs adjustment in order to restore harmony or health in an organisation.

Sometimes the organization needs healing from fear (re. what happy people know), sometimes the role needs to be redefined (as it doesnot jive well with the company culture) . This is especially true for roles and positions of innovation and change. Those roles can easily attract allergic  reactions in organizations.

Now comes a paradox:

.A great (company) leader may combine the best leadership style from the Military (or e.g. great project works) as well from Wisdom leaders (e.g. Dalai Lama) as well from the Entrepreneurial Spirited (e.g. Gates, Jobs, Musk, Ford, Edison, Rockefeller)

Military leaders know as no other that they can only move as fast, and as agile as their people allow them to do: in order to get the results. Military leadership is further focused , second to none, on the understanding of the external and internal landscape and situation of their campaigns..(“situational analysis/ getting the results as no other”)

Wisdom leaders know what is best for the group, and over time, see-ing the situation from many many different perspectives, and working from compassion for humanity (the others and self) at heart.

Entrepreneurs have the minds of imagination, of creativity, the life force of change and innovation- and are free in mind.

A great leader, to my mind, and for what I have seen and witnessed, combines them all- either in person or in his or her (inner circle and) team.

That may be one of the great paradoxes of (situational) leadership.

In Leadership- there are also nuances and styles. A creative advertisement company will have another DNA as a large accountancy firm, and as such will require a different character of leadership (role expectation)..

Another aspect what makes a difference in suitable leadership is: Size. Size matters. A company can retain and remain informal (family feel) if the headcount stays below 50. Above 50, and as experience sofar has indicated, an organization seems to need to formalize its’ workforce into procedures and processes Semco of Selmers a good exception..

Research into the styles of corporate leadership in the US has been done by Jim Collins in his book: Good to Great.

In his book, published in 2001, Collins makes the point for so-called level 5 leadership styles. A leader which is beyond the need to position him or herself in the center of attention and power-making: the otherwise so well-know charisma leaders.

In his research, Jim found evidence that leadership based on the organization and team had a better chance of becoming great. His tripod for greatness existed on three principles: 1. What you are deeply passionate about 2. What you can be the best in the world 3. What drives your economic engine.

Spencer Stuart’s Thomas Neff and James Citrin “Lessons from the Top”, a book looking at the top 100 CEO in US Fortune-500,  released also in 2001 – actually found a somewhat different nuance in differentiating good from great, and this may make the point on our journey into leadership – we are all students for life..

A perhaps much simpler way to look at leadership style (or to learn to practice this) is by adopting Servant Leadership. The whole idea behind this leadership practice (over others) is to think, act and work from the intent to let others (and the organization) blossom, Not yourself- but the other. To act as a coach or steward over the healthy growth of others.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dr.Priya Prabhakar • Policy Reformation and Right to Development at Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) from India

Thanks for the excerpt and indeed it adds and helped me to further few points.

I would like put my thoughts from a different perspective,

Leadership is not about managing people or controlling an organization.

Leadership is about facilitating people and guiding the organizational function inline with the purpose. - As said, The “alignment” between Company needs, the organisation, the role and the self – is essential in order to perform best. But this approach towards the alignment and reforms must be in the mode of facilitation and not in the mode of managing - Looping with what is available.

"The temptation to grow own ego or self-belief (in intuition, being right, etc) – not in the least fuelled by an inner circle of supporters, can be detrimental. (I presume the inner circle referred here is the inner self of an individual and not the members of the organisation forming the structure of first circle.)"

Tempting growth will also lead to inconsistent growth that may be harmful to the organisation. Growth must be founded on the vision or purpose that is fuelled by the zeal, skill and the the factors of inner self that would correspond and add to the vision adopted. A leader or head is not one who gets tempted with the success and growth, A a leader or head is one who get soul satisfaction through accomplishments accomplished.

“What happy people know”. The basic difference between happy and not-so-happy people is in the functioning and ways of the brain and thought processes: either thinking (and thus speaking and acting)  out of compassion (love) or of a higher brain response or from a more reptilian brain (fear). You can’t mix or fix those two themes in one brain, and the good news further is that we can train our minds (and beings) to become much more compassionate: creating positive acts.  Another form by which this message is given to people, and potential leaders, is by spiritual leaders such as e.g. the Dalai Lama."

People don't programme themselves with response and behaviour, if it is so, then it is artificial. They don’t live life, they just survive. People respond to situation, if the situation is positive, they respond with humanity and if the situation is negative or uncomfortable, it is natural that they respond to uneasiness. One can be calm and without fear when their opportunity to life and development is facilitated to them individually. All people whose opportunity to life and development are limited and restricted by external factors belong to “Not so happy people”. Spiritual leaders guide us the way to solitude, where we can liberate ourselves from the pressures and constraints of the rapid and complex world to find an answer or remedy for the problems we face there. Enforcing the environment of “Live with what is facilitated” just increases the number of not so happy people, because when the happy people aims to accomplish something in life that may be progressive but that is away from the facilities of common facilitation, they eventually will get shifted to the group of “Not-so happy people”.

Training minds to limitations and restriction will not lead to development, instead as we sustain with what is facilitated, we will eventually regress, because the development or the facilities of the world will be disproportional the functioning and facilitation of the world. What would happen to an gadget running with an outdated version of software will happen to the world. With restricted facilitation we would be halving the the progressive use of resource, leaps of development and the ease of functioning. 

Therefore, to enable world of Happy people, leadership must get oriented towards liberated facilitation inline with the fundamentals. For government to enable nations of happy citizens, it is important that they liberate their policy making process inline with the constitution and UDHR that would enable facilitation of Individual specific opportunity to life and development for all, individually.

Meditation or re-energising the inner self should be to charge the conscience of the soul. The inner source of energy, wisdom and content is through cognisance one get through illuminating their conscience. Meditation is just not about conscious and unconscious mind but about conscious and subconscious mind. Meditation is about connecting the conscious and subconscious mind through conscience and enlightening humanity to the soul or inner self for wisdom.

"In order to achieve these great projects (or wars- the military is another great example of learning how to master an army in extreme (uncertain) situations), men created organizational hierarchy and functions (roles) by which individuals had to work and abide by."

To serve the purpose of hierarchical functioning, we must understand the reason behind setting up hierarchy. For progressive outcomes we must also understand, what must be the base for the execution of hierarchy; its commands and what obedience to hierarchal command means. All organisation or institution is again a school, hierarchy was formed to help and guide the freshers with experience of the seniors through which they could get oriented towards the institution’s or organisation’s vision and purpose. To make the purpose of he organisation, native to the fresher’s mind and soul. The base of hierarchical suggestion should not be self driven thoughts or opinions but it must be suggestions and viewpoints inline with the fundamental purpose and vision of the institution that would serve and benefit the organisation or institution as a whole along with the corresponding beneficiaries. 

For example, let us take legal advisors, even though not all, in most of the places, legal advisor in institutions and organisation is not to orient the functioning of the organisation or institution inline with the public fundamentals of constitution and UDHR but it is about supporting the profit oriented self approach of the organisations and institutions with the loop holes available. The same holds true to financial advisers and with the department of customer service. 

Financial advisers don’t advice the organisation to regulate their economy inline with the fundamentals but they help the organisation is finding ways to hold larger amount of profit with them without getting it shared to the stakeholders equally. 

Customer support individuals, don’t represent the customers to their organisation but they represent their organisation to the customers. With all flaws, they find ways in which the the organisation could be profited or benefitted and don’t resolve the problems for hardships faced by the customers.

Above all what is more disgusting is that all the professionals in the concerned field are descended with the belief that finding loop holes and helping the tagged organisation to gain self profits or benefits are their basic job responsibilities. 

Obedience to hierarchy or respect to the chair is not about blindly following what is being commanded but to understand and evaluate the command with the conscience built on the fundamentals and suggest with alternatives, if it violates the fundamentals. So, as said, it is not only important to be aligned but it is also important to find and highlight the base for alignment. 

"The whole idea behind this leadership practice (over others) is to think, act and work from the intent to let others (and the organization) blossom, Not yourself- but the other. To act as a coach or steward over the healthy growth of others."

I tend to differ a little from this approach. When something is Not Yourself - but others, it is natural to loose the fix or grip in the functioning. It is always self and others, even in service, it is not “Not me but you” but Me and You. Why should one deprive himself or herself with the benefits of the contribution he/she made? Why do we look up to people who have sacrificed their life or living for others? Is it humane? What is wrong in contributing to the world with self? Selfish motives behind duties are wrong, getting due benefits for self from the contribution made is not wrong. Many leaders and contributors are forced to ignore facilities and benefits they deserve because of this mindset. 

Analyse which is right and purposeful?, Is it a leader employing power who ignores and gives up his/her social benefits along with the job responsibility & basic duties or is it a leader who takes up deserving social benefits from contributing development to the world through their basic job responsibilities and duties? Which is purposeful? 

It is true for a leader to be a guide who gets happiness through the healthy growth of others but it doesn’t mean that they renounce their well being or development for others? Would that wedge to holistic structure of world’s development? 

On the whole, the world proves to be in need of strong reforms that in and out needs orientation and regulations inline with the purpose to set itself towards progressive development through resilience.

Adriaan Kamp- Founder Energy For One World (not verified)

Dear Dr. Priya Prabhakar,

Thank you so much for your clarifications and considerations. Reading your text I feel that our souls speak the same language, but express these perhaps with different words.

I fully agree with all your observations , with only here and there a clarification, e.g. inner circle is the inner circle of the leadership team. and there are a few others- but that is not the essence.

The essence is that you and I agree that development, or leading an organisation comes from a deep and profound interest in the human being. Not programmed- but true, honest and real.

I full-heartingly agree with you that :

 People don't programme themselves with response and behaviour, if it is so, then it is artificial. They don’t live life, they just survive. People respond to situation, if the situation is positive, they respond with humanity and if the situation is negative or uncomfortable, it is natural that they respond to uneasiness. One can be calm and without fear when their opportunity to life and development is facilitated to them individually. All people whose opportunity to life and development are limited and restricted by external factors belong to “Not so happy people”. Spiritual leaders guide us the way to solitude, where we can liberate ourselves from the pressures and constraints of the rapid and complex world to find an answer or remedy for the problems we face there. Enforcing the environment of “Live with what is facilitated” just increases the number of not so happy people, because when the happy people aims to accomplish something in life that may be progressive but that is away from the facilities of common facilitation, they eventually will get shifted to the group of “Not-so happy people”.

My suggestion that better ways of leadership can be found in the so-called servant leadership mindsets- whereby the idea of the leader gets 180-degrees turned around: he or she is not on-top-of the people, world or organisation, he/she is simply (called) to serve the people, world or organisation.

Again- this is not programmed, but this form of "being" can be learned, organised and can be "institutionalized" by example and do-ing.

By our acts, and by our thoughts in our minds: the way we look , think, breath, walk, talk and work in our life.- and by the way we relate and live with people.

Again- leading by example can do miracles here! It can change the contect and the organizational situation we are in!

I donot ask leaders (or people who manage) to write-themselves away. To my mind we donot need martyrs, but we may invite leaders however to experience a form of humility: better understanding their roles and duties given - and better allowing them to excell and radiate as best as they can I: inspiring, working and serving the whole: the common good- and the individuals for which we are invited to care for (all human beings!). and to be this living example to others!!!

Conscious leaders are aware of the limitations of their own thoughts. beliefs and acts, and therefore develop an inner circle of trusted and diverse range of people who help to adjust, supervise and balance the leadership and the whole: leadership hence becoming team-works (such as this) and a shared journey and experience! 

Our invitation today is to do better. To stand on the shoulders of our elders, to learn from history (and the history of leadership)- but also to reach for new ideals and a future we actually want:

A future where everybody is included, and a future where we work, live and grow each other in safety, in dignity, in care and compassion, and in respect.

This form of leadership- doesnot know boundaries, doesnot know hierarchy (only in the event or crisis or emergency in order to be able to re-act), doesnot know gender or colour and doesnot know who is rich or who is poor

I am available for such leadership.

I hope I can.

 

 

 

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dosse SOSSOUGA • Executive Director at UN SDGs NGO Major Group d'or Africa: Amis des Étrangers au Togo: ADET from Togo

Il faut des institutions crédibles pour les ODD. Il est question de faire des réformes en s'appuyant sur les 17 buts de l'après 2015. Ainsi, ces instutions réformées depuis les Nations Unies jusqu'au local en passant par le gouvernement. Ces institutions réformées avec des réformes mentales et des réformes législatives pour renforcer ou accompagner ces institutions.

Andrea Young (not verified)

For example, possible indicators could be related to:

1. Projects - if they were developed considering climate change, prevention, technological education and innovation in an integrated way?2. Were they (in fact) implanted? Where? In what way? Local communities were involved?3. What is the scope (scale)? Were they implanted in local communities, municipalities,states?4. Have being monitored and managed by a competent Authority designated by UN?5. We should create population's satisfaction indices (health and welfare conditions)6. The initial costs were shared with the private sector?7. There was a process of incubators companies at Universities? New business (or research opportunities) were financed by the local government?

Dr.Priya Prabhakar • Policy Reformation and Right to Development at Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) from India

Post 2015 development agenda is about accomplishing the set of 17 goals through reforming the functioning of the world inline with the fundamentals (UDHR & Constitution) adopted. It is true that from UN to the individuals, reforms are to be made inline with principles adopted for the universal functioning, facilitation, development and well-being that encompasses all components of the world in it. 

ER (not verified)

Many thanks for this opportunity to post. A tall order for many countries particularly for smaill island developing states whose officials often wear many hats. Even if fianance were available, there is simply not the human resources. Thus it may be that subregional cooperation mechanisms can help--as well as IT infrastructure be put in place to reach more islocated localles..

In the Asia-Pacifc --would the newly developed Asian Infrastructure Bank be willing to finance such and what would the Bank get in return? While this new bank is a welcome  alternatiive to those with more conditionalties  ---can such diliver in the longer term.

Also the post 2015 development agenda is much more comprehensive than the  MDG agenda which mostly benefitted from dirty yet rapid economic growth ---of which we must pay the consequences now.

So much work ahead.

Lal Manavado • Senior Advisor at undefined from Norway

On the Required Adaptation

Before I comment on the topic, I would like to clarify what is meant by 'structures' here. I find it difficult to think of them as something concrete like a railway network, nor can I see it as an organisation or a conceptual framework of some sort. So, I'll restrict myself to institutions and individuals.

Assuming a set of SDG's that display a clear and justifiable logical cohesion is agreed on, their achievement depends on obtaining the necessary and sufficient conditions involved therein. The required institutional and individual adaptations are concerned with rendering it possible for those conditions to obtain. This is of course, self-evident, but before I expand on them, I'd like to say a few words on justifiable logical cohesion.

A set of goals are logically cohesive if they are distributed in a hierarchy, where the achievement of one or more goals at a lower level is a necessary condition for achieving a goal at a level immediately above them. For instance, we satisfy our nutritional need by feeding; but the need to feed cannot be satisfied unless we procure the food, etc. The justifiability of this loogical cohesion does not rest on any dry theory, but simply on whether it is concerned with the real needs of living individuals.

Even today, it is common for the institutions to try to hold onto their power and prestige by invoking the principle of institutional autonomy. It is an excellent principle as far as it goes, i. e. when it comes to implementation of a given strategy, but it becomes a dreadful bottleneck at the levels of challenge identification, policy formulation and devicing a strategy. It is here that various institutions should learn to coordinate their work with a view to achieving holistic solutions.

We may call it adaptation of joint planning, which will have several new implications.

Dosse SOSSOUGA • Executive Director at UN SDGs NGO Major Group d'or Africa: Amis des Étrangers au Togo: ADET from Togo

Biens  Sûr, l' adaptation dans ce cas s'apparente au changement de stratégie d'où l'esprit de créativité.

Ranjani K.Murthy

My response is to the query "To what extent are existing global institutions and policy frameworks ready to adopt and implement a more integrated approach to development?  What adjustments may be needed to ensure that governments, the UN system and other partners respond to the universal and unified agenda and deliver equitable results for everyone?"

1. Global institutions need to move from the framework of 'rights' to 'rights and justice'. To give an example, Goal 5 refers women's equal access to/control over assets as men.  However, in a context like the state of Tamil Nadu, India where as of 2005-6 (National Family Health Survey) 64% of the rural population was without agriculture land it is  necessary to address right of rural households to land and women's ownership of land together. Rural landlessness is growing in India due to conversion of agricultural land for industries, special economic zones, real estates etc.

Yet another gender related target is by 2030 to ensure universal sexual and reproductive health and rights.  Reproductive justice deserves to be added.  If one adopted the lens of rights, poor women have a right to earn income for their families through being a surrogate. However, it may be detrimental to their own health, especially in countries where anemia levels are high. Justice perspective will also entail prevention of sex selection.   This is not to say remove the rights lens (right to decide whether, when, how many children to have) but that rights perspective has to be combined with a justice one. (For further elaboration, see http://www.comminit.com/policy-blogs/content/shifting-debate-inclusive-…)

 

2. A second shift that is required is combining working on particular sectors with working towards changing unjust norms of institutions institutions.  Most UN organisations, national governments, and NGOs work on sectors like agriculture, health, education, micro finance  ICTs, environment etc.  It may be good to combine this sectoral thrust with working on changing norms, resources, power and people in institutions  be they institutions of marriage, family, community/religious structures, media, markets, state or inter state institutions.  For example, while while NGOs attempt to create awareness against violence on women, the television serials and movies are patriarchal and violent.  Related, there needs to more effort to work with the 'upholders' of hierarchies (See http://www.comminit.com/content/women-victims-agents-or-perpetrators)

Dosse SOSSOUGA • Executive Director at UN SDGs NGO Major Group d'or Africa: Amis des Étrangers au Togo: ADET from Togo

ADET est une ONG qui lutte pour la défense des droits des femmes; équité genre.De meme l'état togolais est dans cette dynamique.

Donc nous ne pouvons qu'apprécier une telle initiative et vous encourager à la pousuivre.

Lal Manavado • Senior Advisor at undefined from Norway

On the Required Adaptations

 I regret that my previous post on the subject has lost a significant part of it during the its submission. Therefore, I'd like to try and make it as complete as it was intended.

 Before I comment on the topic, I would like to clarify what is meant by 'structures' here. I find it difficult to think of them as something concrete like a railway network, nor can I see it as an organisation or a conceptual framework of some sort. So, I'll restrict myself to institutions and individuals.

 Assuming a set of SDG's that display a clear and justifiable logical cohesion is agreed on, their achievement depends on obtaining the necessary and sufficient conditions involved therein. The required institutional and individual adaptations are concerned with rendering it possible for those conditions to obtain. This is of course, self-evident, but before I expand on them, I'd like to say a few words on justifiable logical cohesion.

 A set of goals are logically cohesive if they are distributed in a hierarchy, where the achievement of one or more goals at a lower level is a necessary condition for achieving a goal at a level immediately above them. For instance, we satisfy our nutritional need by feeding; but the need to feed cannot be satisfied unless we procure the food, etc. The justifiability of this logical cohesion does not rest on any dry theory, but simply on whether it is concerned with the real needs of living individuals.

 Even today, it is common for the institutions to try to hold onto their power and prestige by invoking the principle of institutional autonomy. It is an excellent principle as far as it goes, i. e. when it comes to implementation of a given strategy, but it becomes a dreadful bottleneck at the levels of challenge identification, policy formulation and devicing a strategy. It is here that various institutions should learn to coordinate their work with a view to achieving holistic solutions.

 We may call it adaptation of joint planning at the highest level, which will have several new implications. It entails that unlike today, institutions should develop joint planning mechanisms to address the areas of overlap among them. For instance, traditional health services are the prime concern of a ministry of health, but health issues connected with food and agriculture, and trade lie in the domains of other ministries. Here, a holistic approach to health would then require a joint planning group with representatives from all the ministries concerned, which would deal with the health aspect of their brief. This is the usual practice in the military, so it is not an original idea.

Such an approach will have certain budgetary implications as well. So, the institutions may have to adapt a joint budgeting scheme in order to meet the financial requirements the new approach may imply.

Usually, the civilian institutions are bound by monolithic bureaucratic restraints when it comes to decision-making even when they are required operate in a trans-sectorial manner. Time and time again, this tendency has shown to be one of the greatest impediments to efficiency and progress. I believe meaningful open consultations prior to decision-making may improve the situation. They would be meaningful if and only if they are concerned with goal-related technical matters, and they are actually taken into account, and do not serve as a mere window-dressings.

 As all institutional practices are norm-governed, the adaptation of the above suggestions calls for a change of norms, i. e., a change in the rules that govern how ministries and other government offices, and NGO's are run. As far as I can see, these are the generic adaptations the institutions must undertake in order to move towards their integrated operation.

 En passant, I might mention that it would enable many concerned and interested people outside the institutions to make a significant contribution to the former's work, if we learn to  speak plainly, but clearly without resorting to jargon that is often used to conceal the unattractive aspects of many an institution.

 Now, let me say a few words about what is required of an individual. Institutions are man-made, and as such, they represent what some of us have actively thought as to how somethings should be done for a community or a nation, and then have obtained some general agreement from the people that it would serve their interests to get those things done in that way. I shall not go into how that agreement may be obtained, for it ranges from the use of force to rhetoric, and some rare instances to calm and objective reasoning.

As it is widely believed that the involvement of the people in decision-making and their execution is of vital importance to the future well-being of mankind, let us see what mental adaptations of the individual may enable one to make one's participation in them valuable.

 Our actions are motivated by the desire to achieve what we believe to be worthwhile. What we believe to be so represents a conceptual notion of something desirable. So, what we would like to gain or achieve represents our current conceptual apparatus, for some reason it is also called 'mindset'.

 A conceptual apparatus is not inherited, it is acquired by learning. So, the generic adaptation we need to make would involve revision of our current conceptual apparatus, and improve that we impart to the future generation.

 I think indifference to the current state of the world among a significant majority, is one of the greatest obstacles to progress in the alleviation of wide-spread social miseries. Individuals  may enrich their own lives and enhance those of the others by being willing to be involved in contributing to human heritage in any way they can. I think we can be justly proud of our species when one helps a sick man back to health, and when one paints a masterpiece.

 We may design the ideal plan to improve the world starting from 2015. But, its successful execution requires a great deal of resources. Meanwhile, our very existence on earth depends on the equilibrium between the living and the finite mineral resources they require for survival, and the equilibrium among the living, which represents the qualitative and the quantitative bio-diversity amongst them. We have already done much to upset these vital equilibria.

So, it would be fatal to increase the current levels of mineral and biological resource exploitation in order to reach post-2015 objectives. Individual can help by being aware of the problem, and learning how not to exacerbate the situation by not following  fashions that encourage consumerism.

 It is time that we understood that many a fool may make a fortune that he cannot possibly use reasonably in two life times, and money is a mere tool that we may use to live enjoyable and rewarding lives as befit civilised beings. And if we make more money than what that would require, not only will we be the loosers, but would deprive many others their chance of a life that is worthy of man. Indeed, money can and does stink sometimes, and the Roman rhetoric to the contrary was said by somebody when the Roman empire was in the throes of its decline and fall.

And to conclude, unless we each of us do change our ways today, should humans survive for another 1000 years, then they would say that 2015 was their darkest hour, for then a unique oppertunity was thrown away.

 - Lal Manavado

Dosse SOSSOUGA • Executive Director at UN SDGs NGO Major Group d'or Africa: Amis des Étrangers au Togo: ADET from Togo

Merci pour vos observations qui sont vraies.

Mauricio López Dardaine (not verified)

Let me first say that as a foreign trade consultant I was invited to my first Latin American Sustainable Development meetings back in 1999, Day by day, year by year, I became more and more involved.

Regarding Institutions I feel that the most effective in our view in the long term is school. When I say school I mean primary and secondary levels and the University. At the level of secondary schools participation in the struggle against hunger and poverty is growing -I speak from our experience in Argentina- In a wider sense, what governmental level fail to do is undertanken by a myriad on NGOs. When you look at the number of people participating you are surprised at their dedication and growing numbers. Wealthier neighborghoods create associations that have an enormous capacity to manage a series of iniciative dealing with hunger, housing and health care. Going back to school at the secondary level, one of the initiatives in Argentina that congregate yopungsters at this school level is called "Techos" (roofs) formerly "Techos para mi País" (Roofs for my Country) where people are encouraged and helped by young people in this association to builfd their one house. Material is provided by firms that cooperate with the organization.  This is probably one of the healthier examples I've come across. These young people make one public collections every year to support the organisation. When we come to the university, the question is to develop the Sustainable Development concept across the whole institution. Then to start working two fold: on the one hand to incorporate sustainable solutions within, on the other hand, to work the expertise and resourses in the university towards the surrounding areas. In countries such as Argentina, more often than not, needs regading housing and feeding and nutrition and EDUCATION may be found not many blocks away. Establishing bonds of trust and cooperation withi these neighbors is a rather feasible two way street.

Mauricio López Dardaine 

Lal Manavado • Senior Advisor at undefined from Norway

Adaptations required by the educational institutions I agree  with Mauricio that schools and universities are the most important institutions in bringing about a really worthwhile change in how people see the world and their part in it. But, in order to achieve that objective,  it is necessary to revise and expand the content of education at every level. In generic terms,  such changes ought to consist of an alteration of values, and secondly,  enabling one to think critically and holistically. As for the first, it is imperative that we understand and agree that our future survival depends on the well-being of our environment. And we are neither the master, nor the slave of it, but an integral part of it. The second value notion we must learn to appreciate is that acquisition of gain, be it money or power beyond what is required to satisfy one's reasonable needs and/or capacity is vestige from pre-stone age that cannot be justified by civilised man. Please note that this does not entail that it is virtuous to be poor, nor yet a forced re-distribution of wealth. Its general acceptance is the only logical means of making resources available for a sustainable future. My second point about how we think may be more difficult to achieve. Briefly, I think it is positively harmful to teach any child a non-scientific subject interpreted by some fashionable 'theory'. By sciences I mean the studies of phenomena governed by gnomic laws, and not by man-made norms. Of course, this would be highly unpopular among the plethora of experts that crawl upon this earth. Next, let us be kind, but not emotional when teaching. Let us teach children to shun rhetoric, and keep to the point. Let us use advertisements to show how mendacity could be colourfylly concealed, so that many may believe it to be true. And, let us teach children how to turn advertisments into a source of laughter  and see it as a cunning ploy by some silly adults. Cheers! Lal Manavado. 

Mauricio López Dardaine (not verified)

Glad we are in agreement regarding the importance of schools and universities in order to bridge the gap between speech and action. I do agree with Lal Manavado regarding the need to redisign the contents of education across the board. We are still way behind and this means we have lost years as far as curbing global warming, for instance, is concerned. Global Warming, as all of you in this discussion know, means in turn  droughts and floods. Serious problems with crops, problems with housing in zones affected by an unusual number of rains which are more intense than hitherto. These consequences of Global Warming add to hunger and poverty. Small islands, as has been mentioned in this discussion, are in dire straights. So appart from all we can do regarding Mitigation, today Adaptation is a must. School children and young people, university professors and students have a key mission they can acomplish regarding Adaptation, as mentioned in our previous comment, starting within (probably with Mitigation) and looking outside, maybe a few blocks beyond school or university doors, for needs in the feield of feeding, housing, health care and EDUCATION. Those of us, all round the world, who are part or in close contact with institutions concerned with education, whether public or private, have an opportunity of coordinating efforts in this direction. There is another actor in this virtuos circle that ought to be part of these actions involving both Mitigation and Adaptation: the town council, the municipality, or whatever it is called where you belong. In our experience they are more often than not willing and even eager to participate in this sort of endeveaour. You then have: teachers, professors, school staffs, parents, children, young people, universities, needs in the same districtc where either school or university is located, municipal officials, town council, which may join hands regarding feeding, housing, health care and EDUCATION.

 

This, of course, means rather a bottom to top approach to these goals we are aiming at. It will not replace the top to bottom agreements we are asking the world leaders to make up their minds about before Climate Change and Global Warming get totally out of control. Imperfect, but perfectible, far from our expetations, but sets in the right direction. And with one advantage: EDUCATING in so doing those that shall have in only a few years a chance to hold position in government and industry. This, we can do, provided we don't expect perfection!

Dosse SOSSOUGA • Executive Director at UN SDGs NGO Major Group d'or Africa: Amis des Étrangers au Togo: ADET from Togo

ok

Jihène Malek (not verified)

I think that public institution need to be adpated by implementing new target plannification , training and offer capacity building sessions for their employers about the role and the importance of SDG , implement new projects including the SDG area and why not to do restructuation, to implement new rules of governance and improve the quality of services, etc. 

If we explore the goal N16 "Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels" .  thus, the quality of institution and its efficiency are important. for this reason, the implementation of new goals as SDG is an opportunity for many institution to improve and to adpat to this new reflection field.

Dosse SOSSOUGA • Executive Director at UN SDGs NGO Major Group d'or Africa: Amis des Étrangers au Togo: ADET from Togo

I think that reforms are needed in all institutions, in all levels,  adaptation, in local, national and international institutions , is needed to be conform with  the sustainable development goals.

Dr. Timothy Barker (not verified)

Thanks to all for the interesting and collegial discussions, they are very informative. Recently I have been wondering if this forum is encouraging us to be critical of institutions, etc. by almost assuming that adaptation across the board is necessary? Whilst I would agree that a little adaptation can be a good thing there is also a lot to be said for retaining some stability within a society by not attempting to effectively overthrow the status quo overnight. Additionally it may be that not all sectors require adaptations. For example, in the UK I feel we have a fairly good justice system and that our armed forces do a fairly good job. Of course, there is always room for improvement and none more so than our democratic participation in the UK I personally feel. But my point is it therefore that perhaps it becomes difficult to generalise as to the nature of adaptation when there is so much variability? And that's to say nothing of less formal 'institutions'. For example, I can think of our local (regional) newspaper which though again being far from 'perfect' has become a bedrock of our local society. I suppose a similar argument can be made for individuals too. Sorry, I do not mean to muddy the waters - I just simply wanted to sound a note of caution about being too critical please? Thank you.

Lal Manavado • Senior Advisor at undefined from Norway

In reply to Dr. Barker In my post on the subject, I suggested a policy change at the highest level, which involves joint planning in order to accomodate the areas of overlap, which one observes in areas such as health. This however, does not exclude institutional autonomy at the executive level. I think joint planning in appropriate areas could reduce repetition and cost, and what is most important, it makes it easier for one to use the best available expertise. During the Falkland/Malvinas conflict in 1982, there was an unfortunate example of what would happen when institutional autonomy of the military at the executive level was not respected by the cabinet. It is hard to believe that an experienced and intelligent officer as Admiral Woodward would have authorised the sinking of 'General Belgrano' sailing away from the exclusion zone had it not been for the political interference.  Ah, the legal system. You know, real people want legal decisions that are not only fair, but also timely and affordable. For a century or two, people have been waiting for the last two things with surprising patience, or is it with a feeling of powerlessness? Lal Manavado. 

 

 

Dosse SOSSOUGA • Executive Director at UN SDGs NGO Major Group d'or Africa: Amis des Étrangers au Togo: ADET from Togo

Aucun pays ne peut prétendre être mieux adapté avant les ODD. Les objectifs des ODD, en face, permettront de répertorier les adaptations nécéssaires

Ulrich Graute (not verified)

Institutions, Structures and Individuals are important but its partnership which brings them together

 

Partnerhsip may begin with an online dialogue but requires exchange and cooperation in various forms: RSA as a learning society of academics and practitioners is in partnership with several international and national organizations. We publish several journals, organize national and international conferences and are in a regular dialogue with other institutions, but partnership needs to take more intensive forms. For instance, with the Commission of the European Union RSA organized in February 2015 a joint political and academic debate on the Future of Cohesion Policy (http://www.regionalstudies.org/news/article/report-second-eu-cohesion-po...). But it is very important to note that partnership does not develop out of the blue. 

Partners of the side of civil society need to be competent: Over 50 years RSA is now producing academic contributions which are so inspiring and usefull for academics, decision-makers, administrators and other practitioners that they keep using our journals and attenting our meetings. Our members around the world work at academic institutions or as practitioners and thus they compiled a wealth of experience. Only this makes us attractive for external partners.

Partners on the side of (international) governmental institutions must invest into partnerships: CSO in some cases have big money. In this case tey are usually driven by vested interests. Most other organizations of the civil society are in different situations. For example, RSA has a comporsition of more than 1000 members representing institions and individuals related to regional and urban studies and development. Our strength is that we can provide a wealth of different insights coming from our broad membership. Our partners in governental institutions know that they get a high quality and indipendent insight when they meet with us to discuss e.g. sustainable development. But even well established member organizations like RSA are not so wealthy that they could send delegates to all relevant conferences around the world as an investment in a more intensive cooperation.

SDG stand for an agenda unheard-of. Such an agenda needs a partnership intensity which is also unheard-of

There is a high potential expertise by academic and other CSO partners, which is not harnessed yet for SDG, but if (internatinal) governmental institutions are serious about partnership, they need to do more than launching once in a while an online dialogue where enaged CSO and individuals provide their knowledge for free. Existing Expert Group Meetings (EGM), Stakeholder Forums and UN Conferences are good additional activities but is that enough? No, EGM etc are a nice and easy way to tap on some of the knowledge available but it's not enough to analyze open questions and generate new findings. This would need a longer-term exchange and cooperation. According to the Secretary-General of the UN the new development agenda with its SDG is an agenda unheard-of, but it seems that academic research, strategy and indicator development in relation to this agenda are carried out as if the SDG would be just another item next to many others. The reality may look more like this: If not more will be invested in partnership (including support for academic work) it becomes a matter of chance if an online platform and those few experts invited to EGM etc can answer all the questions the UN has. The UN can do better!

 

P.S.: About the Regional Studies Association (RSA)  http://www.regionalstudies.org/

Regions are a key spatial scale for examining the nature and impacts of political, economic, social and environmental change and innovation.

The international Regional Studies Association works with its international membership to facilitate the highest standards of theoretical development, empirical analysis and policy debate of issues at this sub-national scale, incorporating both the urban and rural and different conceptions of space such as city-regions and interstitial spaces. We are, for example, interested in issues of economic development and growth, conceptions of territory and its governance and in thorny problems of equity and injustice.

The Association’s journals, magazines and books, along with our global-to-local series of conferences and events position us as a key forum in shaping and disseminating advances in regional studies and science. Members come from economics, geography, political science, planning and sociology backgrounds. Most work in academia but many are working in policy and practice, and membership is truly global.

Our great strengths include our embrace of multiple methodologies from quantitative to qualitative, the use of thoughtful comparative research, and boundary spanning between academia and policy and practice.

These—and our vibrant mix of members, including active participation from student members and early career researchers—help us to create a dynamic and pro-active environment in which to challenge existing thinking and push the boundaries of knowledge and practice.

Dr. Timothy Barker (not verified)

I am really happy we are now having a debate here. Rather than signposting our own work. This is essential since collaboration nee dialogue is central to the success of these initiatives. Keep up the good work all. Best, Tim.

Mauricio López Dardaine (not verified)

Refering to: Amis des Etrangers au Togo: ADET"En parlant d'adaptation, je parle de réformes mentales, legislatives, institutionelles pour le développement durable:

 - Réformes  Mentales: changement de mentalité et de comportement de la population par l'éducation et la sensibilisation"

Je suis bien d'accord. Voilá probablement la clef pour tout le reste. Maintenant, je vais continuer en Anglais, mes amis.

In all stages of civilization this change of mentality recommended by Les amis des étrangers au TOGO, has been a crucial part of the process. Change of mind, and then of attitude of the population by both education and sensitization. There's part of the population that is today, to a great extent, beyond the possibility of education for sustainable development. Here the media have a part to play. There is, however, another channel not to be disregarded: the example set by children who attend schools where education focusing a sustainable future is part of the system. The kind of instance where the grandfather throws a paper on sidewalk and his grandson picks it up and puts it where it belongs  is probably an excelent image of this combination between education (at the primary level) and awareness through the example set by the new breed.

Would yo totally disregard this simple but key gesture by your son or grandson?

 

Mauricio López Dardaine 

Adriaan Kamp- Founder Energy For One World (not verified)

I will use this space to give some of my reflections on "What it may take (to the world) to transit from the Millennium Development Goals to the Sustainable Development Goals.

 

2015 ECOSOC theme: "Managing the transition from the Millennium Development Goals to the sustainable development goals: What it will take"

 

 

 

And of course - I will be a little specific- when I speak on issues of Energy & Sustainability- but most of my observations may also be quite handy and applicable for the other themes and goals (17) in the proposed program.

 

First of all- I would like to share - that I am excited. Excited by this UN program, and excited by the opportunities , the new hopes and new realizations this program may actually unleash.

 

As the program touches "a new order of human enlightenment" in it's program orientation goals

 

Let's build the World We Want.

 

Let's build sustainable societies for all

 

How are we going to live together- as 9 billion people- sharing one planet?

 

 

I look at the program of Sustainable Development - as a new pact, a new opportunity- between the nations, the  governments, companies (business community), academia and society.

 

In the East and in the West, The North and in the South.

 

I look at this program with new hopes and dreams for the poor and deprived, the working middle-class AND the elites of this world.

 

As this program- when done well - can actually unleash the best in us. It can shine and bring new radiance in ourselves and in our societies. A new radiance of caring and sharing.  Of shared stewardship. Of hope. Of can do.

 

The program- and when done well- can and may help to change or transform today's gridlock and sometimes competitive trenches in the geopolitical arena, and may empower and nurture the more hopeful and healthy dialogues and mind-sets between ourselves:

 

Of collaboration. Of crossing borders and cultures. Of listening and caring. Of giving and sharing. Of diversity and inclusiveness.

 

Yes-  Let's unlock the best in humanity. Let's improve the ways we are going to relate, and  Let's resolve some of the most urgent and pressing issues facing mankind (or of our living together).

 

As such- I and my practice is full-hearting-ly in.

 

Let's look at the individual section queries - and let me share with you, some first and very brief observation on our opportunities therein:-

Policy choices and mindset change for an integrated agenda

 

 

What are current examples of an integrated approach to policy-making and what is their degree of success? What are the existing tools and approaches for operationalizing an integrated approach at different levels?

 

What are the approaches to, and changes in behaviour required for integrated policy-making for the new agenda? What kind of communication strategies are needed for changing this mindset?

 

What are the potential complementarities and synergies involved in the pursuit of a universal agenda at the national, regional and global levels?

 

Required adaptation by institutions, structures and individuals  

What types of changes and adaptation in institutions and structures will be needed at the national, regional and global levels to facilitate a smooth transition to a post-2015 era? What are the necessary corresponding changes in the roles and responsibilities of all partners?

 

To what extent are existing global institutions and policy frameworks ready to adopt and implement a more integrated approach to development? What adjustments may be needed to ensure that governments, the UN system and other partners respond to the universal and unified agenda and deliver equitable results for everyone?

 

What are the institutional and individual capacities required to facilitate a smooth transition from the MDGs to the SDGs?

 

Brief Observation(s):-

 

My practice works from the belief and understanding that our organisational forms determine to a large degree also our abilities to execute and deliver on our vision and strategies.

 

"Function follows our Form".

 

As we are transiting from the MDG towards the SDG- and we acknowledge that we are shape-shifting from an agenda solely focussed on the "bottom of the pyramid" towards an agenda focussed on the "whole of the pyramid"- it is clear that we may have to change our organisational form (of function deliveries) as well.

 

As the order and magnitude of the program is so much "bigger and all encompassing"- we may want to spend a little time in re-thinking of how we approach this massive new change challenge- as it will require new working pacts between and in businesses, governments, academia, and society.

 

Globally, regionally and locally.

 

And these working approaches and organisational forms may be different in the East and in the West, in the North and in the South.

 

Surely-  this work has been done- in the many working groups preparing for the goals and the agenda- but as with everything- the conversion from vision/strategy to reality and realisation-  in time- does need a little creativity and imagination- beyond the machinations of bureaucracy and our todays working styles.

 

Earlier I have given a brief and presentation- on what may be needed in the field of Energy & Sustainability. At UN Level, and at the national and energy corporations level.

 

If of interest- I encourage you to read my briefing papers- Go to UN SDSN briefing papers- or to contact me in person.

 

For this note, and this conversation- I will stay a little generic.

 

The transition from MDG to SDG's - actually asks and invites us to Re-write, Re-form and Trans-form some of the existing beliefs, rules and experiences.

 

As we have the opportunity to make "room for the new", to better listen to understand, and we can also iron-out some of the inequalities in power, inequalities in communication and understandings, some of our sources of conflict, some of our unhealthy and unsustainable practices in our present industrial system.

 

Firstly- I would like to share a little video -presentation from  Prof. Kottler.

 

Go to YouTube video

 

 

I think - and in this video-cast, he gives a good insight of what kind of new organisational dynamics we may want to aspire and organize in order to attain "living organisations" - who can adapt and transform to what we need.

 

This video-cast is applicable to individual corporations, but also is valid and applicable for administrations (UN, government) as well for the work between business, government, academia AND the people!!

 

On the issue of Capacity and Capability building- on achieving the 17 goals- I would say and share the following, and based on my years in large-scale program and project portfolio management within the Shell Group:

 

The magic happens when the "vision and story" is compelling- and binds and passionates people, all people and member nations,  to contribute and deliver.

 

The magic happens when the self-interests can be part and integrated of the whole.

 

The magic happens when we know-how to combine our vision with a workable strategy, manageable execution (delivery) operation and a (human) organisation that ticks.

 

The magic happens when we keep trusting, keep deeply respecting the human dignities, the cultural nuances and the differences in perspectives we may have.

 

The magic happens when we are able to stay out of trouble, and collect and celebrate our early wins.

 

The magic happens when we keep loving what we are doing and keep serving the higher goals.

 

Now- surely- and in our modern days and ways- I know also the following:

 

Discipline and Fun in our Organisation and our Deliveries are not each other enemy:

 

In other words: in order to realize and walk the path from vision, strategy to realization- we need good, compassionate and disciplined program management.

 

The kind of program management I was trained to do in Oil and Gas.

 

Managing and monitoring such an extensive portfolio and integrated program- requires also perhaps some new management system(s) - beyond today's experiences within the UN.

 

To that end- I would like to propose  a new, open and shared management (governance) system, between government, business, academia and society-  and which enables member countries and regions (e.g. Africa Union, EU, India,  etc.)  to self-assess, plan and share their organisational abilities to deliver and perform.

 

To conclude :

 

We have an extra-ordinary opportunity to do well. To raise the aspirations, to bring new hopes and help our human civilisation to a next realm of realization (maturity).

 

Our choice is if we are willing and able to open-up, to build and cross the various bridges,  to be creative and imaginative on the roads ahead, and to be able to organise ourselves for success.

 

That choice was rather simple for me to make.

 

 I wish that same choice to all people.

 

Let me conclude today - with something which really inspires me- and gives new hope, and new insights- on how walking the path of sustainable development, and building the societies we want may look like:

 

Watch Under the Dome. Chinese documentary investigating air qualities. http://t.co/PTjU9rJtNt via @youtube

— Adriaan Kamp (@Kamp_EFOW) March 4, 2015

 

 

(continued tomorrow)

 

Darren Swanson (not verified)

An optimistic view of the question on the ‘types of changes and adaptation in institutions needed for the post-2015 era', is that many exciting innovations already exist, from all regions and all levels of government:

…to name just a few.

Do these all work perfectly? Of course not. Are they helping? Yes.

The main problem is that there has been limited celebration, examination and emulation of these innovations by other jurisdictions. A long journey of adaptation ahead, but a foundation exists to learn from.

If you would like to see more about these innovations and others, see: Sustaineo 2030: Learning Sustainable Development Governance from the Future

Dosse SOSSOUGA • Executive Director at UN SDGs NGO Major Group d'or Africa: Amis des Étrangers au Togo: ADET from Togo

Oui les innovations existent partout dans le monde à divers degrés. Mais d'ici 2030 d'autres innovations vont suivre. En plus, le transfert des connaissances, des technologies, de la science et des ressources humaines doit être inclus dans le partenariat pour pouvoir assister techniquement les governements, la société civile  d'autres pays moins avancés.

John-Mary Kauzya • Chief of the Public Administration Capacity Branch in the Division for Public Administration and Development Management, UNDESA at UNDESA from United States Moderator

 2nd Summary:

This has been a veryenlightening reading for me. The problem is how does one write a summary of adiscussion which sought to answer questions about institutions and then spreadinto fascinating discourse on people, ideologies, values, norms, markets,technology, even philosophical contributions, politics, human rights, and somany others. I hope all this will be captured and analysed to make better useof the materials. Here I will put down what (with my limitations imposed by thevariety of contributions) I take as a synthesis of the discussion only focusingon institutions and people bearing in mind that without people institutionshave no chance of being judged as effective or ineffective. I think every one for the rich postings.

John-Mary Kauzya (moderator)

 

1: Change of mentality on the part of individuals, populations,leaders in public sector institutions, private sector institutions and civilsociety, community, local national, regional and global levels. Changingmentalities is critical in adaptation and change of institutions and structuresbecause as noted in the previous summary while institutions and structuresguide the behaviour and practice of individuals working within them, peoplebuild, develop, modify and adapt institutions and structures. Therefore it willtake a significant shift in mentality to effectively drive the achievement ofSDGs.

2: Adaptive capacities that give opportunity to flexibility,resilience, as well as the individual and collective capability tovisualise  the future needs and adjustcurrent status quo to prepare to meet those future needs.

3: Sharing will need to be a feature of societies, institutions andindividuals that seek to meet the SDGs and this will require adjustments in theideological determinants of the distribution and use of resources. This mayinclude revisiting the role of the market in determining distribution, equityand equality in access to resources, goods and service as well as to integrateddevelopment benefits.

4: Reformed Education and training institutions that are aligned withthe requirements of SDGs will be needed to transform societies and individualsand to change mentalities and align them with the requirements of sustainabledevelopment. Appropriate education at all levels from kindergarten throughUniversities will be needed to alter and adapt values, and form individuals whothink critically and holistically and embrace values of diversity,  equality, equity, and societal gains aboveindividual gains. In addition, institutions and organisations that willchampion sustainable development goals will have to be “learning institutionsand organisations”.  There is need forstrong monitoring, evaluation and learning frameworks that support thesensitization of national, regional, policy making.

5: Collaborative institutions will need to go beyond justcollaboration and use approaches that condition them to integrated policymaking and planning and practices such as joint budgeting.  This will need a change in norms (rules,regulations and even laws ) that govern for example the way governmentministries and departments work together. New institutions should beanticipatory, participatory, networked, connected (cities and rural areas) andnot reacting in the “usual way”.

6:Reforming the UN institutions: Part of the changes inthe global institutions should be the removal of veto power from the security Councilas well as “block votes” from the decision making process of the UNinter-governmental processes to allow for democratic decision making andequality of voice. However, removing veto power without changing mentalities,institutions, governments and civil society, will not accomplish the pursuit ofSustainable development goals. The critical role of leadership in developinginstitutions is raised again with a call on World Leaders to come together toshape a new “international order” as part of upholding international securityand peace. There is a suggestion in this regard that all national andinternational institutions should be reformed in such a way that they cancontribute to the promotion of democratic values around the world becauseof  the deteriorating situation anddeepening crisis in most parts of the world. Moreover, The UN system will need to adopt working approaches andmethodologies that enable it to tap capabilities outside its own institutionsfor implementing the SDGs

7: Value/norms based orvalue laden institutions that will promote values such as human rights,justice, dignity, gender equality, transparency, accountability, ethics,professionalism etc

8: The implementationof the SDGs will require not just institutional reforms but something akin  to institutional revolution in all sectors:  Primary Revolutions – Agriculture Revolution,Government Revolution, Enterprise Revolution, Data Revolution, Applied ResearchRevolution, Attitudinal and Behavioural Change Revolution and other PrimaryRevolutions as well as Nutrition Security Revolution, Food Security Revolution,Health Revolution, Education Revolution, Financial Inclusion Revolution as otherSecondary Revolutions. In other words, success in achieving SDGs will needreforms as the world has not yet seen. They should not be risk aversive butrisk taking and risk sharing to guide people towards unchartered ways thatcould produce hither to un achieved results.

9: Institutionsthat can best support and promote the harnessing of the interface between technologyincluding information and communications technologies and developmentespecially in the areas of service delivery to apply technology to ensureequity and to transform lives of the poor

10: Lastly, whatseems to come out of this lengthy and interesting discussion thread is thatwhile institutional reforms matter, people matter most and that change andadaptation must not only focus on institutions and structures but on thepeople, their values and norms, shifting interests as well as ideologicalunderpinnings because it is by them and through them that institutionsultimately achieve what they are intended to achieve. 

 

Lal Manavado • Senior Advisor at undefined from Norway

Many thanks for your excellent summary Many thanks, and congratulations on your success in doing the impossible, viz., capturing the essence of such a wide variety of sometimes incommensurable contributions. I'd like to make a few observations. First,  some general comments, and then a few specific ones on at the ten points presented in your post. I think it is crucial that we not only understand that the possibility of improving human lives depends on the well-being of our environment, but our very existence on earth depends on it. It implies that other things being equal, the possibility of success in achieving SDG's depends on the well-being of our habitat. The reason for this is quite simple. Post-2015 endeavours are intended to enable those who now live under unacceptable conditions to live as befits human beings. This requires that they are in a position to adequately meet their fundamental needs, viz., nutrition, education, security in its widest sense, health, procreation, and what I have described as man's non-material needs. The possibility of their adequate satisfaction depends on the possibility of our being able to satisfy a hierarchy of secondary needs.  These in turn ramify, each ramification more specific than that at the level above. This is not only a logical fact, but it is empirically demonstrable. Further, each need may be satisfactorily met in more than one way. Now, adequate satisfaction of our fundamental needs entails the use of some living and non-living resources on earth. These are finite both in quaity and quantity (vide my previous post). Therefore, I think it is imperative to underline that successful achievement of SDG's should not be deleterious to our environment, because it would inevitably lead the majority of mankind to live under subb-standard lives with reference to their chosen culture simply because their depleted habitat can no longer support anything else. I would like to draw your attention to the plight of the original inhabitants of the Amazons, Micronesia, Borneo, etc., etc. Of course, this applies with equal force to people living in sub-urban areas, who keep on moving out as cities expand. But, those who can't afford to move and remain, always experience not only new difficulties but also reduction in their quality of life. So, I think it would be wise to include at least a conscious benignity towards the well-being of our environment as one component of the general framework within which one endeavours to achieve any SDG's. This is important, because 'sustainable' is not specific enough. For instance, it is said that 'wind power' is sustainable, but nobody can scientifically predict the effects of large-scale 'wind harnessing' on local rain fall or temperature, for instance.  These could be disastrous for local agriculture and general health. My next observation may seem trivial, but I like to arrange the proposed actions in their logical sequence with reference to their causal connexion. Point 1 is the prime mover of our actions, but in what direction depends on our values. Both our values and how to perform those action with sufficient skill is acquired by learning. So, I would have been happy to see values (including ethics) and education higher up the list. Now a word or two about specific points. I think point 4 should be extended to include the politicians and other decision-makers currently in power, otherwise it might not be possible to design and carry out the appropriate measures indicated for the purpose. While agreeing with the tenor of point 7, I am not so sanguine about an approach heavily dependent of the notion of 'rights'. My reason is simple, they are of no significance, unless they can be enforced reasonably well.  This inevitably requires a fairly effective (at a minimum) legal apparatus. We all know such an apparatus  requires skilled personnel, is expensive and rather slow. Money and such personnel are not so easy to come by where they are most needed.  Perhaps, inculcation of secular ethical standards might prove a better option, which the educational institutions may perform. As for point 8, I wish the term 'evolution' was preferred to 'revolution'. I am glad however, that other jargon by T. Kuhn does not appear. While changing their structure and purpose, institutions can often retain some features that facilitate their operation, and it will be unnecessary to get rid of them as 'revolutions' claim they ought.  I think point 9 would become more comprehensive by a reference to its appropriateness, which will be ascertained with reference to its consequences to human well-being in general. For instance, I have already mentioned the actual  effect of automation on employment. Thank you. Lal Manavado.

Dosse SOSSOUGA • Executive Director at UN SDGs NGO Major Group d'or Africa: Amis des Étrangers au Togo: ADET from Togo

Les ODD englobent le développement social, le développement économique et le développement environnemental, donc nul ne peut prétendre poursuivre ces objectifs sans ce développement holistique.

Dosse SOSSOUGA • Executive Director at UN SDGs NGO Major Group d'or Africa: Amis des Étrangers au Togo: ADET from Togo

Thank you very much.

Adriaan Kamp- Founder Energy For One World (not verified)

Thank you so much- for this wonderful summary, of an apparent - rich conversation, dialogue and collaboration, of the community of people interested and engaged.

TeamWorks!

Good Luck,

and most happy to partake and be of service in any or all of the moving actions forwards, 

AK

Dr.Priya Prabhakar • Policy Reformation and Right to Development at Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) from India

CHANGE IN MENTALITY:

“Institutions and structures guide the behaviour and practice of individuals working within them, people build, develop, modify and adapt institutions and structures.” 

Only to enable this compatibility between the functioning and structures, vision; purpose and constitution (that which encompasses the vision and purpose aimed) were framed and adopted. Every institutions constitutes 100’s and 1000’s of individuals in it, whose skill; interest; depth of knowledge; patterns of perspectives;  perception; contributions differs and to unify this heterogeneitc nature of individual, towards a common core, - purpose; vision and fundamentals were included as its foundation. 

For Developmental agenda; MDG’s and Post 2015 development agenda, it is UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS that would unite the entire functioning of the world towards this goal, without ironing or impairing its heterogenetic quality.

UDHR is not a privilege or grant vested to human beings for their autonomy but it is a guide or a regulative tool to progressively orient the functioning of human beings in such a way that they include their environment and corresponding factors of the world in their living and functioning that would enable them to satisfy their responsibility as an individual,  member of a family,  and as a member of local; regional; national and global society based on their interest and skills. Human rights is not about - fight; get and dominate, human rights is about - get facilitated, re-facilitate and develop. 

ADAPTIVE CAPACITY:

“Opportunity to flexibility, resilience”

Resilience - bringing back to shape. The shape of any institution is its purpose, the reason for which it was instituted. Adaptation is not about putting the advancements and changes into the institution that makes its component stand isolated like islands, adaptation is about moulding the advancement to integrate it perfectly into the functioning that would ease the efforts and multiply the benefits for both the facilitator (individuals within the institution) and beneficiaries (individuals outside the institution). What happens when we fail to integrate the advancements into the functioning? The advancement will look foreign to the user, the mindset of the facilitators will decide the adaption to be idealistic and in reality, what was followed will be followed leaving the purpose, unserved. Therefore, adaptive capacity doesn’t mean about including the advancements, it is about “adapting” -  tailoring the change into the functioning that would look natural and native to the one practicing. 

REFORMED EDUCATION AND TRAINING: Educational institution that prepares individuals to get themselves set as an contributing and responsible constituents of the world must be rich in the principles of human rights. Prior to the knowledge of science and numbers, it must transfer them with the fundamentals that they will live and function with rest of their life. Education is definitely not the theories of science and numbers. It is about the enlightenment of life, the knowledge needed to live life with humanity.  Education - educere, which means to bring out the inborn skills and inheritance of an individual to contribute for the development of self, nation and the world. Education is social, Science and numbers are literarcy, they just enable an individual to speak and write. Social knowledge that teaches individual how to mould their skills and interest into a contributing factor is education. Again, social knowledge that we talk about here is not the Social “SCIENCES” of Karl Marx Theory and theories of other sociologists. By social knowledge, it means, social values that is needed to orient one’s life values. Therefore, it is important for educational institutions to spread and promote the principles of Human Rights as scripted through Universal Declaration of Human Rights. By all means, UDHR is universal and complete that can transform the world into a place of progressive environment. When individuals are introduced to human rights principles and when they are enabled to grow in an environment that is rich in principles of human rights, they will eventually get aligned or set with the principles in their times of facilitation. 

COLLABORATIVE INSTITUTIONS will get aligned to the purpose automatically when the common core of functioning is set to the universal fundamentals. When the purpose of functioning is unified integrating the design, facilitation and contribution will be automatic.

REFORMING THE UN INSTITUTIONS: The meaning of VETO power is misunderstood. VETO is again not Autonomy of rule, it is about the autonomy to regulate that is bound to the fundamentals of UN. VETO status is given to developed countries, that would share its experience in regulating and orienting the functioning and approaches of the developing and developed countries. The facility to VETO a resolution was given to the developed countries ( United States, United Kingdom, China, France and Russia) because, they have the seen the journey towards development and have experienced the path, hence if a resolution taken for the developing and under-developed countries is toward a deviation or complication, with the experience of the developed countries, they can VETO the resolution to prevent the developing or the Under-developed country from repeating the mistakes they did in their journey. 

 “removal of veto power from the security Council as well as “block votes” from the decision making process of the UN inter-governmental processes to allow for democratic decision making and equality of voice.” 

Democracy as said in an earlier post is not about the right to vote but about the opportunity to participate. How could the present voting system be regulated for the purpose and to democratic values? The decision making should not be just on votes that says yes or no, it should be for the votes that says why it is yes or why it is no. This will fix the decision making purposeful. When the voting process, just accept the decision plainly as “Yes” or “No”, the reason behind it could be anything, but when the decision of yes or no is voted with the reason behind, we could orient and align the decision for the purpose. Along with the vote of the members, participation of the public can also be appreciated and included in the process to further liberate the quality of democracy in its functioning and facilitation. 

 “UN system will need to adopt working approaches and methodologies that enable it to tap capabilities outside its own institutions for implementing the SDGs”

It is important that all social activities are routed through the government or United Nations. It is really unfortunate to see, defenders of human rights (individuals who creates awareness on human rights) to be descended with the thought and approach of activism being a mode of practise. Activism imposes reformation and regulation onto an individual. When an individual is bluntly imposed with an opportunity of privilege or concession in the name of right, they don’t understand the reason and purpose behind it. Every opportunities enabled through Universal Declaration of human rights have a value and responsibility behind it, without understanding this essence behind, the right facilitated will not serve its purpose. When the opportunity to rights are got in the name of privilege and concession, the use of opportunities because its value is not transferred or cognised to the beneficiaries. 

And when this opportunity to right is to reconcile a deprivation, it creates or intensifies the feel of aversion or aggression between the concerned individuals. It will bring in lots of conflicts and misunderstandings between the individuals. Reformations or change must be with conviction, it must enable individual to envision its prospects. When a suggestion is given along with an opportunity to practise it, change will be definite and progressive. That is why it is best for the public, NGO or any private organization, agency, institution or association to share or practise their social activities through the government or United Nations, because both the opportunity and facilitation can be clubbed that will enable individuals to take up the reformation suggested with full conviction. 

IMPLEMENTATION OF SDGs doesn’t really needs revolution, but it just needs to be aligned and oriented with the principles of universal declaration of human rights. 

“In other words, success in achieving SDGs will need reforms as the world has not yet seen. They should not be risk aversive but risk taking and risk sharing to guide people towards unchartered ways that could produce hither to un achieved results.”  

All institutions, structures and individuals should get oriented towards the purpose and fundamentals of all activity they approach for the world to successfully accomplish the goals in the development agenda. Blind risk will always lead to unintended results. Risk or chance taken must be strong inline with fundamentals that is roped to be the guiding factor. The world in the present is the risk taken by unchartered ways. The facilities and opportunities enabled by the charter is entirely different from the facilities and opportunities facilitated and practised. New methodologies or approaches taken inline with the chartered fundamentals will never put the involved in danger. It is essential that atleast by now, the world should reform its functioning and approach inline with the fundamentals adopted through UDHR and the constitution of the respective nation. It is sure to produce and take the world towards unaccomplished and unimagined result progressively.

 Lastly, what seems to come out of this lengthy and interesting discussion thread is that while institutional reforms matter, people matter most and that change and adaptation must not only focus on institutions and structures but on the people, their values and norms, shifting interests as well as ideological underpinnings because it is by them and through them that institutions ultimately achieve what they are intended to achieve. 

Blind shift, transformations will create unresting environment because ideologies are descended with lots of links and emotions. Most individual, consider their ideologies , belief and interest as their identity which makes it all the more delicate to deal with. Therefore, than directly reforming the ideologies and interest, it is best to set them inline with the fundamentals that could orient and convince them with progressive principles of humanity. Through progressive facilitation and opportunity, when individuals realises that all their personal ideologies, belief and interest are “personal” - “Individual specific”, that has no place in the common functioning, facilitation or forum, they will regulate themselves, accordingly. 

Therefore, it is imporant to put the fundamentals in front and at the centre of the world that could progressively unify and orient the diversified functioning of the world towards the unified goals and vision of universal well-being and development

Adriaan Kamp- Founder Energy For One World (not verified)

Dear John, and Team ( Patrick Paul, et. al)

Will we- the participants, ie. those who have contributed to TeamWorks receive a copy of your report and findings of this most interesting conversation on what it takes to get us from MDG to SDG?

 

I am very interested to read your papers and findings,

adn even more interested to help to make it happen!

 

Thanking you in advance!

H. Gerhart (not verified)

(I’m coming late to the conversation and so I apologize if any of this post repeats points already raised.)  In reading back over the latest summary of the discussion, I was encouraged to see references to engaging the people in adaptation strategies: “while institutional reforms matter, people matter most” (summary point #10).  Indeed, by engaging people in the process, the SDG effort assures that changes and policies developed are responsive to community values and norms and, therefore, more likely to cultivate the sort of local support that is essential to sustainable programming in general.  Along these lines, I hope the point has also been raised that the SDG effort must be grounded in a community-building mission, to include citizen engagement – especially with respect to setting goals and determining aspects of sustainable development that are meaningful/valuable to the communities affected.  Such engagement will require education around the means, mechanisms and opportunities for public participation.  An engaged citizenry can also contribute oversight functions that lend legitimacy to the values described under summary point #7, in particular, norms related to transparency and accountability of institutions charged with implementation. 

With regard to summary point #3, I’d like to echo the need for new thinking around the redistribution of resources.  Clearly, the profit-driven market system is incompatible with the “gift economy” that the sharing of resources implies.  (The U.S. serves as a cautionary model in this respect, as corporations have convinced policymakers to pursue growth/profit policies and citizens have found disempowerment has replaced democracy.)  Innovative thinking in this area should consider alternative measures of well-being (e.g., GPI vs. GDP) and include the contributions of non-monetized transactions and the “underground” economy, as well as the true costs of economic growth in formulating new, socially just ways of sharing access to resources, goods and services.

Lal Manavado • Senior Advisor at undefined from Norway

Your second point: Since these consultations began 2 years ago, I have tried to emphasise your second point with an analogous change in our thought i science, viz., the replacement of Geocentric notion of the universe by the Copernican one. As you know, this was awfully hard, and quite a few were burned at the stake for trying. It's the same with our current notion of economy. It is primitive in spite of its frills,  because it inevitably leads to an increase in the number of the deprived, and what is worse, makes serious inroads into the well-being of our environment, on whose well-being our very existence depends. Our error isquite simple, viz., valuing a tool for its own sake and forgetting what the wretched thing is for! I think it is quite easy to understand that (leaving aside the prestige its possession is supposed to give one), material wealth is valued simply because it enables one to meet a set of universal, or as I call them, fundamental needs. These include nutrition, education and security in their widest sense, etc., and are six in number. We want to satisfy those six needs, because we want to continue living in a way we believe to be satisfying. We believe our lives are satisfying when we experience a sense of well-being. Other things being equal, how we satisfy those six needs is governed by the norms of our culture. What we like to eat, what music we enjoy,  etc., are examples of this. So, it would be reasonable to propose that development ought to be concerned with enabling the individual to lead a life of well-being  within the framework of one's chosen culture in a way that does not harm the others and our common habitat. Economy which generates wealth is just  a tool, and it is important only as such. An expensive bread knife is worthless if its possessor  has no way to get a loaf of bread. This is the conceptual change we need to make, if we wish the coming generations to be in a position to live in a manner that befit a cultured species. Lal Manavado. From: notification@unteamworks.org [mailto:notification@unteamworks.org]Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2015 3:36 AMTo: Lal ManavadoSubject: [World We Want 2015] Graduate Student from United States commented on the Discussion "Required adaptation by institutions, structures and individuals"

Dosse SOSSOUGA • Executive Director at UN SDGs NGO Major Group d'or Africa: Amis des Étrangers au Togo: ADET from Togo

ok

Movimento Nós Podemos Paraná (not verified)

Estimados colegas: 

Nos gustaría compartir experiencia que ha sido bastante exitosa en Brasil para la discusión de los Objetivos de Desarrollo del Milenio y que podrá ser interesante considerar cuando pensamos en las adaptaciones de las instituciones para promover la transición hacia la agenda post-2015. 

Muchos colegas manifestaron la importancia de considerar los individuos en todo ese proceso. En este sentido, las instituciones micro, es decir, las que tienen una actuación en las instancias locales son esenciales para garantizar el éxito de todo ese proceso. Por eso, dar voz, legitimidad y responsabilidad a las instancias locales es fundamental. Sugerimos analizar la creación de grupos locales que promuevan el debate y la reflexión sobre los ODS y animar a que eses grupos sean los promotores y animadores de acciones y proyectos sobre los ODS. 

Un cordial saludo,

Movimento Nós Podemos Paraná

Mellany Moreira (not verified)

Dear  Mr. Kauzya, 

Thank you very much for your 2nd summary. 

After reading a lot of comments from our colleagues and the summary provided, I would like to add some comments on the 8th topic: "The implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals will require not just institutional reforms but something akin to institutional revolution in all sectors:  

“Primary Revolutions – Agriculture Revolution, Government Revolution, Enterprise Revolution, Data Revolution, Applied Research Revolution, Attitudinal and Behavioural Change Revolution and other Primary Revolutions as well as Nutrition Security Revolution, Food Security Revolution, Health Revolution, Education Revolution, Financial Inclusion Revolution as other Secondary Revolutions. In other words, success in achieving SDGs will need reforms as the world has not yet seen. They should not be risk aversive but risk taking and risk sharing to guide people towards unchartered ways that could produce hither to un achieved results.”

It is clear that we need a group of revolution to be done to finally success in achieving SDGs. We also know that in different part of the globe, there are different necessities and different levels of revolution. It is not possible to implement the same level of revolution all over the world. However, it is possible to start with these revolutions step by step until  achieve a basic level that give dignity and development for people. 

From the 8th topic, I would like to highlight the “Enterprise Revolution, Data Revolution” and include access to internet. I think these three themes are incredible related to development, access to information and dignity. On one hand, the enterprise revolution is already happening, but we know that few have access to all this revolutionary world (enterprise + technology + intellectual property + data protection). On the other hand, people who have access to this technology progress do not have the right information about how powerful is all information that people (you, me, all of us) provide online. Data revolution is already happening, Big Data is a top topic on entrepreneurial world. My main point here is to tell all of us that people are not alert for how to use their data online and what are the consequences of easy disposal of their datas. 

Finally to conclude my thoughts, provide an access to internet + an education of data protection are  also essential for a real change and adaptation in institutions at national, regional and global levels to facilitate a smooth transaction to a post-2015 era. These corresponding changes are also responsibility of all sectors in the society - governments + civil society + entrepreneurs + international community should work together to implement these access together with education of data protection. 

Thank you very much for your attention, 

Andrea Young (not verified)

Dear Colleagues,

I thought better and read again some documents recommended by you. I am working with urban areas and I have seen a lot of injustice around, even in wealthier countries where supposedly there is no inequality. So, as I am an architect and urban planner, I thought it would be better to send a contribution in my area of expertise. It's just an idea; despite differences cities suffer similar problems.

In my opinion:

There are two challenges for the establishment of urban health conditions (or welfare conditions), particularly in urban areas (i.e. towns, cities, megacities). The first refers to the legal and human rights instruments, which contains the government's action principles, in which the city should be given with equal rights, democratic support and judicial impartiality.

The second challenge concerns the absence, or in other words, the necessity of urban policy aimed at ensuring integrated planning, which could express the prevention of environmental disasters through effective actions. It means that the development of public policies is still incipient; we need more specific laws and governance systems for municipal scales and urban networks.

The cities, when considered as political objects, are treated as if they were designed symmetrically, regardless of its history, the obvious differences in size, complexity and function performed in the urban network. On the other hand, the urban areas could only achieve this goal through interconnected policies that exceed the multi sectorial conception of public action; it is necessary to overcome the institutional barriers.

In general, the public provision of housing has not been articulated, with the integration of urban mobility, infrastructure and the provision of public services.

This translates in practice, in the urgency of inclusion of well-being perspective in our towns, and global cities, through the population's right and responsibilities of all citizens (society and the government). Somehow, we can find these ideas and possibly the collective voices of human beings on the planet, since the environmental disasters reveal only welfare promises through the increased comfort by over consumption. Political and economic crisis as well as collective poverty was daily experienced by population in our megacities with gigantic dimensions, where people co-habit spaces subject to the spread of disease and environmental risks.

The main question: How could cities make a difference for the global sustainable development agenda?

INDICATORS – SUGGESTIONS

Areas at Risk - Environmental Disasters

1. Proportion of people living in urban areas at risk (floods, landslides, drought);

2. Proportion of urban (and rural) population affected by disasters;

3. Proportion of deaths by environmental disasters / per year;

4. Proportion of people affected by environmental disasters per year;

5. Proportion of missing persons due to environmental disasters per year;

 

Mobility

6. Proportion of urban population using public transport in commuting - home to work;

7. Proportion of urban population using public transport in commuting - home to school;

8. Home to work travel time up to one hour (12 to 13% of hours worked per day).

9. Home to school travel time up to one hour (25% of the time at school);

10. Proportion of people affected by extreme weather events in commuting - from home to work;

11. Proportion of students affected by extreme weather events in commuting - from home to school;

12. Proportion of people who died in commuting from home to work due to environmental disasters;

13. Proportion of students who died in the commuting  - from home to school - due to environmental disasters;

Housing conditions and collective services

14. Household density - ratio of the number of people per house by the number of rooms;

15. Proportion of households located in city dumps?

16. Proportion of households in areas without infrastructure and without urban drainage system?

17. Proportion of households without network and drinking water supply?

18. Proportion of households without sewage system?

19. Proportion of household with effluents discharged directly into rivers?

20. Proportion of households without garbage collection?

21. Proportion of people without support from municipal government (schools, safety, health centers, hospitals, civil defense);

Education

22. Proportion of people who received guidance and training on environmental disasters;

23. Proportion of people who do not know their legal rights, mainly in situations of disasters;

24. Proportion of people who know or have received guidance on environmental prevention;

25. Proportion of people who know about Civil Defense work´s and  its responsibilities;

26. Proportion of people who spread their knowledge to other citizens;

27. Number of inhabitants at risk that were trained by civil defense of their city;

28. Proportion of people engaged in guidance and prevention programs;

29. Proportion per citizens, or total number of environmental projects (for sustainable development) - incubators within universities;

Project funding

30. Proportion of environmental projects per sector (power supply, water supply, sanitation, alternative fuels, transport, education, etc.) financed by the government?

31. Proportion of environmental projects per sector or operation (power supply, water supply, sanitation, alternative fuels, transport, education, etc.) financed by the private initiatives (banks; entrepreneurs)?

32. Proportion of environmental projects financed per sector in a kind of public-private partnerships;

Industry

33. Proportion of industrial plants in areas at risk?

34. Proportion of industrial plants devastated by environmental disasters?

35. Proportion of workers and employees who have suffered accidents caused by environmental disasters?

36. Proportion of death caused by environmental disasters?

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, there is no single authority, public or private sector, responsible for “Urban Welfare”, provided with technical, institutional and political capacity to draw appropriate policy directions for most of nations, which has long since become urban societies.

Everyone is responsible. But this is not enough, it is necessary that our society decide in what perspective the urban areas and the natural environment should be considered: through the exclusive logic of predatory market at all costs; or the logic of citizenship, environmental  conservation and human rights? What price are we really willing to pay? How soon? Every citizen of this planet should answer this question. People are not realizing the urgency, because they have not been sufficiently included in the process.

17/03/2015------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Allison (not verified)

1: Change of mentality on the part of individuals, populations, leaders in public sector institutions, private sector institutions and civil society, community, local national, regional and global levels. Changing mentalities is critical in adaptation and change of institutions and structures because as noted in the previous summary while institutions and structures guide the behaviour and practice of individuals working within them, people build, develop, modify and adapt institutions and structures. Therefore it will take a significant shift in mentality to effectively drive the achievement of SDGs.

On the topic of changing the mentality of communities, I believe that it is vital to shift our consumer culture to a sustainable culture.  Private and public sector changes are necessary to implement this but consumers and constituents can be the driving force behind these changes.  In other words, at the root of the issue, in my opinion, is influencing and educating the individual.  Media plays a large role in reaching people.  Women tend to be the shoppers in the majority cultures and are dedicated to the wellbeing of their children.  Educating and influencing this sector with facts about the mental and physical health benefits of engaging in natural places and presenting media images of the ideal family living in eco-villages, making sustainable choices, supporting natural places, and so forth could have an important impact on those living in urban or suburban areas.  As globalization inevitably spreads and is often driven by wealthy nations, these cultural ideals may disperse as well.

Adriaan Kamp- Founder Energy For One World (not verified)

Dear Alison,

 

I like this very much. Most helpful!

 

AK

John-Mary Kauzya • Chief of the Public Administration Capacity Branch in the Division for Public Administration and Development Management, UNDESA at UNDESA from United States Moderator

Dear participants, 

I would like to thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts and expertise in the thematic window on "Required adaptation by institutions, structures and individuals," as part of the 2015 ECOSOC Theme “Managing the transition from the Millennium Development Goals to the sustainable development goals: What it will take”

I was impressed by the high quality and substance of the contributions. It was particularly enlightening for me to follow the discussion that sought to address questions about institutional requirements, but which also developed into an interesting discourse on people, values, norms, markets, technology, philosophy and human rights. 

Over the one month period, the e-discussion generated a significant amount of interest and substantive input.  For this thematic window, there were 148 contributions. Overall, for all four thematic windows, there were over 750 contributions from over 170 countries. The e-discussion also received 19,600 likes on the ECOSOC Facebook account. 

The relevant contributions will be channelled into various parts of ECOSOC, particularly through the report of the Secretary-General on the ECOSOC theme, which will be the focus of the Council during its High-level Segment in July. 

Thank you again for making this discussion a success. 

Best regards, 

 John-Mary Kauzya (moderator) 

Chief, Public Administration Capacity Branch

Division for Public Administration and Development Management 

United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs