Gareth Owens’ Advice for Humanitarian Aid Work

On Tuesday 21st March, the Welsh Centre for International Affairs and Hub Cymru Africa hosted an evening with Gareth Owens, Humanitarian Director at Save the Children. We have created a short summary of Gareth’s advice for pursuing a career in humanitarian aid that we hope you will find useful.

With Gareth’s educational background in civil engineering, he made clear that you don’t need to physically train in humanitarian work, rather you can get involved from any career angle.

Working in humanitarian aid is not glamorous and it involves dealing with a lot of raw emotions and different people. It is not for everyone but is best viewed as a selfish job. You will be away from home for months at a time, often in very dangerous places so must understand the worries your family back home will have.

Passion and persistence are key! The more passionate about something you are the greater chance you have of seeing it through and making change happen.

Gareth Owens 21st March

Continually possessing a good character where you don’t let things get personal is important.
If you’re a difficult person this is not the job for you, you must be humble and energetic as well as being able to embrace different cultures and share compassion for the people whom you are helping.

Gender does play different roles when working in humanitarian aid, sometimes you will work in countries that are uncomfortable for women and at other times being a woman can be an advantage.

Speaking additional languages is always a bonus, especially French and Arabic as these are most widely spoken in developing countries.

Try to volunteer in your home country if you are starting out; there are many refugees now here in Britain and charities are always looking for help.

Also, volunteer projects abroad are good. The more you can get on your CV from little projects like these, the better chance you have at making contacts and stumbling onto your big break.
You may find it takes several years working on little projects here and there before you manage to go abroad and help on the big disasters.

If you are interesting in volunteering with the WCIA, see our website for further details about how you can get involved   http://www.wcia.org.uk/volunteer.html

Advertisements

Annual Law Lecture: How global trading rules are contributing to Africa’s deindustrialization and what we can do about it

By Georgia Marks

On the 21st November 2016, the WCIA, in partnership with Centre for Law and Society/ Law and Global Justice Programme, Cardiff University, held the fifth annual law lecture by Professor James Thuo Gathii at the Temple of Peace in Cardiff. John Harrington, the chairman of the Board of Justice for the WCIA, chaired the event. He introduced the speaker and the discussant, Celine Tan. Overall, the event was insightful and gave the audience a range of solutions to think about in terms of global trade.

Professor Gathii began by defining deindustrialization as the movement of workers from industry and then went on to give a brief context. He stated that Africa’s economy has been growing, but this has brought deindustrialization. In the 1970s, the governments had policies focusing on agriculture, but wanted to be like the West so produced industrialised economies, with structural adjustment programmes set up to reduce the role of the state in the economy. In 1990, the World Bank and the IMF drove for reform which the speaker says had a debilitating effect on industries. For example, in Senegal, the manufacturing and processing of sugar decreased in the past 20 years.

Next, Gathii highlighted the problems behind deindustrialization. He said that bad economic governments contributed. Many governments are corrupt, as well as the fact that the African elite have been able to source products, that can be made in Africa, outside of the continent at the expense of local producers. He then went on to use the supply of palm oil to reinforce his point. He then went on to talk about the phenomenon of consumption cities where workers are moving from manufacturing as there is less work. This is exacerbated by the lack of sustainable effort to create work in industry, and thus the problem grows. This seems to be a valid problem in these countries which in turn create a variety of different problems, particularly to local businesses.

The speaker continued by proposing solutions which he referred to as ‘big ideas.’ Firstly, he suggested making technology transfers a key component of the trade system, for example with Japan and China. Emphasis was placed on Africa’s need to go for innovation seeking investments and utilise other countries’ need for resources. He also gave importance to the fact that the availability of these contracts allows the transfer of knowledge between countries. I think that this is important as it allows for African countries to develop which will hopefully enhance their position within trade. Gathii stated that there is a lot of potential in this idea as exemplified in South Korea doing business with Britain over the manufacturing of rail cars. Countries can gain leverage in order to get what they want instead of just selling off resources. In his belief, African countries have the capacity to do this. This idea is a good one as it encourages African countries to be more assertive in trade which appeared to be one of the main themes in the talk, but it is also interactive for Western countries as they will participate in this trade.

The next proposed solution was improved regional trade among African countries. This is perhaps one of the strongest solutions as it promotes self-sufficiency in Africa. Gathii expressed that there is currently an unequal system in international trade as the ways trading rules are interpreted are consistent with bias because big countries will make sure that their view prevails. This solution is within Africa itself, so does not address part of the talk which askes what we can do about it, but despite this, it is still a strong solution. The speaker gave the shocking statistic that inter-African trade is only 9% of their overall trade, with Africa importing $35 billion worth of food each year. What is worse, according to Gathii, is that it is the sort of food that Africa grows! He went on to say that famines in African countries were because of no trade, not because of lack of food. This stresses the importance of inter-African trade. He stated that commitments to reduce the trade barriers are all there. If there have been things put in place for this solution then there is no reason why it should not be successful. A member of the audience from Cardiff University asked how we could focus on south-south cooperation to reduce dependence on the western world. In response, Gathii expressed that southern countries were doing a bad job of trading with themselves. In order to improve this we could make evident these blind spots as there is a possibility to build a vibrant market in rural Africa with the right policies. How we could make them see the blind spots was not made clear, however the speaker is right in the fact that good policy making will help to boost trade.

Third, Gathii suggests productivity enhancing initiatives, which could be done without the other two proposals. He goes on to recommend basic processing of natural produce and simple but critical farming technology. All of this centres on product development, but also ensures that the changes are realistic and work for regionalists. Whilst this proposal is the simplest of all the solutions, it is a positive that it can work independently of the others given, and may also be the most realistic recommendation.

Overall, the proposals made by Professor Gathii were good as they would be effective if carried out properly. However, the emphasis is not on what the West can do about it. Yet, I do not think that is a bad thing, as a lot of discussions have the tendency to be too focussed on the West, which can sometimes mean that the issue at hand can get forgotten. So I think the fact that the main subjects are the African countries strengthens the proposals given by the speaker, but also gives a more innovative perspective to these solutions.

The discussant, Celine Tan, then analysed the proposals made by Professor Gathii, stating that they were excellent. This I totally agree with. She took on an Asian perspective as a child of Malaysian industrialisation. She spoke of the lack of regulation which made industrialisation problematic in Malaysia, however despite this it is undeniable that industrialisation was the driver in the country’s economic growth. The discussant claimed that in Africa, external factors are constraining the continent’s industrial development, and expressed that Gathii was too generous to the external sources. The main question surrounding Tan’s talk was how much of Gathii’s proposals does he think is achievable? Particularly in terms of current constraints. She went on to say that external factors were not barriers to other countries such as Malaysia, particularly that they did not have pressures from external places to get funds. Malaysia’s transition from agriculture to industry was gradual because they had the policy space to do so. However, according to Tan, African countries have lost their autonomy of the constraints, whereas Malaysia maintains their scope for determining what to do with their economy. I think this highlights one of the key constraints on Africa which is unique to them, and emphasizes that as a continent they need to try and address these limits. Also, bringing in a different perspective on industrialisation made for a really effective comparison, so that the audience could see the realistic limits on African countries.

Tan highlights three key issues that Gathii’s proposals may encounter. Firstly, there is the issue of Africa’s dependence on external finance, as some of the speakers’ proposals were predicated on public finance. But where is this finance going to come from? I think that this is a really crucial question to ask, as how can we see any of these solutions put into place if there is nothing to fund them. Secondly, there is a question of international regulation as it hinders the finance available. She stated that multi-national firms threaten countries’ revenue. This is the downside to processes with foreign investors as how can we ensure that African countries keep onto the revenue. Again, I think that this is a point worth addressing as there is a risk of exploitation here. In the Q&A session after the talks, a representative from Fair Trade Wales asked what the solutions can be provided to support farmers and ensure that they have a choice a choice on a global scale. Gathii responded by saying that we shouldn’t leave things the way they are if they are corrupt. Investment programmes are the solution. The speaker acknowledged the limits as inevitable, but everyone says that this is the right thing to do. On basic necessities trade could be improved, but the time scales need to be more visible. There are interesting policies already existing. He went on to express that if trade does not benefit the people then there is no point. Western ideas do not truly know about African issues, so aid is not going to help as much as trade. I think this makes a good point in that instead of the West attempting to help, we should be taking a step back and let Africa retain control of their own policies so that they have more influence in trade as Africa knows what will benefit them the most.

Lastly, Tan emphasised the constraints of investment rules in global trade. These trade rules mean that countries like the UK generate value from raw materials. Additionally, the discussant also highlighted the constraints that treaties bring to African countries, such limits are not faced by countries in south-east Asia. She continued by saying that the rules are so stacked against African countries, it is doubtful as to whether the proposals given by Gathii will work. This is point is very valid as it shows the problems as exclusive to African countries, which only emphasizes the problems of trade in these countries. It is also an important aspect to consider when asking whether the proposals would realistically work.

Ms Tan concluded by saying that a more holistic outlook was needed. Overall, her rebuttals to Professor Gathii’s proposals were all persuasive and acted for a good academic discussion. These proposals appear to be an ideal, but more thought needs to go into how these could be developed in practice, linking to the context of the current situation in African countries.

Gathii then summarised his stance, addressing the points made by Tan. In terms of the last point, he stated that the discussant was right in that there were huge barriers imposed by the West that prevent many of his proposals. He claimed that this problem was escalated by the fact that African countries fail to negotiate and end up settling with deals that do not benefit them. This is reinforced by the point that the Southern African Customs Union is the only region to reject a template for trade. He continued by stating that the systems often favour developed countries and that he wishes that African leaders were more proactive in deciding not to participate in trade with challenging affluent countries. In the Q&A session, a practicing lawyer in the audience questioned the retaliation system in terms of compensation. Gathii responded with the statement that the treaties are a reflection of interests of the people who wrote them which is unfair as it is favour of developed countries. Developing countries as a collective have the opportunity to take trade into a different direction. This, again focuses on what Africa can do rather than how the West can contribute. Yet the point made that African countries should take power into their own hands is still a strong one and promotes self-sufficiency.

John Harrington concluded with the idea of ‘aid vs trade.’ The current Secretary of State suggested that we should increase aid to promote trade, but this is only to improve British trade. From a Welsh context, Wales is to act in a globally responsible manner. This is a strong conclusion as to be responsible and aware of how are actions affect other countries in terms of global trade is significant in order to ensure that we do not hinder Africa’s development by rigid rules and bias policies. So, a sense of being conscious about the problems of non-western countries is one of the most important things that we can do in order to improve industry in Africa.

Aid is a moral obligation

By David Hooson 

With globalism and the UK’s place in the world having become extremely hot topics in the wake of the EU referendum, it is of little surprise that debate and media coverage of international development and foreign aid have skyrocketed. The new Prime Minister’s decision to install a leading Brexiteer, Priti Patel, as International Development Secretary, has only served to push the issue up the agenda and fan the flames of controversy.

Ms. Patel has a track record of being outspoken on the area of government policy she now leads, at one point having called for the Department for International Development to be abolished and its work integrated into the Department for Trade and Industry. That theme continued with her recent comments about ‘wasteful’ and ‘superficial’ aid projects, as well as suggesting foreign aid could be used to help negotiate future international trade deals when the UK leaves the EU.

The use of the UK’s aid budget should be based on nothing more than our moral obligation to help those in need around the world. To attach political strings to aid money or to use it as an economic bargaining tool contravenes the point of its existence.

RAF C17 Lands in Nepal with Vital UK Aid

Picture: Sgt Neil Bryden/ RAF

The UN goal of dedicating 0.7% of gross national income to foreign aid was first suggested in 1969, and a succession of British politicians have pledged their commitment to meeting that target, with Ms. Patel the latest to do so. The principle of this goal is for developed countries to work together to tackle poverty around the world and to respond adequately to humanitarian crises – not to further their own economic objectives. The 0.7% pledge is a rare opportunity for a government to be selflessly outward-looking, and it should be relished as such.

Furthermore, the fate of those bearing the brunt of social or economic injustice should not be determined by the ability or whims of politicians and businesspeople, whose actions they have little or no influence upon. Indeed, it may be the failings of those politicians and businesspeople that have led to such injustice. The availability of aid should always be determined by need, not by backroom deals and political expediency.

The direction Ms. Patel proposes for international development policy is part of a worrying wider trend that could see the UK turn its back on our global moral obligations. We in Wales should be pushing against this trend by remaining inclusive and outward-looking, as well as campaigning and raising awareness on global issues like international development.

The future of international development?

By Rosa Brown

The International Development Secretary Priti Patel is not one to shy away from controversy. However, last month Patel appears to have outdone herself as she revealed her desire to use the UK’s aid budget for post-Brexit trade deals. In an interview with the BBC, Patel asserted that “We have to make sure that our aid works in our national interest and also that it works for our taxpayers – much more openness, much more transparency and much more accountability.” priti_patel_20161

Patel’s vision for the Department for International Development (DfID) would be concerning had it belonged to any public official. But coming from the current International Development Secretary, it sounds ill-conceived at best. To insert the taxpayer at the heart of DfID’s objectives completely neglects the countries, communities and individuals reliant on UK funding. These are the people Patel should be talking about, many of whom have been empowered by the inter-governmental organisations supported by the aid budget.

The UK’s position on the world’s stage is recognised by Patel but used to justify her take on aid, “we have a strong footprint overseas and it is right that we use that footprint in the national interest”.

Whether the UK will have such a ‘strong footprint overseas’ if Patel gets her way is questionable to say the least. Patel’s crackdown on inefficient use of public money has also inspired the MP to claim that her department should no longer support the UN’s cultural body, UNESCO. This recent move earnt the MP a ‘major rap on the knuckles’ from No 10, according to a senior government official who spoke to The Sun newspaper last week.

Whilst some have wondered whether Patel’s sole objective is to make the UK appear greedy and cruel, I think she is genuinely convinced that free trade agreements are the answer to economic prosperity for the UK. But for poor countries, free trade agreements have been found to drive economies into deeper poverty. It has been over twenty years since the Northern American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) was enacted between the United States, Canada and Mexico. Since the agreement, Mexico’s annual per capital growth flat-lined to an average of 1.2 percent, which happens to be one of the lowest rates in the hemisphere. Twenty million Mexicans currently live in ‘food poverty’, with twenty five percent of the population unable to access basic food. This increase in poverty in the country has helped nurture organised crime recruitment and the breakdown of local communities.

Not all of Mexico’s problems can be blamed on NAFTA. But it is possible to trace a direct link between the agreement and the country’s declining economy; as NAFTA was responsible for closing alternative development paths for the economy in its prohibition of protective tariffs. The impact of NAFTA upon Mexico’s economy indicates the dangers caused by the removal of such tariffs, along with the fact that these agreements are rarely ever ‘free’.6624096043_60551c99cb_o

The implications of Patel’s comments on the international aid budget cannot be detached from its post-Brexit context. These comments have come at a time when many political agreements relating to the EU are riddled with uncertainty. Now Patel has used the topic of Brexit trade agreements as a topical soundbite to deliver her stress on ‘value for money’ for the ‘good, hardworking, British taxpayer’. But this is a time when it is more important than ever to look outward rather than in, to work with others, to help others, rather than simply act upon British vested interests.

International development is not currently devolved in Wales. However the National Assembly has asserted its desire to engage in international issues, one shining example of which is the Wales for Africa Programme, launched to work in line with the United Nation’s Millennium Development Goals. Now on the tenth anniversary of the programme, is an opportunity for the nation to celebrate Wales for Africa’s successes, but also look to the future to the work that can be done.

On the subject of the Wales for African Programme, Archbishop Desmond Tutu said that the “people in Wales have big hearts. They belong in a small country but, oh man, they really have the kick of a mule!”. Now is the time to nurture our country’s commitment to international development and continue to empower those in poverty. Not for the sake of ‘strong footprints overseas’ but because it is simply the right thing to do.

Welsh party leaders answer WCIA questions on global issues: Q5 of 6 / Arweinwyr pleidiau Cymru yn ateb cwestiynau WCIA ar faterion byd-eang: C5 o 6

Cymraeg

098d5507-c32f-4b16-ad4a-eed2bd53af57

UKIP were invited to participate but did not submit responses to the questions by the deadline.


Q5. Since 2008 there have been calls for a Wales Peace Institute – endorsed in 2013 by the Assembly’s Petitions Committee – to build on Wales’ peace heritage, contribute to social cohesion, and shape Wales’ role in the world for future generations, as a fitting legacy of the 100 years WW1 commemoration period. Would your party support this initiative, and what resources should the Welsh Government commit to a Peace Institute so that it can play the most effective role possible?

Wales Green Party

A Peace Institute is our party’s policy and will be a manifesto commitment of ours.

Welsh Labour

In line with the committee endorsement, we believe that there is a role for a Wales Peace Institute. However, we believe that this should be an institution separate from Welsh Government and owned by civil society in Wales.

Welsh Conservatives

Wales needs strong, resilient and harmonious communities. A Peace institution can help to create unity across Wales as well as shape Wales’ role in the world. Welsh Conservatives would ensure a Welsh Peace Institute would work with faith communities, third parties and local people to generate social cohesion, promote equality and increase citizenship.

Plaid Cymru

It was Plaid Cymru MEP Jill Evans who first called on the creation of a Wales Peace Institute in 2008. We continue to be committed to the initiative, and have worked with the Flemish Peace Institute, which we believe could serve as a model for the Wales Peace Institute. The Flemish Peace Institute has a strong focus on education, and since its creation it has ensured that tolerance and an insight into the role of conflicts be adopted as targets in secondary schools. We believe a similar role should be developed for the Wales Peace Institute, whereby the institute could help develop the curriculum, provide teaching information, assess current practise and provide practical support in achieving the aims of democracy and peace. The institute should put an emphasis on young people, and should work specifically to combat violence amongst and against young people in urban areas of Wales.

Welsh Liberal Democrats

We would support a Wales Peace Institute initiative, as an innovative and novel way to engage Wales further with the world and to promote peace and social justice. We would work to facilitate the creation of such an Institute. We acknowledge that a great deal of work still needs to be done, regarding the role, function and activities of a Peace Institute – in the next Welsh Government, we would seek to help facilitate these discussions. Potentially, we would explore whether the Assembly Commission would be a suitable source of support and financing.

Join the discussion on Facebook and Twitter.


 


Arweinwyr pleidiau Cymru

Rhoddwyd gwahoddiad i UKIP gymryd rhan ond ni dderbyniwyd ymatebion i’r cwestiynau erbyn y dyddiad cau.


C5. Ers 2008, mae galw wedi bod am Sefydliad Heddwch Cymru – wedi’i gefnogi yn 2013 gan Bwyllgor Deisebau’r Cynulliad – i adeiladu ar dreftadaeth heddwch Cymru, cyfrannu at gydlyniad cymdeithasol, a llunio rôl Cymru yn y byd ar gyfer cenedlaethau’r dyfodol, fel etifeddiaeth priodol o gyfnod coffâd 100 mlynedd ers y Rhyfel Byd Cyntaf. A fyddai eich plaid yn cefnogi’r fenter hon, a pha adnoddau ddylai Llywodraeth Cymru eu rhoi i Sefydliad Heddwch er mwyn iddo allu chwarae’r rôl fwyaf effeithiol posibl?

Plaid Werdd Cymru

Mae Sefydliad Heddwch yn bolisi i’n plaid a bydd yn ymrwymiad maniffesto gennym.

Llafur Cymru

Yn unol â chefnogaeth y pwyllgor, rydym yn credu bod rôl i Sefydliad Heddwch Cymru. Fodd bynnag, credwn y dylai hwn fod yn sefydliad ar wahân i Lywodraeth Cymru ac yn eiddo i gymdeithas sifil yng Nghymru.

Ceidwadwyr Cymreig

Mae Cymru angen cymunedau cryf, gwydn a chytûn. Bydd sefydliad Heddwch yn helpu i greu undod ledled Cymru yn ogystal â siapio rôl Cymru yn y byd. Byddai’r Ceidwadwyr Cymreig yn sicrhau fod Sefydliad Heddwch Cymru yn gweithio gyda chymunedau ffydd, trydydd parti a phobl leol i gynhyrchu cydlyniad cymdeithasol, hyrwyddo cydraddoldeb a chynyddu dinasyddiaeth.

Plaid Cymru

ASE Plaid Cymru Jill Evans oedd y cyntaf i alw am greu Sefydliad Heddwch Cymru yn 2008. Rydym yn parhau i fod wedi ymrwymo i’r fenter, ac wedi gweithio gyda’r Sefydliad Heddwch Ffleminaidd – credwn y gallai hon fod yn fodel ar gyfer Sefydliad Heddwch Cymru. Mae gan y Sefydliad Heddwch Ffleminaidd ffocws cryf ar addysg, ac ers ei greu mae wedi sicrhau bod goddefgarwch a mewnwelediad ar rôl gwrthdaro’n cael eu mabwysiadau fel targedau mewn ysgolion uwchradd. Credwn y dylid datblygu rôl debyg ar gyfer Sefydliad Heddwch Cymru, lle gallai’r sefydliad helpu i ddatblygu’r cwricwlwm, darparu gwybodaeth addysgu, asesu arfer cyfredol a chynnig cefnogaeth ymarferol o ran cyflawni nodau democratiaeth a heddwch. Dylai’r sefydliad roi pwyslais ar bobl ifanc, a dylai weithio i frwydro yn erbyn trais ymysg ac yn erbyn pobl ifanc mewn rhannau trefol o Gymru.

Democratiaid Rhyddfrydol Cymru

Byddem yn cefnogi menter Sefydliad Heddwch Cymru, fel ffordd wreiddiol ac arloesol o ymgysylltu Cymru ymhellach gyda’r byd ac i hyrwyddo heddwch a chyfiawnder cymdeithasol. Byddem yn gweithio i hwyluso creu Sefydliad o’r fath. Rydym yn cydnabod bod llawer iawn o waith i’w wneud o hyd, mewn perthynas â rôl, swyddogaeth a gweithgarwch Sefydliad Heddwch – yn Llywodraeth nesaf Cymru byddem yn ceisio hyrwyddo’r trafodaethau hyn. O bosibl, byddem yn archwilio p’un a fyddai Comisiwn Cynulliad yn ffynhonnell addas o gefnogaeth ac ariannu.

Beth ydych chi’n feddwl o’r safbwyntiau hyn? Ymunwch â’r drafodaeth ar Facebook neu Twitter.


Africa 2050: trends, hopes and fears for the future

25715785682_9309b7853a_o

Event at the Temple of Peace, organised by the Welsh Centre for International Affairs

Roundtable discussion with:
Mark Goldring, Chief Executive of Oxfam GB
Ambreena Manji, Professor of Land Law and Development at Cardiff University
Martha Musonza Holman, Founder of Love Zimbabwe
Chaired by: Fadhili Maghiya, Diaspora & Inclusion Officer, Sub-Saharan Advisory Panel
Report by: Lara Hirschhausen

Will Oxfam still be working in Africa in 2050?

This was the opening question to Oxfam’s Chief Executive Mark Goldring at a roundtable discussion organised by the Welsh Centre for International Affairs on the 24th of February.

Mark Goldring, the current CEO of Oxfam GB, had just returned from a visit to Ethiopia and offered an informative insight into the organisation’s current work on the continent. Referring to the devastating impacts of the current draught in Ethiopia, Mr. Goldring highlighted the necessity to recognise climate change as a major challenge faced by the developing world. He further spoke about conflict, unequal distribution of economic growth, and illicit money as major opponents to just development on the African continent. However, the Oxfam Chief Executive also emphasised that credit needs to be given to the advancements of African leaders. Positive examples of the improved conditions in many African nations do exist, such as the increase of democratically elected governments or the 2005 plea for the abolition of African debt and the increase in school enrolment thereafter.

Ambreena Manji, a lecturer at the Law Department of Cardiff University, commented on her research area of land tenure as a core issue that is holding back a more equitable development agenda in many African states. She elaborated further on the disputes that arise from land allocation being dominated by commercial interested rather than public interest, and how the promotion of a legal framework was at the core of just economic development.

Martha Musonza Holman, founder of the NGO Love Zimbabwe, spoke about current issues in her home country Zimbabwe, from which she had also just returned. She particularly emphasised the need to mobilise civil society both within the states, but also through the diaspora, to tackle corruption in the political leadership. As Zimbabwe is also currently suffering a draught, Martha pointed out the consequences of environmental change on the industrialised world that relies on food imports from African countries. As a teacher by training, she further endorsed the benefit and need for exchange programmes that allow African students to visit the United Kingdom.

The initial roundtable was followed by a lively QA session. The audience, which seemingly was made up of people involved with human rights or development organisations in Africa, raised a number of relevant questions. The event captured well the various issues and diverging opinions how to solve them. What role does China have to play in African development? And what are the risks, what the opportunities of Chinese investment in the continent? How is Climate Change hindering development? How can we ensure adequate mitigation as well as adaption strategies? Is there hope that these strategies can be used to lead to not only more environmentally, but also sociably, sustainable economic growth? Arguably, these are some of the big questions that our world has to address, and for Africa these challenges will be of crucial importance in order to determine its way over the next 50 years. While there is undoubtedly a lot of work left to be done, allowing for a dialogue that focuses on the needs of the citizens will hopefully form the core of it. You can see a detailed transcript of the event here.

Transforming our World: The 2030 United Nations Sustainable Development Agenda

Mark Bulmer, 2015 © Some rights reserved. Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution license http://bit.ly/20s863K

Mark Bulmer, 2015 © Some rights reserved. Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution license http://bit.ly/20s863K

Melanie Hawthorne, WCIA Volunteer

The United Nations Sustainable Development summit in New York on 25 -27 September 2015, agreed to 17 goals and 169 targets that build upon and develop from the eight Millennium Goals (MDG).  Broader in scope, the 15 year strategy of Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) will include all 180 nations (both wealthy and poor) and not just focus on the developing nations as previously targeted by the MDG’s.

On November 4-6th, the DCF Uganda High-level Symposium will provide a first opportunity for a range of stakeholders to discuss development cooperation of the 2030 SD Agenda and explore ways to motivate, support and further shape cooperation as a critical means of implementation.

Initially, attention will be placed on what this means in terms of challenges and opportunities for development cooperation in Africa and the Symposium will focus on two overarching questions:

  1. How will the UN adapt development cooperation policies and interventions for implementing the SDGs?
  2. How will the UN monitor and review the impact of development cooperation in advancing the new sustainable development agenda.

The Symposium aims to bring to the table key issues related to ownership of the new global agenda, and will produce concrete evidence based policy guidance to be able to put into practice at international, regional, national and local level as part of the broader global partnership for sustainable development.

The report will be prepared in preparation for the 2016 meeting of the United Nations High-Level Political Forum (HLPF), the UN platform for the follow-up and review of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and will be the first HLPF after the adoption of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.  The Forum is expected to start effectively delivering on its mandates to provide political leadership, guidance and recommendations on the Sustainable Development Agenda’s implementation and will meet from Monday, 11 July, to Wednesday, 20 July 2016, under the auspices of the UN Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC).

*In order to informally contribute to the reflection, Major Groups and other Stakeholders were invited to provide their views and comments by completing an online questionnaire by 15 November 2015. Responses received will be made available on the website.

The Wales We Want

blog2As nations across the globe get to grips on how they will implement their own bottom up v’s top down policies through the framework guidelines, development cooperation is viewed as the main pillar of the global partnership for achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

Wales has a high profile in sustainable development and is recognised as being one of the first nations to take sustainable development seriously.

The Sustainable Development Charter managed by Cynnal Cymru/Sustain Wales on behalf of the Welsh Government encourages private, public and third sector organisations in Wales to become more resilient by using the principles of sustainable development – of improving decision making based on the economic, social, environmental and cultural well-being of Wales. Over 340 organisations have signed up on a voluntary basis and as more continue to do so as sustainable development continues to climb the agenda.

In April 2015, The Welsh Government passed into law The Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act  that aims to improve the social, economic, environmental and cultural well-being of Wales, and strengthen governance arrangements within public bodies to ensure that present needs are met without compromising the ability of future generations.

The legislation will place a statutory duty upon public bodies in Wales to adopt sustainable development as the central organising principle upon which all other organisational decisions are made and provide evidence on how this is implemented in practice.

The legislation identifies 7 key goals to improve the well-being of Wales:

  1. A Prosperous Wales
  2. A Resilient Wales
  3. A Healthier Wales
  4. A More equal Wales
  5. A Wales of Cohesive communities
  6. A Wales of Vibrant Culture and Thriving Welsh language
  7. A Globally responsible Wales

Delivered through Public Service Boards (PSB’s) and local wellbeing plans for all local authorities in order to improve wellbeing for people and their communities, Public bodies in Wales were asked to respond to the detailed draft guidance that aims to enable government bodies and agencies in responding to and complying with the statutory duties they are under as a result of the Act.   All public bodies are scheduled to commence statutory reporting on wellbeing indicators as from April 2017

These public Bodies include: Welsh Ministers, Local Authorities, Local Health Boards, Public Health Wales NHS Trust, Velindre NHS Trust, National Parks Authorities, Fire and Rescue Authorities, National Resources Wales, Higher Education Funding Council (HEFCW), Arts Council of Wales (ACW), Sports Council of Wales (SCW), National Library and the National Museum and Galleries Wales (NMGW).

The consultation documents closes for submission on the 16th November 2015

Alongside the Consultation the proposed national indicators,  How do you measure a nation’s progress? will measure and capture wellbeing statistics in Wales and the deadline for consultation is the 19th January 2016.

Picture Hope in the Thorns (2007), Dan Foy © Some rights reserved. Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution license http://bit.ly/1WuB834