David Hulme
(20007) in a paper: The Making of the Millennium Development Goals: Human Development
meets Result-based management in an imperfect world, observed that two ideas –
human development and result based management- have been particularly
significant in shaping the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). He explained
that though they seems unlikely intellectual, they significantly influence and
shape the pattern of direction of MDGs. He further observed that at time, the
ideas of human development and result based management were pursued as crucial
to survival of MDGs, when these ideas challenges the interests of powerful
groups or nations, their principles are compromised or assiduously avoided.
In a related
development, Hulme (2008) studied the process that led to the formulation and
implementation of MDGs and observed that it is an incremental and ongoing
process of negotiation and bargaining with no clear cut phases or precise end.
He is of the view that while the key actors presents policy as an outcome of a
linear rational process based on scientific analysis and weighing up evidence, the
real process that they are engaged in are quite different. He explained that no
leader or agency is ‘in control’ (see also Keeley and Scooneb,2003; Stone,
2006)).
Olayode (2006),
argued that for MDGs objectives to be realized there is need for establishment
of an appropriate political and institutional framework to guide state
intervention, market reform and poverty alleviation. He observed that MDGs
being benefits accrued from globalisation requires Nigeria repositioning
through appropriate policy measure. He argued that with appropriate policy
measure, Africa in general and Nigeria in particular can more, attract more
capital flows and benefit immensely from full integration into the world
economy, which will culminate into speedy realisation of the MDGs objectives.
In another
development, Agbu (2006) observed that for Nigeria to part take of the benefits
of MDGs, it is imperative for the country to adopt a practical approach by
collaborating with the other countries of the South, and other south multilateral
groups in negotiating for better terms of engagement with the developed world.
He sited the membership of Nigeria in the Developing Eight (D -8), consisting
of Nigeria, Iran, Indonesia, Turkey, Egypt, Bangladesh, Pakistan and Malaysia
who unanimously agreed to promote trade among themselves through reforming
there custom services and other policies that hinders the free flow of goods
and services across their borders. This we believe is crucial to the
fulfillment of MDGs objectives and targets. He advocated for attraction of FDI
in the agriculture and manufacturing sectors as crucial to MDGs goals
achievements as it has the capacity to increase job creation and reduce poverty
knowing that about 70% of the rural populace engage in Agriculture and a strong
relationship between agric and manufacturing.
Aribigbola
Afolabi (2009) studied the institutional constraints to achieving the MDGs in
Nigeria, using the example of Akure Millennium City and Ikaram/Ibaram
Millennium Villages both in Ondo states, and observed that although both the
Millennium City and Millennium Village projects have taken off as programmed,
the effect of the program has not been widespread especially in Akure, though
the effect of the program seems visible in the millennium village. He discovered
that the problems which the programs are design to solve are still widespread
and lack adequate conceptualization of the programs militating against full
implementation of the project. He identified lack of conceptualization and
understanding both by the implementers and the will be beneficiary (people at
the grass root), over politization by the government, lack of interest on the
part of grass root would-be beneficiary/ community and inadequate funding and
capacity under utilization as the major problems militating against the success
of the project. He recommended collective participation that will carry the
community along in project design, and implementation as crucial to achievement
of the MDGs and complete removal of civil service bureaucracy.
In a
related development, Ajayi (2008) studied the success of MDGs in Millennium
Village project and found out that Nigeria is at present off track and very
slow , when it come to MDGs implementation and execution. He therefore called
for a better understanding between the policy formulators and executors.
Similarly, Falade (2008) observed that most African countries are backward when
it comes to implementation and execution of the MDGs, when compared with other
region of the world. This, he explained is due to poor technical capacity in
formulating, implementing and monitoring the operational MDGs based Poverty
Reduction Strategy Process (PRSPS). Hassan Arif, Patel Shela and Satherwaite
David (2005) observed that MDGs represent a new attempt to increase the
effectiveness of development assistance in reducing poverty with a time bound
targets and strong commitment to monitor progress. They pointed out that in
order to achieve these laudable MDGs objectives, it is imperative to address
the need for water sanitation, health care, schools, employment and poverty
crisis especially among the less developed economies.
Adam
Elhirika (2005) observed that despite recent increase in average growth rate of
most African countries from about 4.3 percent to 4.6 percent in 2003 and 2004
respectively, as a result of global expansion that led to higher demand and
prices for commodities, a significant increase in Official Development
Assistance, driven mainly by debt relief and emergency assistance, improving
macroeconomic stability, the continent will have a long way to go if
sustainable growth is to be achieved as specified in the MDGs targets. He
identified unpredictable weather conditions, concentration of production and
exports in the commodity market, and volatile external capital flows too week
in comparism with those of other parts of the world. He noted that Official
Development Assistance (ODA) represents the main source of development
financing for many African countries, reaching over $23 million for sub-Sahara Africa
in 2003, and far exceeding debt service payment in that year. This
notwithstanding, aid flows to Africa remain volatile and cannot meet the MDGs
financing needs even if the goal of 0.7 percent of rich countries GNP is
achieved. He concluded by saying to ensure reality of MDGs, Africa’s
development partners are urged to move faster to ensure all their policies – on
ODA, market access and debt – are consistent with meeting MDGs. Wing Thye Woo,
Gordon McCord and Jeffrey Sachs (2005) observed that MDGs offers Africa a way
of escape out of poverty trap. Poverty trap being too poor to grow – they plead
with the Western policymakers to fully support the MDGs and encourage increase
in public investments so as to produce a large step increase in Africa’s underlying
productivity, both rural and urban. They noted that foreign donors will be
critical to achieving this substantial step increase.
On the
other hand, Yonghyup Oh (2005) was of the opinion that MDGs is a combination of
enhanced foreign intervention, more external money and top-down approach having
a potential of depriving recipients of the spirit of independence as their eyes
are clue to free launch offer by the donor agencies. Another area of concern as
noted by Noko(2011), is the post MDGs implementation periods, in other words,
what become of MDGs after 2015. He argued that since MDGs focus mainly on
building up infrastructure to produce more public goods, chances are that poor
funding may set in after 2015, the terminal year of MDGs, at this point, he asked
what becomes of successful MDGs projects.
Roy Culpeper
(2005) appreciates the global commitment to move about 50 percent poor of the
world out of extreme poverty by 2015 through MDGs projects. However, he
advocated for a more thorough approach on the ground that not just 50 percent,
but 100 percent of the people living in poverty should be elevated. He
explained that if we still had 40 percent or 50 percent of humanity struggling
to subsist at between one and two dollars a day, then we needs a deeper approach
to fighting poverty. He equally observed that MDGs pay little or no significant
attention to poverty in the urban economy, he is of the opinion that the MDGs
should focus as well on provision of decent employment in the productive sector
for urban dwellers. He advocated for restructuring of the tax system which he
described as being regressive at current based on the extreme reliance on sales
and consumption tax system. He argued that most developing economies, elites
hardly pay tax (a very regressive distributional tax system).
Mistry (2005)
observed that MDGs are laudable projects aimed at poverty reduction. He
established a divergence between MDGs and Developmental goals. He pointed out
that ever since independence, most Africa states have been faced with
developmental failure, and he observed that aid to Africa has not worked
because human, social and institutional capital – not financial capital – poses
as biding constraint. He advocated for a shift in foreign Direct Investment
(FDI) on concentration of funding to a blend of funding and know-how so as to
maximize the benefits of MDGs Benno Ndulu, Lolette Kritzinger-Van and Ritra
Reinikka in Jan Joost Teunissen (2005) were of the opinion that MDGs are the
finest set of goals or promises to the third world especially African
countries, however there is need to blend MDGs with economic growth. They
identify four major reasons for Africa’s slow growth: low capital accumulation;
high price of investment goods for African investors; low productivity of investment;
and geographical disadvantages. They advocated for aggressive investment in
infrastructure as key to economic growth that will complement MDGs achievements
and improved social outcomes. Furthermore, they identify the importance of
regional cooperation and integration. According to them, regional integration
helps growth and infrastructure and vice versa, which will have a lasting
effect on MDGs beyond 2015