On Saturday, July 19th – after nearly 35 hours spent negotiating in its final session – the Open Working Group (OWG) on Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) adopted its outcome document. Mercy International was there till the end – including throughout the entirety of Friday night and Saturday morning – along with several friends and colleagues from the Mining Working Group, observing the process and engaging in final advocacy with governments.

The Open Working Group ended with agreement on 17 proposed SDGs (with 169 targets among them); we would like to add our voice to those thanking the OWG’s co-chairs, Ambassador Macharia Kamau (Kenya) and Ambassador Csaba Korösi (Hungary) for their deft leadership and vision in guiding the OWG to its successful conclusion. The final report of the OWG will be submitted to the UN General Assembly, where all 193 governments will negotiate the final post-2015 agenda. These discussions will begin later this fall, or (more likely) early in 2015, and will culminate in a Post-2015 Summit, to be held in New York in September 2015.

From the perspective of Mercy’s sustainable development concerns that we have tracked through the OWG process (challenging the extractive development model; a rights-based approach to development; the human right to water and sanitation; and human trafficking), the outcome presents mixed results, and guidelines for the work ahead.

The chapeau that introduces the goals represents the most progressive part of the outcome, with references to the commitments of Rio+20, the need to align development to the international human rights framework, the urgency of climate change, the need to address self-determination for countries under colonial rule and occupation, and other issues essential to development. It emphasizes that “people are at the centre of sustainable development” and that development should “benefit all, in particular the children of the world, youth and future generations of the world without distinction of any kind such as age, sex, disability, culture, race, ethnicity, origin, migratory status, religion, economic or other status.”

      

There is a glaring disconnect, however, between the concrete, rights-based and people-centred language in the chapeau and the actual content of the proposed goals and targets. The text does not address or even name root causes of poverty and inequality, and does not challenge the extractivist model of development or the inherent assumption that market-based growth will provide adequate services for the world’s increasing population. In fact, we hold that it opens the door wide to the interests and involvement of big business, including through two paragraphs on the importance of multistakeholder partnerships in the section on means of implementation.

As Mercy International Association and our colleagues know, a rights-based approach is required to ensure the SDGs address structural root causes of poverty and inequality, in acknowledgment that poverty is a function of violations of human rights and is perpetuated by the extractive, market-led paradigm of development. Many of the OWG’s proposed goals most relevant for improving people’s livelihoods and guaranteeing their rights contain few measurable provisions and lack much-needed specificity with regards for human rights. And aside from the chapeau, human rights are explicitly mentioned in only a few of the 17 proposed goals. As far as targets, human rights are mentioned – most often in vague terms – in just a handful of 169 targets total.

Addressing human trafficking is mentioned in both proposed goal 5 (gender equality) and proposed goal 16 (“Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels”), but its root causes and manifestations are not addressed. Target 5.2 of the proposed gender equality goal states the need to “eliminate all forms of violence against all women and girls in public and private spheres, including trafficking and sexual and other types of exploitation.” The lack of time-bound or measurable elements to address this target weakens what is otherwise an important focus. Where trafficking is mentioned in proposed goal 16, the emphasis is on children; target 16.2 reads “end abuse, exploitation, trafficking and all forms of violence and torture against children.”

On the focus of much of our recent UN advocacy, the human right to water and sanitation, the OWG delivered a successful result. Led by the courageous call of Ambassador Caleb Otto, Permanent Representative of Palau to the UN, and several other government champions (Spain, Italy, Uruguay, Bolivia and their troikas), the final version of the text’s chapeau includes a mention of the importance of the right to water. Mercy International celebrates this mention as a victory for our advocacy and – more importantly – for the communities whose priorities and concerns should be at the forefront of all development planning and agenda-setting. This language is also an essential entry point for our further work on ensuring a rights-based approach to development, especially as the post-2015 process continues with negotiations in the General Assembly (GA).

Much work remains to be done. As with most of the other goals, human rights language is not mentioned or reflected in proposed goal 6 (“Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all”). The limited targets under this goal fail to establish a hierarchy of water use that prioritizes human and ecosystem well-being, and lack guarantees for participation, non-discrimination, and accountability. Like many of the other proposed SDGs, goal 6 could allow for commodification, privatization, or the shepherding in of corporate interests – the exact opposite of Mercy’s rights-based and environment-centered approach.

Overall, the model of development put forward by the OWG text is not fundamentally different from the status quo – as we have witnessed over decades of work – that fails to deliver for people’s human rights. Moving forward, ensuring a post-2015 development agenda that is grounded in people’s human rights will be a key area of advocacy for MIA and for corresponding advocacy in the countries in which we are active, because the rights-based approach is the essential foundation for all other Mercy concerns and for development that ensures the dignity and wellbeing of all people everywhere. As governments debate the OWG in the GA plenary, we will have to work even harder to ensure that human rights are part of the very essence of the post-2015 agenda – in more than name only. Continued coordination of our Mercy Global Action work, especially through advocacy at the national level, will be critical to realize these rights and to help our governments to ensure a just, sustainable, equitable world for all peoples and for the future sustainability of our planet.

Messages to: Aine O’Connor rsm - MGA Co-ordinator