Get PDF The Greening of Aid: Sustainable livelihoods in practice (Aid and Development Set)

Free download. Book file PDF easily for everyone and every device. You can download and read online The Greening of Aid: Sustainable livelihoods in practice (Aid and Development Set) file PDF Book only if you are registered here. And also you can download or read online all Book PDF file that related with The Greening of Aid: Sustainable livelihoods in practice (Aid and Development Set) book. Happy reading The Greening of Aid: Sustainable livelihoods in practice (Aid and Development Set) Bookeveryone. Download file Free Book PDF The Greening of Aid: Sustainable livelihoods in practice (Aid and Development Set) at Complete PDF Library. This Book have some digital formats such us :paperbook, ebook, kindle, epub, fb2 and another formats. Here is The CompletePDF Book Library. It's free to register here to get Book file PDF The Greening of Aid: Sustainable livelihoods in practice (Aid and Development Set) Pocket Guide.

Cbmzan Hudton 8. Conway Marilyn Carr Cure Studies: Sorghum Processing, Botswana 0. Schmidt Rees Case Studies: Conway, Tariq Husain, zahur Alum and M. Alim Mian Dichter Mellors Jere Request an e-inspection copy. Share this Title. Recommend to Librarian. Shopping Cart Summary. Items Subtotal. In scalar terms, ecological inclusiveness at the local level focuses on protecting local access to and ownership of resources as well as protecting local ecosystems.

At the national level, it requires that resources are well managed and the sustainability of ecosystem services are ensured. At the transboundary and global level, it implies not causing harm to other countries and using common but differentiated responsibilities for dealing with global problems. Environmental inclusiveness, or the relation between environmental issues and the marginalized, emerges from three different strands. First, the livelihoods argument has been that the poor depend on their local ecosystem for their survival e.

Chambers and Conway Second, the vulnerability argument focuses on how the vulnerability of the poor may be exacerbated by the effects of climate change Paavola and Adger and thus calls for enhancing adaptive capacity and resilience Nelson et al. Third, the Anthropocene argument is that the great acceleration in the demand for limited land, water, and other resources and sinks may lead to ecospace grabbing or the large-scale transfer of these resources from local communities to governments, large corporations and the private sector by changing the rules of access to these resources cf.

Zoomers ; Fairhead et al. Limited sinks refers to the amount of greenhouse gases that we may emit into the atmosphere if we wish to address the problem of climate change; or the carrying capacity of our ecosystems if we wish them to continue to provide us the supporting e. Living and progressing within these limits requires a different vision regarding prosperity and well-being.

It challenges the need for continuous growth Lorek and Spangenberg with its perverse incentives for a throwaway materialistic society. It calls for equitably allocating rights i. It also calls for greening the financial, aid and trade institutions e. Hicks et al. This translates into five principles. These include a the adoption of multiple sets of internally consistent, contextually relevant, but not necessarily identical ecocentric limits from the local to the global level to maintain ecosystem capital and services e. Relational inclusiveness recognizes that poverty and ecological degradation are often the result of actions taken by others Harriss-White ; Mosse because of increasing inequality in society Piketty ; Stiglitz and the substance and process of politics e.

Okafor A scalar perspective requires understanding and addressing the multi-level drivers of inequality, exclusion and vulnerability see e. Laven ; Ros-Tonen et al. Social inequality refers to the difference in income, wealth, opportunity and access between the rich and the poor. Currently, an astounding 85 individuals possess more wealth than the bottom half of the global population Oxfam Although historical inequalities were reduced in the twentieth century, the trend is towards rising inequality today Piketty ; Stiglitz ; Ortiz and Cummins ; Milanovic The rich have become richer through the historical accumulation of wealth that is unevenly taxed, exploitation of capital markets which may or may not create bubbles such as the housing bubble—where investors were bailed out by tax-payers at the cost of home-owners , and the development of intellectual property rights that protect medical patents, among others.

Given the importance of natural resources and sinks for economic growth, the rich invest heavily in these resources land rights, water rights, minerals and metals, the electromagnetic spectrum and sinks e. By not accepting their responsibility for environmental pollution e. Thus, the concentration of wealth leads to inequality through direct and indirect resource expropriation. It also increases the ability of the rich to lobby for a certain kind of politics such as calling for small government and deregulation.

Countering the cause and effect of structural inequalities caused by the political relations that keep them intact requires both scholarly engagements on inclusive development through multi-scalar, geographically and sectorally diverse analyses, and social movements to bring attention to them Townsend ; Hickey et al. A relational approach first requires a rethinking of how merit and public goods are managed Kaul et al. Second, the direct and indirect drivers of poverty, exclusion, and environmental degradation operate from the local to the global level, involving marginal to extremely powerful actors.

This calls for policies that deal with all actors as opposed to policies that only deal with empowering the poorest cf. Harriss-White ; Mosse This would counter the tendency to offshore economic activities and offload governance activities deregulation as a way to bypass rules. Third, it recognizes that the roots of the direct and indirect drivers of inequality may lie in the ideological foundations of society calling for the questioning of dominant discourses and vested interests.

Fourth, it sees the normative, legal, and instrumental interventions Cook ; Rappaport : as not value-neutral. For example, when states make trade-offs between economic growth for all i. This calls for the downward accountability of institutions Narayan Finally, an inclusive relational approach calls for global constitutionalism and rule of law to ensure that powerful actors like governments, entities, banks, and tax havens are subject to common rules cf. Koskenniemi ; Gupta Target 8.

However, this does not reflect that a true decoupling will require drastic redefinition of what constitutes growth.

Sustainable development goals and inclusive development

This reflects the view of some development economists that growth is needed to reduce inequality, a vision we contest. Even so, the emphasis on economic growth reflects the type of dualities mentioned above and undermines more ecocentric goals. This confirms our fear that there is a risk that the SDGs will go the way of the sustainable development discourse and make trade-offs in favour of growth over social and ecological issues. Business-as-usual growth is justified as necessary for reducing social inequalities and for addressing ecological issues instead of making clear commitments to redefine the development process.

This would be to live within ecological constraints for the well-being of society, even if it is at the cost of sustained growth. Of the 17 Goals, 13 focus on social inclusiveness, but also take some ecological or relational aspects into account. Goal 1 aims to end all forms of poverty everywhere, recognizes that poverty is not simply measured in income per capita and that it is also not exclusively located in poor countries.

It specifies targets for eradicating extreme poverty, ensuring social protection systems including floors, and ensuring access to basic resources. These social floors are further elaborated in Goal 2 which aims to end hunger and malnutrition by , while doubling the productivity and incomes of small-scale food producers; and in Goal 3 which aims at enhancing well-being and healthy lives through targets on reducing maternal mortality, preventable deaths of children, and major epidemics, managing substance abuse and traffic related deaths, and universal access to sexual and reproductive health care services and health coverage by Similarly, Goal 6 aims to ensure universal access to water and sanitation.

Goal 7 ensures universal access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy, while Goal 8 promotes universal employment opportunities. Goal 9 focuses on resilient and sustainable infrastructure with affordable and equitable access for all and inclusive and sustainable industrialization.

It aims to integrate small-scale enterprises into value chains. Goal 5 focuses on gender equality by eliminating discrimination, violence, harmful social practices, recognizing the value of unpaid care, promoting participation, and promoting access to sexual and reproductive health rights. Goal 10 aims at reducing inequalities within and among countries to achieve social, economic and political inclusion. Goal 11 is likewise defined by inclusive aspirations in cities and human settlements to make them safe and resilient.

It guarantees access to housing, basic services, and transportation, but with special attention for women, children, people with disabilities and older persons. Goal 15 refers also to sustainable livelihoods for local communities so that they can avoid relying on poaching and trafficking of protected species for income. Finally, Goal 16 promotes inclusive societies and institutions aiming to reduce violence and death, abuse, trafficking and torture of children, provide legal identity and birth certificates to all, ensure participatory decision-making, guarantee access to information, and protect fundamental freedoms.

Most targets are national-level targets with primarily national-level responsibilities. Goal 10 has very specific global target Eleven goals focus on ecological inclusiveness, marking a shift away from the MDG targets and towards recognizing the interrelationships between exclusion, marginalization and an overburdened environment. They set targets on production and consumption patterns Goal 12 including sustainable and resilient agricultural practices, maintaining ecosystem services and adaptation to climate change, genetic diversity and securing seed and plant banks Goal 2 , demand side management through energy efficiency and supply side management through promoting renewable energy Goal 7 , resource efficiency, decoupling growth from pollution Goal 8 and sustainable industrialization Goal 9 ; and on enhancing the quality of life by providing access to open and green spaces for all, sustainable transport systems, sustainable urbanization, sustainable human settlement planning, and improving air quality and waste management within sustainable and resilient cities Goal These targets also focus on sustainable water management from local to global levels Goal 6 and 14 , mitigating climate change Goal 13 , and protecting ecosystems and forests Goal Perhaps most significant for the prospects of ensuring ecological inclusiveness is target In terms of building resilience, Goals 11 and 13 call to minimize exposure to disasters and enhance resilience and adaptive capacity, not least through emphasizing the importance of land and resource ownership of the poorest Goal 1.

Different levels are addressed in the need to adopt sustainable practices including the state, the private sector, local economies depending on tourism, and populations. Key to these steps is also the effective mobilization of financial resources and the role of international law.

Post navigation

Thus some of these goals a establish ecocentric targets, if vague in qualitative and quantitative terms; b focus on building resilience and adaptive capacity; and c regulate financial institutions. There is also not enough guarantee of the participation of all stakeholders. Three of the 17 SDGs take an explicitly relational approach Goals 10, 16 and 17 , while others are more implicit. It is remarkable, relative to the MDGs, that the proposed SDGs made a clear relational goal on reducing inequality within and among countries.

Goal 10 provides guards against exclusion at different levels and recognizes the overlap between multiple forms of exclusion and marginalization. Inclusion refers to closing the income gap between the rich and poor, eliminating discriminatory laws and implementing social protection to enhance equality. This goes beyond social protection purely to prevent people from falling below the absolute poverty line. Furthermore, inclusion is facilitated by monitoring global financial markets, and by enhancing representation and conditions for developing countries in global decision-making fora.

It tries to tackle structural inequality through changing decision-making processes, aid, investment, and trade agreements. Goal 16 goes a step further to call for the rule of law and equal access to justice for all, which is critical for addressing structural issues. It also focuses on reducing illicit financial and arms flows, reducing corruption and bribery and ensuring responsive participatory institutions.

Goal 17 addresses structural issues by focusing on enhancing tax imposition on the rich, reiterating the 0. It includes the usual clauses on technology transfer and capacity building, the promotion of policy coherence, multi-stakeholder partnerships and monitoring and accountability. Additional targets embracing relational aspects focus on enhancing opportunities for the poor and managing migration possibilities, as well as progressive taxation, monitoring of global institutions and financial markets, and giving more voice to developing countries in global financial and economic policy.

It also recommends that there should be access to medicines in developing countries using the flexibilities of intellectual property rights laws in order to promote public health.

Post navigation

Goal 4 on gender equality tries to address the complex issue of ownership rights, but otherwise is not really dramatic in its relational approach. Goal 11 encourages positive links between urban, peri-urban and rural areas to promote mutually inclusive instead of exclusive development. Goal 12 includes targets which address the threat of private ownership of resources and aims to regulate private actors and their reporting practices.

Goal 13 emphasizes the need for national ratification of climate change measures, and the responsibility that developed countries have to developing countries to help them act in accordance with them. Goal 15 reiterates the need for developed countries to raise financial resources to protect biodiversity and other ecological goals.

Sustainable Livelihoods Guidance Sheets

The SDGs a promote the rule of law and equality of access to justice; b attempt at addressing issues of bribery, corruption, illicit financial flows, tax evasion, unfair subsidies, and debt forgiveness; and c deal with ending inequality by enhancing fair participation within domestic and international institutions.

However, they do not address the logic of market-based economic growth, safeguard public goods from privatization and securitization, nor ensure downward accountability. Furthermore, the lack of clear quantitatively defined targets and timetables for some of these issues may run the risk that they pacify critics without actually delivering on the goals. This section explores what the document says about SDG implementation. While Goal 17 on implementation highlights the importance of finance, technology, capacity building, trade, and systemic issues, other goals also include some aspects of implementation.

Recent Posts

On social inclusiveness, Goals 1 and 17 seek better domestic financial resource mobilization; Goals 9 and 17 promote cooperation on science, technology, innovation and ICT; Goals 4 and 8 promote capacity building of teachers, scholarships for higher education in other countries, and a global strategy for youth employment.

On ecological inclusiveness, Goals 7, 11, 14, and 17 emphasize raising financial resources and cooperating on environmentally sound technologies between states and recommend multilateral negotiations within the UN calling, inter alia, for the full implementation of international law on climate change and water Goals 6, Relational inclusiveness is more complex as it challenges the existing status quo and is expressly developed in Goal It calls on the powerful countries to meet their ODA commitments, debt restructuring to help developing countries, and to deal with tax evasion.

Goal 17 calls on powerful institutions such as the trading regime to promote more balanced trading and to implement the principle of special and differential treatments for developing countries, in accordance with long-standing WTO agreements. Beyond this, implementation also means doubling the share of global exports of LDCs by and using international forums to give special attention to rural infrastructure and agricultural research and to managing food price volatility.

Goal 8, which focuses on aid for trade, may counter the relational approach if carried to its logical conclusion. Some goals call on all countries to enhance tax collection capacities to generate revenue which may also force multinational corporations to reduce their own tax avoidance practices. There is also a focus on reducing unfair subsidies. Technology transfer to developing countries is required to take place on terms favourable to them, including concessional and preferential terms.

The Sustainable Livelihoods Approach

Importantly, in Goal 17, capacity building is meant to come from support from developed countries. In terms of social aspects, pro-poor and gender-sensitive policies are to be included from the national to the international level. The targets in Goal 17 addressing policy coherence are implicitly relational in nature. Aiming for macroeconomic stability without undermining the national integrity of developing countries implicitly restricts developed countries from being too invasive and setting their economic conditions. Likewise, the target to enhance global access to data and information means that—with equal understanding and knowledge about any issue area—there will be a more level playing field between developed and developing countries in negotiating all forms of development interventions.

Thus these targets reflect relational criteria by putting pressure on developed countries to take their responsibilities seriously and to work through multilateral institutions. More radically though extremely limited , they hint at reducing the opportunities for tax breaks and evasion by multinationals. Nonetheless, they do not collectively represent a powerful enough relational text that challenges status quo politics and existing power relations to create more conducive conditions for enhancing inclusive development.

This paper argues that an inclusive development analysis of the SDGs may help to assess whether the textual design truly aims at ensuring that development focuses both on social and ecological issues, as well as on the political tools for achieving the transformation to which it aims.

Recognizing the risk that the SDG agenda may go the same route as the sustainable development discourse—that priority will go to economic growth over social and economic goals—this paper has surveyed the 17 SDGs to assess how well they represent inclusive development. We conclude first that the SDG document continues to emphasize the growth component in its interpretation of sustainable development.

Sustainable livelihoods guidance sheets

Second, the SDG text scores well on the articulation of social inclusiveness—as 11 of the 17 goals focus on issues concerning the most marginalized. Third, its commitment to addressing ecological inclusiveness is significantly lower. Although eleven goals deal with ecological issues, the actual quantitative and qualitative commitment is lower. They are largely focused on technology transfer and scientific solutions and not enough on the need to redefine the growth concept based on the availability of limited ecospace and the need to enhance human welfare.

Fourth, while relational politics generally received low attention, the SDGs do groundbreaking work by at least mentioning global inequalities, and the need to tax the rich and reform global institutions to create a level playing field. However, in contrast to the other two aspects of inclusive development, relational politics has received the least amount of attention, though the unexpected mention of private sector responsibility and focus on multi-scalar decision-making bodies represents the potential for important changes.

The foregoing content analysis leads us to some points for reflection. First, from the perspective of inclusive development, successful implementation of the SDGs would not only mean that poverty and marginalization are reduced, ecological sustainability is enhanced, and the gap between the powerful and less powerful is minimized. Rather, it also means recognizing a powerful ends-means connection between the goals and the ways in which they are integrated into global society.

Close Figure Viewer. Browse All Figures Return to Figure. Previous Figure Next Figure. Email or Customer ID.


  • Australias Strangest Mysteries #2.
  • Dryland Systems 2015 Annual Report: Towards Sustainable Livelihoods in Drylands released.
  • The Greening of Aid: Sustainable livelihoods in practice!
  • INDO-PAK RELATION: MEMOIRS AND EMOTIONS.
  • Log in to Wiley Online Library!
  • The Greening of Aid: Sustainable livelihoods in practice - CRC Press Book;

Forgot password? Old Password. New Password. Password Changed Successfully Your password has been changed.