Search This Blog

Thursday, November 22, 2018

Millennium Development Goals

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Official logos for each of the Millennium Development Goals.

The Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) were the eight international development goals for the year 2015 that had been established following the Millennium Summit of the United Nations in 2000, following the adoption of the United Nations Millennium Declaration. All 191 United Nations member states at that time, and at least 22 international organizations, committed to help achieve the following Millennium Development Goals by 2015:
The Millennium Development Goals are a UN initiative.

Each goal had specific targets, and dates for achieving those targets. To accelerate progress, the G8 finance ministers agreed in June 2005 to provide enough funds to the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the African Development Bank (AfDB) to cancel $40 to $55 billion in debt owed by members of the heavily indebted poor countries (HIPC) to allow them to redirect resources to programs for improving health and education and for alleviating poverty.

Critics of the MDGs complained of a lack of analysis and justification behind the chosen objectives, and the difficulty or lack of measurements for some goals and uneven progress, among others. Although developed countries' aid for achieving the MDGs rose during the challenge period, more than half went for debt relief and much of the remainder going towards natural disaster relief and military aid, rather than further development.

As of 2013, progress towards the goals was uneven. Some countries achieved many goals, while others were not on track to realize any. A UN conference in September 2010 reviewed progress to date and adopted a global plan to achieve the eight goals by their target date. New commitments targeted women's and children's health, and new initiatives in the worldwide battle against poverty, hunger and disease.

Among the non-governmental organizations assisting were the United Nations Millennium Campaign, the Millennium Promise Alliance, Inc., the Global Poverty Project, the Micah Challenge, The Youth in Action EU Programme, "Cartoons in Action" video project and the 8 Visions of Hope global art project.

The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) replaced the MDGs in 2016.

Background

Millennium Summit

Preparations for the 2000 Millennium Summit launched with the report of the Secretary-General entitled, "We the people: The Role of the United Nations in the Twenty-First Century". Additional input was prepared by the Millennium Forum, which brought together representatives of over 1,000 non-governmental and civil society organizations from more than 100 countries. The Forum met in May to conclude a two-year consultation process covering issues such as poverty eradication, environmental protection, human rights and protection of the vulnerable.

MDGs derive from earlier development targets, where world leaders adopted the United Nations Millennium Declaration. The approval of the Millennium Declaration was the main outcome of the Millennium Summit.

The MDGs originated from the United Nations Millennium Declaration. The Declaration asserted that every individual has dignity; and hence, the right to freedom, equality, a basic standard of living that includes freedom from hunger and violence and encourages tolerance and solidarity. The MDGs set concrete targets and indicators for poverty reduction in order to achieve the rights set forth in the Declaration.

Precursors

The Brahimi Report provided the basis of the goals in the area of peace and security.

The Millennium Summit Declaration was, however, only part of the origins of the MDGs. More ideas came from Adam Figueroa, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. A series of UN‑led conferences in the 1990s focused on issues such as children, nutrition, human rights and women. The OECD criticized major donors for reducing their levels of Official Development Assistance (ODA). UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan signed a report titled, We the Peoples: The Role of the United Nations in the 21st Century. The OECD had formed its International Development Goals (IDGs). The two efforts were combined for the World Bank's 2001 meeting to form the MDGs.

Human capital, infrastructure and human rights

The MDGs emphasized three areas: human capital, infrastructure and human rights (social, economic and political), with the intent of increasing living standards. Human capital objectives include nutrition, healthcare (including child mortality, HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria, and reproductive health) and education. Infrastructure objectives include access to safe drinking water, energy and modern information/communication technology; increased farm outputs using sustainable practices; transportation; and environment. Human rights objectives include empowering women, reducing violence, increasing political voice, ensuring equal access to public services and increasing security of property rights. The goals were intended to increase an individual’s human capabilities and "advance the means to a productive life". The MDGs emphasize that each nation's policies should be tailored to that country's needs; therefore most policy suggestions are general.

Partnership

MDGs emphasize the role of developed countries in aiding developing countries, as outlined in Goal Eight, which sets objectives and targets for developed countries to achieve a "global partnership for development" by supporting fair trade, debt relief, increasing aid, access to affordable essential medicines and encouraging technology transfer. Thus developing nations ostensibly became partners with developed nations in the struggle to reduce world poverty.

Goals

A poster at the United Nations Headquarters in New York City, New York, United States, showing the Millennium Development Goals.

The MDGs were developed out of several commitments set forth in the Millennium Declaration, signed in September 2000. There are eight goals with 21 targets, and a series of measurable health indicators and economic indicators for each target.

Goal 1: Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger

  • Target 1A: Halve, between 1990 and 2015, the proportion of people living on less than $1.25 a day
    • Poverty gap ratio [incidence x depth of poverty]
    • Share of poorest quintile in national consumption
  • Target 1B: Achieve Decent Employment for Women, Men, and Young People
    • GDP Growth per Employed Person
    • Employment Rate
    • Proportion of employed population below $1.25 per day (PPP values)
    • Proportion of family-based workers in employed population
  • Target 1C: Halve, between 1990 and 2015, the proportion of people who suffer from hunger
    • Prevalence of underweight children under five years of age
    • Proportion of population below minimum level of dietary energy consumption

Goal 2: Achieve universal primary education

  • Target 2A: By 2015, all children can complete a full course of primary schooling, girls and boys
    • Enrollment in primary education
    • Completion of primary education

Goal 3: Promote gender equality and empower women

  • Target 3A: Eliminate gender disparity in primary and secondary education preferably by 2005, and at all levels by 2015
    • Ratios of girls to boys in primary, secondary and tertiary education
    • Share of women in wage employment in the non-agricultural sector
    • Proportion of seats held by women in national parliament

Goal 4: Reduce child mortality rates

Goal 5: Improve maternal health

The Maternal Mortality Ratio is the KPI used by the UN to measure Maternal health
  • Target 5A: Reduce by three quarters, between 1990 and 2015, the maternal mortality ratio
    • Maternal mortality ratio
    • Proportion of births attended by skilled health personnel
  • Target 5B: Achieve, by 2015, universal access to reproductive health
    • Contraceptive prevalence rate
    • Adolescent birth rate
    • Antenatal care coverage
    • Unmet need for family planning

Goal 6: Combat HIV/AIDS, malaria, and other diseases

  • Target 6A: Have halted by 2015 and begun to reverse the spread of HIV/AIDS
    • HIV prevalence among population aged 15–24 years
    • Condom use at last high-risk sex
    • Proportion of population aged 15–24 years with comprehensive correct knowledge of HIV/AIDS
  • Target 6B: Achieve, by 2010, universal access to treatment for HIV/AIDS for all those who need it
    • Proportion of population with advanced HIV infection with access to anti-retroviral drugs
  • Target 6C: Have halted by 2015 and begun to reverse the incidence of malaria and other major diseases
    • Prevalence and death rates associated with malaria
    • Proportion of children under 5 sleeping under insecticide-treated bednets
    • Proportion of children under 5 with fever who are treated with appropriate anti-malarial drugs
    • Incidence, prevalence and death rates associated with tuberculosis
    • Proportion of tuberculosis cases detected and cured under DOTS (Directly Observed Treatment Short Course)

Goal 7: Ensure environmental sustainability

  • Target 7A: Integrate the principles of sustainable development into country policies and programs; reverse loss of environmental resources
  • Target 7B: Reduce biodiversity loss, achieving, by 2010, a significant reduction in the rate of loss
    • Proportion of land area covered by forest
    • CO2 emissions, total, per capita and per $1 GDP (PPP)
    • Consumption of ozone-depleting substances
    • Proportion of fish stocks within safe biological limits
    • Proportion of total water resources used
    • Proportion of terrestrial and marine areas protected
    • Proportion of species threatened with extinction
  • Target 7C: Halve, by 2015, the proportion of the population without sustainable access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation
  • Target 7D: By 2020, to have achieved a significant improvement in the lives of at least 100 million slum-dwellers
    • Proportion of urban population living in slums

Goal 8: Develop a global partnership for development

  • Target 8A: Develop further an open, rule-based, predictable, non-discriminatory trading and financial system
  • Target 8B: Address the Special Needs of the Least Developed Countries (LDCs)
    • Includes: tariff and quota-free access for LDC exports; enhanced programme of debt relief for HIPC and cancellation of official bilateral debt; and more generous ODA (Official Development Assistance) for countries committed to poverty reduction
  • Target 8C: Address the special needs of landlocked developing countries and small island developing States
    • Through the Programme of Action for the sustainable Development of Small Island Developing States and the outcome of the twenty-second special session of the General Assembly
  • Target 8D: Deal comprehensively with the debt problems of developing countries through national and international measures in order to make debt sustainable in the long term
    • Some of the indicators listed below are monitored separately for the least developed countries (LDCs), Africa, landlocked developing countries and small island developing States.
    • Official development assistance (ODA):
      • Net ODA, total and to LDCs, as percentage of OECD/DAC donors’ GNI
      • Proportion of total sector-allocable ODA of OECD/DAC donors to basic social services (basic education, primary health care, nutrition, safe water and sanitation)
      • Proportion of bilateral ODA of OECD/DAC donors that is untied
      • ODA received in landlocked countries as proportion of their GNIs
      • ODA received in small island developing States as proportion of their GNIs
    • Market access:
      • Proportion of total developed country imports (by value and excluding arms) from developing countries and from LDCs, admitted free of duty
      • Average tariffs imposed by developed countries on agricultural products and textiles and clothing from developing countries
      • Agricultural support estimate for OECD countries as percentage of their GDP
      • Proportion of ODA provided to help build trade capacity
    • Debt sustainability:
      • Total number of countries that have reached their HIPC decision points and number that have reached their HIPC completion points (cumulative)
      • Debt relief committed under HIPC initiative, US$
      • Debt service as a percentage of exports of goods and services
  • Target 8E: In co-operation with pharmaceutical companies, provide access to affordable, essential drugs in developing countries
    • Proportion of population with access to affordable essential drugs on a sustainable basis
  • Target 8F: In co-operation with the private sector, make available the benefits of new technologies, especially information and communications
    • Telephone lines and cellular subscribers per 100 population
    • Personal computers in use per 100 population
    • Internet users per 100 Population

Criticism

General

General criticisms include a perceived lack of analytical power and justification behind the chosen objectives.

The MDGs lack strong objectives and indicators for within-country equality, despite significant disparities in many developing nations.

Iterations of proven local successes should be scaled up to address the larger need through human energy and existing resources using methodologies such as participatory rural appraisal, asset-based community development, or SEED-SCALE.

MDG 8 uniquely focuses on donor achievements, rather than development successes. The Commitment to Development Index, published annually by the Center for Global Development in Washington, D.C., is considered the best numerical indicator for MDG 8. It is a more comprehensive measure of donor progress than official development assistance, as it takes into account policies on a number of indicators that affect developing countries such as trade, migration and investment.

The MDGs were attacked for insufficient emphasis on environmental sustainability. Thus, they do not capture all elements needed to achieve the ideals set out in the Millennium Declaration.

Agriculture was not specifically mentioned in the MDGs even though most of the world's poor are farmers.

Alleged lack of legitimacy

The entire MDG process has been accused of lacking legitimacy as a result of failure to include, often, the voices of the very participants that the MDGs seek to assist. The International Planning Committee for Food Sovereignty, in its post 2015 thematic consultation document on MDG 69 states "The major limitation of the MDGs by 2015 was the lack of political will to implement due to the lack of ownership of the MDGs by the most affected constituencies".

Human rights

The MDGs may under-emphasize local participation and empowerment (other than women’s empowerment). FIAN International, a human rights organization focusing on the right to adequate food, contributed to the Post 2015 process by pointing out a lack of: "primacy of human rights; qualifying policy coherence; and of human rights based monitoring and accountability. Without such accountability, no substantial change in national and international policies can be expected."

Human capital

MDG 2 focuses on primary education and emphasizes enrollment and completion. In some countries, primary enrollment increased at the expense of achievement levels. In some cases, the emphasis on primary education has negatively affected secondary and post-secondary education.

A publication from 2005 argued that goals related to maternal mortality, malaria and tuberculosis are impossible to measure and that current UN estimates lack scientific validity or are missing. Household surveys are the primary measure for the health MDGs but may be poor and duplicative measurements that consume limited resources. Furthermore, countries with the highest levels of these conditions typically have the least reliable data collection. The study also argued that without accurate measures, it is impossible to determine the amount of progress, leaving MDGs as little more than a rhetorical call to arms.

MDG proponents such as McArthur and Sachs countered that setting goals is still valid despite measurement difficulties, as they provide a political and operational framework to efforts. With an increase in the quantity and quality of healthcare systems in developing countries, more data could be collected. They asserted that non-health related MDGs were often well measured, and that not all MDGs were made moot by lack of data.

The attention to well being other than income helps bring funding to achieving MDGs. Further MDGs prioritize interventions, establish obtainable objectives with useful measurements of progress despite measurement issues and increased the developed world’s involvement in worldwide poverty reduction. MDGs include gender and reproductive rights, environmental sustainability, and spread of technology. Prioritizing interventions helps developing countries with limited resources make decisions about allocating their resources. MDGs also strengthen the commitment of developed countries and encourage aid and information sharing. The global commitment to the goals likely increases the likelihood of their success. They note that MDGs are the most broadly supported poverty reduction targets in world history.

Achieving the MDGs does not depend on economic growth alone. In the case of MDG 4, developing countries such as Bangladesh have shown that it is possible to reduce child mortality with only modest growth with inexpensive yet effective interventions, such as measles immunization. Still, government expenditure in many countries is not enough to meet the agreed spending targets. Research on health systems suggests that a "one size fits all" model will not sufficiently respond to the individual healthcare profiles of developing countries; however, the study found a common set of constraints in scaling up international health, including the lack of absorptive capacity, weak health systems, human resource limitations, and high costs. The study argued that the emphasis on coverage obscures the measures required for expanding health care. These measures include political, organizational, and functional dimensions of scaling up, and the need to nurture local organizations.

Fundamental issues such as gender, the divide between the humanitarian and development agendas and economic growth will determine whether or not the MDGs are achieved, according to researchers at the Overseas Development Institute (ODI).

The International Health Partnership (IHP+) aimed to accelerate MDG progress by applying international principles for effective aid and development in the health sector. In developing countries, significant funding for health came from external sources requiring governments to coordinate with international development partners. As partner numbers increased variations in funding streams and bureaucratic demands followed. By encouraging support for a single national health strategy, a single monitoring and evaluation framework, and mutual accountability, IHP+ attempted to build confidence between government, civil society, development partners and other health stakeholders.

Equity

Further developments in rethinking strategies and approaches to achieving the MDGs include research by the Overseas Development Institute into the role of equity. Researchers at the ODI argued that progress could be accelerated due to recent breakthroughs in the role equity plays in creating a virtuous circle where rising equity ensures the poor participate in their country's development and creates reductions in poverty and financial stability. Yet equity should not be understood purely as economic, but also as political. Examples abound, including Brazil's cash transfers, Uganda's eliminations of user fees and the subsequent huge increase in visits from the very poorest or else Mauritius's dual-track approach to liberalization (inclusive growth and inclusive development) aiding it on its road into the World Trade Organization. Researchers at the ODI thus propose equity be measured in league tables in order to provide a clearer insight into how MDGs can be achieved more quickly; the ODI is working with partners to put forward league tables at the 2010 MDG review meeting.

The effects of increasing drug use were noted by the International Journal of Drug Policy as a deterrent to the goal of the MDGs.

Women's issues

The Hollywood actress Geena Davis in a speech at the MDG Countdown event at the Ford Foundation in New York, addressing gender roles and issues in film such as her organisation's work in combating inequality in Hollywood (24 September 2013)

Increased focus on gender issues could accelerate MDG progress, e.g. empowering women through access to paid work could help reduce child mortality. In South Asian countries babies often suffered from low birth weight and high mortality due to limited access to healthcare and maternal malnutrition. Paid work could increase women's access to health care and better nutrition, reducing child mortality. Increasing female education and workforce participation increased these effects. Improved economic opportunities for women also decreased participation in the sex market, which decreased the spread of AIDS, MDG 6A. Another way in which women can be empowered is through access to paid work. Kabeer states that this access increases women’s agency in their households, it does so in the economic and political spheres as well. A study of women in rural Mexico found that those of them engaged in industrial work were able to negotiate and obtain a greater degree of respect in their households. Additionally, another study from Tanzania found that increased access to paid work led to a long-term reduction in domestic violence. Lastly, Women’s employment and access to financial resources increased their political participation. Data from Bangladesh indicates that longer membership in microfinance organizations have many positive effects including higher levels of political participation and improved access to government programs.

Although the resources, technology and knowledge exist to decrease poverty through improving gender equality, the political will is often missing. If donor and developing countries focused on seven "priority areas", great progress could be made towards the MDG. These seven priority areas include: increasing girls’ completion of secondary school, guaranteeing sexual and reproductive health rights, improving infrastructure to ease women’s and girl’s time burdens, guaranteeing women’s property rights, reducing gender inequalities in employment, increasing seats held by women in government, and combating violence against women.

It is thought that the current MDGs targets do not place enough emphasis on tracking gender inequalities in poverty reduction and employment as there are only gender goals relating to health, education, and political representation. To encourage women’s empowerment and progress towards the MDGs, increased emphasis should be placed on gender mainstreaming development policies and collecting data based on gender.

Progress

Graph of global population living on under 1, 1.25 and 2 equivalent of 2005 US dollars a day (red) and as a proportion of world population (blue) from 1981 to 2008 based on data from The World Bank

Progress towards reaching the goals has been uneven across countries. Brazil achieved many of the goals, while others, such as Benin, are not on track to realize any. The major successful countries include China (whose poverty population declined from 452 million to 278 million) and India. The World Bank estimated that MDG 1A (halving the proportion of people living on less than $1 a day) was achieved in 2008 mainly due to the results from these two countries and East Asia.

In the early 1990s Nepal was one of the world's poorest countries and remains South Asia's poorest country. Doubling health spending and concentrating on its poorest areas halved maternal mortality between 1998 and 2006. Its Multidimensional Poverty Index has seen the largest decreases of any tracked country. Bangladesh has made some of the greatest improvements in infant and maternal mortality ever seen, despite modest income growth.

Between 1990 and 2010 the population living on less than $1.25 a day in developing countries halved to 21%, or 1.2 billion people, achieving MDG1A before the target date, although the biggest decline was in China, which took no notice of the goal. However, the child mortality and maternal mortality are down by less than half. Sanitation and education targets will also be missed.

Multilateral debt reduction

G‑8 Finance Ministers met in London in June 2005 in preparation for the Gleneagles Summit in July and agreed to provide enough funds to the World Bank, IMF and the African Development Bank (AfDB) to cancel the remaining HIPC multilateral debt ($40 to $55 billion). Recipients would theoretically re-channel debt payments to health and education.

The Gleaneagles plan became the Multilateral Debt Relief Initiative (MDRI). Countries became eligible once their lending agency confirmed that the countries had continued to maintain the reforms they had implemented.

While the World Bank and AfDB limited MDRI to countries that complete the HIPC program, the IMF's eligibility criteria were slightly less restrictive so as to comply with the IMF's unique "uniform treatment" requirement. Instead of limiting eligibility to HIPC countries, any country with per capita income of $380 or less qualified for debt cancellation. The IMF adopted the $380 threshold because it closely approximated the HIPC threshold.

Sub-Saharan Africa

One success was to strengthen rice production in Sub-Saharan Africa. By the mid‑1990s, rice imports reached nearly $1 billion annually. Farmers had not found suitable rice varieties that produce high yields. New Rice for Africa (NERICA), a high-yielding and well adapted strain, was developed and introduced in areas including Congo Brazzaville, Côte d'Ivoire, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Guinea, Kenya, Mali, Nigeria, Togo and Uganda. Some 18 varieties of this strain became available, enabling African farmers to produce enough rice to feed their families and have extra to sell.

The region also showed progress towards MDG 2. School fees that included Parent-Teacher Association and community contributions, textbook fees, compulsory uniforms and other charges took up nearly a quarter of a poor family’s income and led countries including Burundi, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya, Malawi, Mozambique, Tanzania, and Uganda to eliminate such fees, increasing enrollment. For instance, in Ghana, public school enrollment in the most deprived districts rose from 4.2 million to 5.4 million between 2004 and 2005. In Kenya, primary school enrollment added 1.2 million in 2003 and by 2004, the number had climbed to 7.2 million.

Following the adoption of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), in 2000, Jeffrey Sachs of The Earth Institute at Columbia University was among the leading academic scholars and practitioners on the MDGs. He chaired the WHO Commission on Macroeconomics and Health (2000–01), which played a pivotal role in scaling up the financing of health care and disease control in the low-income countries to support MDGs 4, 5, and 6. He worked with UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan in 2000–2001 to design and launch The Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria. He also worked with senior officials of the George W. Bush administration to develop the PEPFAR program to fight HIV/AIDS, and the PMI to fight malaria. On behalf of Annan, from 2002 to 2006 he chaired the UN Millennium Project, which was tasked with developing a concrete action plan to achieve the MDGs. The UN General Assembly adopted the key recommendations of the UN Millennium Project at a special session in September 2005. The recommendations for rural Africa are currently being implemented and documented in the Millennium Villages, and in several national scale-up efforts such as in Nigeria.

The Millennium Villages Project, which Sachs directs, operates in more than a dozen African countries and covers more than 500,000 people. The MVP has engendered considerable controversy associated as critics have questioned both the design of the project and claims made for its success. In 2012 The Economist reviewed the project and concluded "the evidence does not yet support the claim that the millennium villages project is making a decisive impact." Critics have pointed to the failure to include suitable controls that would allow an accurate determination of whether the Projects methods were responsible for any observed gains in economic development. A 2012 Lancet paper claiming a 3-fold increase in the rate of decline in childhood mortality was criticized for flawed methodology, and the authors later admitted that the claim was "unwarranted and misleading".

Although developed countries' financial aid rose during the Millennium Challenge, more than half went towards debt relief. Much of the remainder aid money went towards disaster relief and military aid. According to the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (2006), the 50 least developed countries received about one third of all aid that flows from developed countries.

Funding commitment

Over the past 35 years, UN members have repeatedly "commit[ted] 0.7% of rich-countries' gross national income (GNI) to Official Development Assistance". The commitment was first made in 1970 by the UN General Assembly.

The text of the commitment was:
Each economically advanced country will progressively increase its official development assistance to the developing countries and will exert its best efforts to reach a minimum net amount of 0.7 percent of its gross national product at market prices by the middle of the decade.

European Union

In 2005 the European Union reaffirmed its commitment to the 0.7% aid targets, noting that "four out of the five countries, which exceed the UN target for ODA of 0.7%, of GNI are member states of the European Union". Further, the UN "believe[s] that donors should commit to reaching the long-standing target of 0.7 percent of GNI by 2015".

United States

However, the United States as well as other nations disputed the Monterrey Consensus that urged "developed countries that have not done so to make concrete efforts towards the target of 0.7% of gross national product (GNP) as ODA to developing countries".

The US consistently opposed setting specific foreign-aid targets since the UN General Assembly first endorsed the 0.7% goal in 1970.

OECD

Many Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) nations, did not donate 0.7% of their GNI. Some nations' contributions fell far short of 0.7%.

The Australian government committed to providing 0.5% of GNI in International Development Assistance by 2015-2016.

Review Summit 2010

A major conference was held at UN headquarters in New York on 20–22 September 2010 to review progress. The conference concluded with the adoption of a global action plan to accelerate progress towards the eight anti-poverty goals. Major new commitments on women's and children's health, poverty, hunger and disease ensued.

MDG3

According to MDG Monitor, the target under MDG 3 "To eliminate gender disparity in primary and secondary education by 2005, and in all levels of education by 2015" was met.

However MDG monitor points out that while parity has been achieved across the developing world, there are regional and national differences favouring girls in some cases and boys in others. In secondary education in "Western Asia, Oceania, and sub-Saharan Africa, girls are still at a disadvantage, while the opposite is true in Latin America and the Caribbean – boys are at a disadvantage." Similarly in tertiary education there are disparities "at the expense of men in Northern Africa, Eastern Asia, and Latin America and the Caribbean" while conversely they are "at the expense of women in Southern Asia and sub-Saharan Africa."

Improvements

Improving living conditions in developing countries may encourage healthy workers not to move to other places that offer a better lifestyle.

Cuba, itself a developing country, played a significant role in providing medical personnel to other developing nations; it has trained more than 14,500 medical students from 30 different countries at its Latin American School of Medicine in Havana since 1999. Moreover, some 36,000 Cuban physicians worked in 72 countries, from Europe to Southeast Asia, including 31 African countries, and 29 countries in the Americas. Countries such as Honduras, Guatemala, and Nicaragua benefit from Cuban assistance.

Post 2015 development agenda

Although there has been major advancements and improvements achieving some of the MDGs even before the deadline of 2015, the progress has been uneven between the countries. In 2012 the UN Secretary-General established the "UN System Task Team on the Post-2015 UN Development Agenda", bringing together more than 60 UN agencies and international organizations to focus and work on sustainable development.

At the MDG Summit, UN Member States discussed the Post-2015 Development Agenda and initiated a process of consultations. Civil society organizations also engaged in the post-2015 process, along with academia and other research institutions, including think tanks.

The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) have been proposed as targets relating to future international development once they expire at the end of 2015.  [DJS -- Unclear]

On 31 July 2012, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon appointed 26 public and private leaders to advise him on the post-MDG agenda.

In 2014, the UN's Commission on the Status of Women agreed on a document that called for the acceleration of progress towards achieving the millennium development goals, and confirmed the need for a stand-alone goal on gender equality and women's empowerment in post-2015 goals, and for gender equality to underpin all of the post-2015 goals.

Related activities/organisations

The United Nations Millennium Campaign is a UNDP campaign to increase support for the Millennium Development Goals. The Millennium Campaign targets intergovernmental, government, civil society organizations and media at global and regional levels.

The Millennium Promise Alliance, Inc. (or simply the "Millennium Promise") is a U.S.-based non-profit organization founded in 2005 by Jeffrey Sachs and Ray Chambers. Millennium Promise coordinates the Millennium Villages Project in partnership with Columbia's Earth Institute and UNDP; it aims to demonstrate MDG feasibility through an integrated, community-led approach. As of 2012 the Millennium Villages Project operated in 14 sites across 10 countries in sub-Saharan Africa.

The Global Poverty Project is an international education and advocacy organisation that encourages MC support in English-speaking countries.

The Micah Challenge is an international campaign that encourages Christians to support the Millennium Development Goals. Their aim is to "encourage our leaders to halve global poverty by 2015".

The Youth in Action EU Programme "Cartoons in Action" project created animated videos about MDGs, and videos about MDG targets using Arcade C64 videogames.

The World We Want 2015 is a platform and joint venture between the United Nations and Civil Society Organizations that supports citizen participation in defining a new global development framework to replace the Millennium Development Goals.

Education

The Teach MDGs, and Accessing Development Education European projects, coordinated by Future Worlds Center aim to increase MDG awareness and public support by engaging teacher training institutes, teachers and pupils in developing local teaching resources that promote the MDGs with a focus on sub-Saharan Africa.

Global Education Magazine is an initiative launched by the teaching team that formulated the proposal most voted in the group "Sustainable Development for the Eradication of Poverty in Rio+20". It is supported by UNESCO and UNHCR and aims to create a common place to disseminate transcultural, transpolitical, transnational and transhumanist knowledge.

UN Goals

UN Goals is a global project dedicated to spreading knowledge of MDG through various internet and offline awareness campaigns.This has had tremendous progress.

Libraries and the Millennium Development Goals

Librarians and others in the information professions are in a unique position to help achieve the Millennium Development Goals. It is often the dissemination of key information, e.g., about health, that changes daily life and can affect an entire community.

Millennium Development Goals are not only for the developing world. Maret (2011) specifically addresses how U.S. public libraries can help the United States meet the goals. The work of U.S. librarians has evolved in a manner that incorporates human rights values and precepts without having generally used the language that characterizes the philosophical and ethical goals of human rights and human development. Librarians are able to further the Millennium Development Goals and contribute by providing information and services to all people in varying formats and languages.

Albright and Kwooya (2007) report that cultural and financial barriers in Sub-Saharan Africa impede LIS education programs. As a result, MDG goals for poverty, healthcare, and education fall short. High rates of HIV/AIDS, and escalating child and maternal mortality are the direct result of poverty and substandard medical care. Limited instruction in information access and exchange contributes to this ongoing dilemma.

Genuine progress indicator

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Genuine progress indicator (GPI) is a metric that has been suggested to replace, or supplement, gross domestic product (GDP). The GPI is designed to take fuller account of the well-being of a nation, only a part of which pertains to the size of the nation's economy, by incorporating environmental and social factors which are not measured by GDP. For instance, some models of GPI decrease in value when the poverty rate increases. The GPI separates the concept of societal progress from economic growth.

The GPI is used in ecological economics, "green" economics, sustainability and more inclusive types of economics. It factors in environmental and carbon footprints that businesses produce or eliminate, including in the forms of resource depletion, pollution and long-term environmental damage. GDP is increased twice when pollution is created, since it increases once upon creation (as a side-effect of some valuable process) and again when the pollution is cleaned up; in contrast, GPI counts the initial pollution as a loss rather than a gain, generally equal to the amount it will cost to clean up later plus the cost of any negative impact the pollution will have in the mean time. While quantifying costs and benefits of these environmental and social externalities is a difficult task, "Earthster-type databases could bring more precision and currency to GPI's metrics." It has been noted that such data may also be embraced by those who attempt to "internalize externalities" by making companies pay the costs of the pollution they create (rather than having the government or society at large bear those costs) "by taxing their goods proportionally to their negative ecological and social impacts".

GPI is an attempt to measure whether the environmental impact and social costs of economic production and consumption in a country are negative or positive factors in overall health and well-being. By accounting for the costs borne by the society as a whole to repair or control pollution and poverty, GPI balances GDP spending against external costs. GPI advocates claim that it can more reliably measure economic progress, as it distinguishes between the overall "shift in the 'value basis' of a product, adding its ecological impacts into the equation". Comparatively speaking, the relationship between GDP and GPI is analogous to the relationship between the gross profit of a company and the net profit; the net profit is the gross profit minus the costs incurred, while the GPI is the GDP (value of all goods and services produced) minus the environmental and social costs. Accordingly, the GPI will be zero if the financial costs of poverty and pollution equal the financial gains in production of goods and services, all other factors being constant.

Motivation

Most economists assess progress in people's welfare by comparing the gross domestic product over time—that is, by adding up the annual dollar value of all goods and services produced within a country over successive years. However, GDP was not intended to be used for such purpose. It is prone to productivism or consumerism, over-valuing production and consumption of goods, and not reflecting improvement in human well-being. It also does not distinguish between money spent for new production and money spent to repair negative outcomes from previous expenditure. For example, it would treat as equivalent one million dollars spent to build new homes and one million dollars spent in aid relief to those whose homes have been destroyed, despite these expenditures arguably not representing the same kind of progress. This is relevant for example when considering the true costs of development that destroys wetlands and hence exacerbate flood damages. Simon Kuznets, the inventor of the concept of GDP, noted in his first report to the US Congress in 1934:
the welfare of a nation can scarcely be inferred from a measure of national income. If the GDP is up, why is America down? Distinctions must be kept in mind between quantity and quality of growth, between costs and returns, and between the short and long run. Goals for more growth should specify more growth of what and for what.
Some have argued that an adequate measure must also take into account ecological yield and the ability of nature to provide services, and that these things are part of a more inclusive ideal of progress, which transcends the traditional focus on raw industrial production.

Theoretical foundation

The need for a GPI to supplement biased indicators such as GDP was highlighted by analyses of uneconomic growth in the 1980s, notably that of Marilyn Waring, who studied biases in the UN System of National Accounts.

By the early 1990s, there was a consensus in human development theory and ecological economics that growth in money supply was actually reflective of a loss of well-being: that lacks of essential natural and social services were being paid for in cash and that this was expanding the economy but degrading life.

The matter remains controversial and is a main issue between advocates of green economics and neoclassical economics. Neoclassical economists understand the limitations of GDP for measuring human well-being but nevertheless regard GDP as an important, though imperfect, measure of economic output and would be wary of too close an identification of GDP growth with aggregate human welfare. However, GDP tends to be reported as synonymous with economic progress by journalists and politicians, and the GPI seeks to correct this shorthand by providing a more encompassing measure.

Some economists, notably Herman Daly, John B. Cobb and Philip Lawn, have asserted that a country's growth, increased goods production, and expanding services have both "costs" and "benefits"—not just the "benefits" that contribute to GDP. They assert that, in some situations, expanded production facilities damage the health, culture, and welfare of people. Growth that was in excess of sustainable norms (e.g., of ecological yield) had to be considered to be uneconomic. According to the "threshold hypothesis", developed by Manfred Max-Neef, "when macroeconomic systems expand beyond a certain size, the additional benefits of growth are exceeded by the attendant costs" (Max-Neef 1995). This hypothesis is borne out in data comparing GDP/capita with GPI/capita from 17 countries. The graph demonstrates that, while GDP does increase overall well-being to a point, beyond $7,000 GDP/capita the increase in GPI is reduced or remains stagnant.[5] Similar trends can be seen when comparing GDP to life satisfaction as well as in a Gallup Poll published in 2008.

According to Lawn's model, the "costs" of economic activity include the following potential harmful effects:
Analysis by Robert Costanza also around 1995 of nature's services and their value showed that a great deal of degradation of nature's ability to clear waste, prevent erosion, pollinate crops, etc., was being done in the name of monetary profit opportunity: this was adding to GDP but causing a great deal of long term risk in the form of mudslides, reduced yields, lost species, water pollution, etc. Such effects have been very marked in areas that suffered serious deforestation, notably Haiti, Indonesia, and some coastal mangrove regions of India and South America. Some of the worst land abuses for instance have been shrimp farming operations that destroyed mangroves, evicted families, left coastal lands salted and useless for agriculture, but generated a significant cash profit for those who were able to control the export market in shrimp. This has become a signal example to those who contest the idea that GDP growth is necessarily desirable.

GPI systems generally try to take account of these problems by incorporating sustainability: whether a country's economic activity over a year has left the country with a better or worse future possibility of repeating at least the same level of economic activity in the long run. For example, agricultural activity that uses replenishing water resources, such as river runoff, would score a higher GPI than the same level of agricultural activity that drastically lowers the water table by pumping irrigation water from wells.

"Income" vs. "capital depletion"

Hicks (1946) pointed out that the practical purpose of calculating income is to indicate the maximum amount that people can produce and consume without undermining their capacity to produce and consume the same amount in the future. From a national income perspective, it is necessary to answer the following question: "Can a nation's entire GDP be consumed without undermining its ability to produce and consume the same GDP in the future?" This question is largely ignored in contemporary economics but fits under the idea of sustainability.

In legislative decisions

The best-known attempts to apply the concepts of GPI to legislative decisions are probably the Atlantic indicator invented by Ronald Colman for Atlantic Canada, the Alberta GPI created by ecological economist Mark Anielski to measure the long-term economic, social and environmental sustainability of the province of Alberta and the "environmental and sustainable development indicators" used by the Government of Canada to measure its own progress to achieving well-being goals: its Environment and Sustainable Development Indicators Initiative (Canada) is an effort to justify state services in GPI terms. It assigns the Commissioner for the Environment and Sustainable Development (Canada), an officer in the Auditor-General of Canada's office, to perform the analysis and report to the House of Commons. However, Canada continues to state its overall budgetary targets in terms of reducing its debt to GDP ratio, which implies that GDP increase and debt reduction in some combination are its main priorities.

In the European Union (EU) the Metropole efforts and the London Health Observatory methods are equivalents focused mostly on urban lifestyle.

The EU and Canadian efforts are among the most advanced in any of the G8 or OECD nations, but there are parallel efforts to measure quality of life or standard of living in health (not strictly wealth) terms in all developed nations. This has also been a recent focus of the labour movement.

Calculation

The calculation of GPI presented in the simplified form is the following:
  • GPI = A + B - C - D + I
  • A is income weighted private consumption
  • B is value of non-market services generating welfare
  • C is private defensive cost of natural deterioration
  • D is cost of deterioration of nature and natural resources
  • I is increase in capital stock and balance of international trade

The GPI indicator is based on the concept of sustainable income, presented by economist John Hicks (1948). The sustainable income is the amount a person or an economy can consume during one period without decreasing his or her consumption during the next period. In the same manner, GPI depicts the state of welfare in the society by taking into account the ability to maintain welfare on at least the same level in the future.

Components

The Genuine Progress Indicator is measured by 26 indicators which can be divided into three main categories: Economic, Environmental, and Social. Some regions, nations, or states may adjust the verbiage slightly to accommodate their particular scenario. For example, the GPI template uses the phrase "Carbon Dioxide Emissions Damage" whereas the state of Maryland uses "Cost of Climate Change" because it also accounts for other greenhouse gases (GHG) such as methane and nitrous oxide.

Development in the United States

Non-profit organizations and universities have measured the GPI of Vermont, Maryland, Colorado, Ohio, and Utah. These efforts have incited government action in some states. As of 2014, Vermont, Maryland, Washington and Hawai'i have passed state government initiatives to consider GPI in budgeting decisions, with a focus on long-term cost and benefits.

In 2009, the state of Maryland formed a coalition of representatives from several state government departments in search of a metric that would factor social well-being into the more traditional gross product indicators of the economy. The metric would help determine the sustainability of growth and economic progress against social and environmental factors typically left out of national indicators. The GPI was chosen as a comprehensive measure of sustainability as it has a well-accepted scientific methodology that can be adopted by other states and compared over time. Maryland's GPI trends are comparable to other states and nations that have measured their GPI in that Gross State Product (GSP) and GPI have diverged over the past four decades where GSP has increased more rapidly than GPI. While economic elements of GPI have increased overall (with a significant drop off during the Great Recession), social well-being has stagnated, with any values added being cancelled out by costs deducted, and environmental indicators, while improving slightly, are always considered costs. Combined, these elements bring the GPI below GSP. However, Maryland's GPI did increase by two points from 2010 to 2011.

The calculation methodology of GPI was first adapted to US data in the late-1990s. Results show that GDP has increased substantially. At the same time, the GPI has stagnated. Thus, according to GPI theory, economic growth in the US, i.e., the growth of GDP, has not increased the welfare of the people during last 30 years. So far, GPI time-series have been calculated for the US and Australia as well as for several of their states. In addition, GPI has been calculated for Austria, Canada, Chile, France, Finland, Italy, the Netherlands, Scotland, and the rest of the UK.

Development in Finland

The GPI time-series 1945 to 2011 for Finland have been calculated by Statistics Finland. The calculation closely followed the US methodology. The results show that in the 1970s and 1980s economic growth, as measured by GDP, clearly increased welfare, measured by the GPI. After the economic recession of the early-1990s the GDP continued to grow, but the GPI stayed on a lower level. This indicates a widening gap between the trends of GDP and GPI that began in the early-1990s. In the 1990s and 2000s the growth of GDP has not benefited the average Finn. If measured by GPI, sustainable economic welfare has actually decreased due to environmental hazards that have accumulated in the environment. The Finnish GPI time series have been updated by Dr Jukka Hoffrén at Statistics Finland.

Development in Finland regions

Within EU's Interreg IV C FRESH Project (Forwarding Regional Environmental Sustainable Hierarchies) GPI time-series were calculated to Päijät-Häme, Kainuu and South-Ostrobotnia (Etelä-Pohjanmaa) regions in 2009-2010. During 2011 these calculations were completed with GPI calculations for the Lappland, Northern Ostrobothnia (Pohjois-Pohjanmaa) and Central-Ostrobothnia (Keski-Pohjanmaa) regions.

Criticism

GDP is held up as a value neutral measure. It is relatively straightforward to measure compared to GPI. Competing measures like GPI define well-being to mean things that the definers ideologically support. Therefore, opponents of GPI claim that GPI cannot function to measure the goals of a diverse, plural society. Supporters of GDP as a measure of societal well-being claim that competing measures such as GPI are more vulnerable to political manipulation.

Finnish economists Mika Maliranta and Niku Määttänen write that the problem of alternative development indexes is their attempt to combine things that are incommensurable. It is hard to say what they exactly indicate and difficult to make decisions based on them. They can be compared to an indicator that shows the mean of a car's velocity and the amount of fuel left.

They add that it indeed seems as if the economy has to grow in order for the people to even remain as happy as they are at present. In Japan, for example, the degree of happiness expressed by the citizens in polls has been declining since the early 1990s, the period when Japan's economic growth stagnated.

Supporting countries and groups

  • Canada planning applications. GDP has functioned as an "income sheet". GPI will function as a "balance sheet," taking into consideration that some income sources are very costly and contribute a negative profit overall.
  • Beyond GDP is an initiative of the European Union, Club of Rome, WWF and OECD.
  • Redefining Progress. Reports and analyses. A non-profit organization with headquarters in Oakland, California.

GPI and GPI-type studies completed

+/- Indicator Brief Explanation
Economic Personal Consumption Expenditures The bulk of GDP as well, consumption informs the baseline from which the rest of the indicators will be added or subtracted.
÷ Income Inequality Using the Gini index, published by World Bank, and the Income Distribution Index (IDI), its relative change over time.
(PCE/IDI)*100 Adjusted Personal Consumption Formula=(Personal consumption/IDI) x 100. Forms the base number from which the remaining indicators are added or subtracted.
- Cost of Consumer Durables Calculated as a cost to avoid double counting the value provided by the durables themselves.
+ Value of Consumer Durables Household appliances, cars, etc. are not used up in one year and are considered a part of household capital. Their value is depreciated over a number of years.
- Cost of Underemployment Encompasses the chronically unemployed, discouraged workers, involuntary part-time workers and others with work-life restraints (lack of childcare or transportation).
+/- Net Capital Investment Capital investment in foreign markets minus incoming investments from other countries. If lending (+) if borrowing (-).
Environmental

- Cost of Water Pollution Damage to water quality from things such as chemicals or nutrients, and the costs of erosion/sedimentation in waterways.
- Cost of Air Pollution Includes damage to vegetation, degradation of materials, cost of clean-up from soot or acid rain, and resulting reduced property values, wage differentials and aesthetics.
- Cost of Noise Pollution Noise from traffic and factories can cause hearing loss and sleep deprivation.
- Loss of Wetlands Valuates the services given up when wetlands are lost to development i.e. buffering of weather, habitat, water purification.
- Loss of farmland, soil quality or degradation Due to urbanization, soil erosion and compaction. This indicator is measured cumulatively to account for all years of production lost as it compromises self-sufficient food supply.
- Loss of Primary Forest and damage from logging roads Loss of biodiversity, soil quality, water purification, carbon sequestration, recreation etc. Cumulative affect year over year.
- CO2 Emissions Increases in severe weather is causing billions in damages. A value of $93USD/metric ton of CO2 emitted is used, based on a meta-analysis study by Richard Tol (2005) of 103 separate studies of costs of economic damages.
- Cost of Ozone Depletion Our protective layer in the atmosphere. Depletion can lead to increased cases of cancer, cataracts and plant decline. Weighed at $49,669USD/ton
- Depletion of Non-Renewables These cannot be renewed in a lifetime. Depletion is measured against cost of implementing and substituting with renewable resources.
Social

+ Value of Housework and Parenting Child care, repairs and maintenance are valued equivalent to the amount a household would have to pay for the service.
- Cost of Family Changes Social dysfunction presents itself early in family life. Care is taken to avoid double counting goods and services duplicated due to split-parent households.
- Cost of Crime Medical expenses, property damages, psychological care and security measures to prevent crime are all included in this indicator.
- Cost of Household Pollution Abatement Cost to residents to clean the air and water in their own household i.e. air and water filters.
+ Value of Volunteer Work Valued as a contribution to social welfare. Neighborhoods and communities can find an informal safety net through their peers and volunteer work.
- Loss of Leisure Time Compared to 1969 hours of leisure. Recognizes that increased output of goods and services can lead to loss of valuable leisure time for family, chores or otherwise.
+ Value of Higher Education Accounts for the contribution resulting knowledge, productivity, civic engagement, savings, and health; a "social spillover," set to $16,000 per year.
+ Value of Highways and Streets Annual value of services contributed from the use of streets and highways. Valued at 7.5% of net stock of local, state and federal highways.
- Cost of Commuting Money spent to pay for the transportation and time lost in transit as opposed to other more enjoyable activities.
- Cost of Auto Accidents Damage and loss as a result of traffic accidents. Increased traffic densities are a direct result of industrialization and wealth accumulation.

Indicator name Region Beginning year in study End year in study Year of publication Authors
MEW -(A/S) United States of America 1929 1965 1972 Nordhaus and Tobin
ISEW United States of America 1951 1986 1989 Daly and Cobb
ISEW Germany 1950 1990 1994 Diefenbacher
ISEW Scotland 1980 1991 1994 Moffatt and Wilson
ISEW Netherlands 1950 1992 1995 Oegema and Rosenberg
ISEW Netherlands 1950 1992 1995 Rosenberg, Oegema, Bovy
ISEW Sweden 1950 1992 1996 Jackson and Stymne
ISEW Austria 1955 1992 1997 Stockhammer et al.
ISEW UK 1950 1996 1997 Jackson, et al.
ISEW Austria 1955 1992 1997 Stockhammer, Hochreiter, Obermayr, Steiner
ISEW Italy 1960 1991 1998 Giogio Guenno, Silvia Tiezzi
ISEW Chile 1965 1995 1999 Castañeda
GPI United States of America 1950 1998 1999 Cobb, Goodman, Wackernagel
GPI Australia 1950 1996 1999 Clive Hamilton
SNBI Australia 1966 1967 1999 Lawn and Sanders
SNBI Australia 1994 1995 1999 Lawn and Sanders
ISEW Scotland 1980 1993 1999 Hanley
GPI Australia 1950 2000 2000 Hamilton and Dennis
GPI Minnesota 1960 1995 2000 Minnesota Planning Agency
GPI Alberta, Canada 1961 1999 2001 Mark Anielski
ISEW Czech Republic 1988 1998 2002 Scasny
ISEW Poland 1980 1997 2003 Gil and Sleszynski
ISEW Wales 1990 2000 2003 Matthews, Williams, Roberts, Munday
GPI United States of America 1950 2002 2004 Venetoulis and Cobb
GPI San Francisco Bay Area 2000 2000 2004 Venetoulis and Cobb
GPI Vermont, Chittenton County, and Burlington 1950 2000 2004 Costanza, Erickson et al.
ISEW Thailand 1975 1999 2005 Matthew Clarke, Sardar M.N. Islam
GPI United States of America 1950 2004 2006 John Talberth, Clifford Cobb, and Noah Slattery
ISEW Siena, Italy 1999 1999 2006 Pulselli, Ciampalini, Tiezzi, Zappia
ISEW Belgium 1970 2000 2006 Brent Bleys
GPI Victoria, Australia 1986 2003 2006 Clarke and Lawn
ISEW Netherlands 1971 2004 2007 Brent Bleys
IBES/ISEW Puerto Rico 1970 2006 2007 Alameda-Lozada and Diaz-Rodriguez
GPI China (4 regions) 1991 2001 2007 Zongguo Wen, Kunmin Zhanf, Bin Du, Yadong Li, Wei Li
GPI Northern Vermont (7 counties) 1950 2000 2007 Bagstad and Ceroni
ISEW Belgium 1970 2004 2008 Brent Bleys
R-ISEW England (regions) 1994 2005 2008 Tim Jackson, Nat McBride, Saamah Abdallah and Nic Marks
ISEW France 1990 2002 2008 Nourry
ISEW Modena and Rimini, Italy ? ? 2008 Pulselli, F.M., Tiezzi, E., Marchettini, N., Bastiononi, S.
GPI India 1987 2003 2008 Ed: Philip Lawn and Matthew Clarke (Book)
GPI Australia 1967 2006 2008 Ed: Philip Lawn and Matthew Clarke (Book)
GPI New Zealand 1970 2005 2008 Ed: Philip Lawn and Matthew Clarke (Book)
GPI Japan 1970 2003 2008 Ed: Philip Lawn and Matthew Clarke (Book)
GPI China 1970 2005 2008 Ed: Philip Lawn and Matthew Clarke (Book)
GPI Thailand 1975 2004 2008 Ed: Philip Lawn and Matthew Clarke (Book)
GPI Vietnam 1992 2004 2008 Ed: Philip Lawn and Matthew Clarke (Book)
Edmonton Wellbeing Index Edmonton, Canada 1981 2008 2009 Anielski and Johannessen
ISEW Tuscany, Italy 1971 2006 2009 Pulselli, F., Bravi, M., Tiezzi, E.
GPI Utah 1990 2007 2011 Berik, G. and E. Gaddis.
GPI Baltimore City, County, and the State of Maryland 1950 2005 2011 Posner, S. and R. Costanza
GPI Vermont 1960 2010 2011 Zencey, Eric, Sebastian Castro, Marigo Farr, Mark Isselhardt, Brian Kelly, Katharine Lucas, Julie Nash, Matt Pescatore, Meagan Pharis, Vinson Pierce, Tarah Rose, Daniel Sanchez, Aaron Witham, Zach Zimmerman.
GPI & ISEW Päijät-Häme, 'CEDESO', and Kainuu, Finland 1960 2009 2011 Hoffren
GPI Vermont 1960 2011 2013 Jon D. Erickson, Eric Zencey, Matthew J. Burke, Sam Carlson, and Zachary Zimmerman
GPI Maryland 1950 2004 2012 MacGuire, S., S. Posner, H. Haake
ISEW Netherlands 1970 2010 2012 Bob van Moerkerk
GPI Northern Ohio 1990 2005 2012 Kenneth Bagstad and Md Rumi Shammin
ISEW Flanders, Belgium 1990 2009 2013 Brent Bleys
GPI Austria 1955 1992 2013 Kubiszewski, Costanza, Franco, Lawn, Talberth, Jackson, Aylmer
GPI Belgium 1970 2005 2013 Kubiszewski, Costanza, Franco, Lawn, Talberth, Jackson, Aylmer
GPI Netherlands 1950 1992 2013 Kubiszewski, Costanza, Franco, Lawn, Talberth, Jackson, Aylmer
GPI Poland 1980 1998 2013 Kubiszewski, Costanza, Franco, Lawn, Talberth, Jackson, Aylmer
GPI Italy 1960 1990 2013 Kubiszewski, Costanza, Franco, Lawn, Talberth, Jackson, Aylmer
GPI Sweden 1950 1992 2013 Kubiszewski, Costanza, Franco, Lawn, Talberth, Jackson, Aylmer
GPI United Kingdom 1950 2001 2013 Kubiszewski, Costanza, Franco, Lawn, Talberth, Jackson, Aylmer
GPI United States 1950 2005 2013 Kubiszewski, Costanza, Franco, Lawn, Talberth, Jackson, Aylmer
GPI Chile 1950 1992 2013 Kubiszewski, Costanza, Franco, Lawn, Talberth, Jackson, Aylmer
GPI Australia 1965 2006 2013 Kubiszewski, Costanza, Franco, Lawn, Talberth, Jackson, Aylmer
GPI New Zealand 1970 2005 2013 Kubiszewski, Costanza, Franco, Lawn, Talberth, Jackson, Aylmer
GPI China 1970 2006 2013 Kubiszewski, Costanza, Franco, Lawn, Talberth, Jackson, Aylmer
GPI India 1985 2003 2013 Kubiszewski, Costanza, Franco, Lawn, Talberth, Jackson, Aylmer
GPI Japan 1970 2003 2013 Kubiszewski, Costanza, Franco, Lawn, Talberth, Jackson, Aylmer
GPI Thailand 1975 2005 2013 Kubiszewski, Costanza, Franco, Lawn, Talberth, Jackson, Aylmer
GPI Vietnam 1990 2005 2013 Kubiszewski, Costanza, Franco, Lawn, Talberth, Jackson, Aylmer
GPI Global 1950 2005 2013 Kubiszewski, Costanza, Franco, Lawn, Talberth, Jackson, Aylmer
ISEW Tuscany and Marche, Italy 1999 2009 2013 Chelli, Ciommi, Gigliarano
GPI Maryland 1960 2013 2014 Hans Haake
GPI Hawaii 2000 2009 2014 Regina Ostergaard-Klem, Kirsten Oleson
ISEW Flanders, Belgium 1990 2012 2014 Brent Bleys
GPI Brazil 1970 2010 2015 Daniel Caixeta Andrade, Junior Ruiz Garcia
GPI Hong Kong 1968 2010 2015 Claudio O Delang (Book)
GPI Singapore 1968 2010 2015 Claudio O Delang (Book)
GPI Massachuesetts 1960 2012 2015 Jon D. Erickson, Eric Zencey, and Zachary Zimmerman
GPI Oregon 1960 2010 2015 Ida Kubiszewski, Robert Costanza, Nicole E. Gorko, Michael A. Weisdorf, Austin W. Carnes, Cathrine E. Collins, Carol Franco, Lillian R. Gehres, Jenna M. Knobloch, Gayle E. Matson, Joan D. Schoepfer
ISEW Flanders, Belgium 1990 2014 2016 Brent Bleys
GPI Missouri 2000 2014 2016 Zencey, Eric
ISEW Flanders, Belgium 1990 2015 2017 Brent Bleys
GPI US, 50 States 2010 2011 2017 Mairi-Jane Fox
GPI California 2010 2014 2017 Brown and Lazarus
ISEW Turkey 2001 2012 2018 Angeliki Menegaki
N/RWI Germany, Bavaria, Hamburg, North Rhine/Westphalia, Rhineland-Palantinate, Saxonia, Thuringia 1991 2014 2018 Held, Rodenhäuser, Diefenbacher, Zieschank
GPI Vermont 2000 2015 2018 Eric Zencey
GPI 10 megacities (Beijing, Tianjin, Nanjing, Shanghai, Guangzhou, Chongqing, Chengdu, Xi'an, Wuhan, Shenyang), China 199x 201x 2018 Lu Huang

Mandatory Palestine

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandatory_Palestine   Palestine 1920–...