Implementation of SDGs in Nepal: Some Observations on Prioritization. Yuba Raj Khatiwada

Transcription

1 Implementation of SDGs in Nepal: Some Observations on Prioritization Yuba Raj Khatiwada

2 Background of SDGs Implementation Nepal builds 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development on what were achieved through MDGs and seeks to complete unfinished development agenda; MDGs terminal report a feedback for this. MDGs broadly achieved; but still left with a high degree of poverty, malnutrition, deprivation, mortality & environment degradation as targets were modest; SDGs taken up to almost end the development deficit. Implementation of MDGs being late starter and country ownership being taken time to take place, SDGs started early on, and with national ownership. SDGs taken up to compensate for infrastructure gap which arose for MDGs major focus on social sectors.

3 Initiatives for SDGs Implementation Prepared national report on SDGs, was one of the early countries to develop indicators even before global indicators were worked out. Implementation coincided with new planning cycle; mainstreamed SDGs in the approach paper of 3 Yr Plan starting Mid July 2016 and Budget for FY 2016/17. Audit of budget allocation on programs and projects related to SDGs from FY 2016/17; highest allocation gone for infrastructure followed by social sector including hunger. Initiated preparing detailed SDG implementation strategy, costing and financing exercise, but progress slow in absence of agreed tools & global/regional supports in capacity development.

4 Initiatives for SDGs Implementation Activities on awareness, advocacy & orientation started with goals and targets translated in local language, discussions held with parliamentarians, and local development bodies during plan preparation process. Work on localization at the provincial and local levels yet to start as provincial structure is just being formed. Preparing Envisioning Nepal: 2030 with SDGs at center point. NGOs and civil society organizations brought on board but private sector (which is major jobs creator) & cooperatives (which cover nearly half of working age population & a major player of inclusive development yet to be.

5 SDGs Prioritization Key priority areas exercised at Ministry and local bodies along with programming & budgeting guidelines issues to put SDGs in priority; but no separate exercise to prioritize within SDGs. Top priority accorded to areas of shortfall in achievement of MDGs & in basic infrastructure such as energy and road. MTEF being exercised as tool for project prioritization with given budget ceiling; projects ranked as priority 1, 2, & 3; budget negotiation and allocation done by this rank. In FY 2016/17 Budget, most (85%) spending on priority 1, most of it being directly linked to SDGs. Priority 1 projects assured of funding even in adverse resource condition; their monitoring mechanism strengthened. Resource envelop to be basis to pick SDG projects by priority.

6 SDGs Prioritization Budget allocation pattern: 13% on inclusive growth, 58% on physical infrastructure, 22 % on social services, 4% on good governance, & 3% on cross cutting areas. From SDG perspectives: 29.5 % of budget for directly addressing Goal 1 to 6 (advanced levels of MDGs), 65 % for SDG 7, 9 & 11 (mostly infrastructure) & 5.5 % for 8 SDGs. In terms of number of development projects, nearly half (48.5%) on SDGs 1-6, 35% on SDG 7, 9, &11, & 16.5% on other SDGs. Detailed Plan (under progress) to work out SDG priorities; SDG costing, financing, & fiscal space exercise to help guide the priorities. Prioritization & sequencing to base on evidence from MDGs; prioritized early interventions to be empirically evident.

7 SDGs- Key Considerations Not all goals and targets equally important or pressing for all countries, require adaptation (e.g. Goal 14 for Nepal, some targets are also irrelevant). Require prioritization and sequencing of targets & interventions to match with leveraged resources; prioritization matter being country specific issue, requires evidence based exercise. Prioritization often dictated by political consideration than synergy being generated from early interventions; technocratic role of planners at national and local levels crucial. Prioritization at local level also different from national or international levels; require adaptation to local condition.

8 SDGs- Key Considerations SDGs alignment with national plan and annual programs easier more challenging at sub-national level than at national; pressing local needs overwhelm national targets. Mainstreaming in plans and budgets a problem when local governments do not have periodic plan,implementation rigour, motivation, incentives,& capacity to implement. Goals and targets being negotiable and adaptable to country condition, risk of under-targeting (e.g. Nepal targets absolute poverty at <6%, hunger 1%, ECE 90%, access to piped water supply >95%). Disaster and other immediate issues compelling government to have shorter sight, addressing longer term development issues difficult task in political transition with unstable governments.

9 SDGs Monitoring mechanism Developing indicators for monitoring Data gaps exist; work yet to proceed for creation of data for indices demanded by national & global indicators. Issues on recognizing data from non government sources & from global agencies, standardization of indicator data sources. Existing surveys such as living standard survey, labour force survey, annual household survey, economic activity survey being recast to cover data requirement for SDGs. No survey yet to gather intra household survey needed for sex and age disaggregated information on poverty, income and social protection. Issue on collecting administrative data & ensuring reliability.

10 SDGs Monitoring mechanism Coordinating government agencies for collecting, reporting SDGs related data from one window, Strategic Statistical Plan under consideration. Some indicators serving more than one goal and target, could fit for many targets, some indicators as proposed still very aggregative; so SDG report has to be updated. Some global indicators not reflecting target even in an proximate way, some indicators for global action grossly short of effective monitoring. Global indicators mostly set in line with market based economic system; not many interventions at state level for access to productive resources, fair distribution of income and assets, etc; national government approach may differ.