Building an advocacy coalition for financing development

Financing for Development Seminar

Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, Rome, July 9, 2004

Afternoon Session: “ Building an advocacy coalition for financing development”

Katherine Marshall, The World Bank

Introduction

I am honored to be here today, on Jim Wolfensohn’s behalf.  He wanted to be here in person, given his deep commitment to the subject we are discussing today, and asked me to convey his thanks to the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace and to salute all of you -- Ministers, international organizations, civil society and NGOs, and development experts.  Your presence today underscores our shared commitment to rebalancing our world in favor of all its citizens by fighting poverty and promoting development and peace. It offers a remarkable opportunity to learn from our individual and collective experience.

This morning’s session on development finance addressed in considerable depth the critical challenges facing us in implementing the Millennium Development Goals (highlighting above all our shared concern about the looming prospect of likely shortfalls).  It also focused on debt relief, the importance and the evolution of the PRSP process, and the International Financing Facility (IFF) and other potential innovative sources of financing, as responses to the critical challenges of ensuring adequate development financing. This afternoon, the focus is on the effort to translate these goals and specific financing objectives into reality, and in particular to build and build on advocacy coalitions.  The most immediate issue is the game-plan for the international community as a framework for the campaign through to 2005 and beyond, particularly on the MDGs, the IFF and the PRSPs. My intervention aims to establish a bridge between these agendas and addresses three principle topics:

The MDG Agenda and Financing for Development

            Today’s discussion has traced and highlighted in considerable depth the key foundations for moving ahead with the MDG agenda and for a renewed focus on implementation.  Several elements emerge as priorities:

(a)    Making the case for aid – the discussion today echoes the moral, technical, geopolitical, and other facets of the powerful case that we can make for aid, and it has focused strongly on the central importance of grounding this case in basic arguments around human dignity.  The importance of making critical linkages among different elements of the agenda emerges: the importance of trade and aid as complementary facets of the agenda bears special emphasis.  As we look ahead, it is also vital that we present and consider the remaining debt burden and potential avenues for alleviating the debt burden as an integral part of the broader development and aid agenda.  We face the special challenge of keeping the focus on Africa and the world’s poorest countries, in the face of new challenges and pressures and the current global strategic agenda which has, in practice, drawn a significant share of resources.  There are some key areas of emphasis ahead, among them the importance of tailoring messages to appeal to wider audiences.  Younger audiences seem often more motivated by environmental than poverty issues, yet their engagement has special importance and we need to find better ways to enlist their support.

(b)    Demonstrating effectiveness and results both on the recipient and donor side.  Making the case that aid is being well used has special importance. Ongoing efforts to harmonize aid, to move away from practices that in the past detracted from country commitment and ownership, to simplify donor agency practices, and above all, to link aid to poverty reduction amount to major advances, which are too little known and understood.  This challenge puts a spotlight, inter alia, on the issue of corruption, which is a theme that echoes in many audiences, both in donor countries and in the developing world.  We must be convincing that the issue is being well and actively addressed. 

(c)    Using innovative and creative approaches such as the IFF proposed by Gordon Brown.  This avenue was discussed in depth this morning; we fully support these efforts to develop new and innovative sources of financing.

(d)    And most important, mobilizing the political will to step up on aid commitments.  This means delivering on the Monterrey Summit commitments to raise aid levels and work together with a focus on results.  It means providing aid in a form that is more predictable, more flexible and more supportive of the MDGs than in the past.

Priorities for the Advocacy Coalition

The paradox of the disappointing picture painted this morning is that there has never been a better time to scale up actions in the fight against poverty. We have solid foundations laid by past successes, we have learned ample lessons from past mistakes, and we have strong commitments from all actors, expressed time and time again and unequivocally in public statements.  We have a solid development system based on mutual accountabilities.  We know well that development starts in developing countries themselves and that development strategies and policies must be locally grown and country owned.  And we have all committed ourselves to align aid better with country priorities, to focus it on tangible and concrete results, and to harmonize aid practices and procedures

In exploring the paradox of powerful verbal commitment to fighting poverty versus disappointing results, four elements need special focus:

·         The gap between rhetoric and reality: at some levels this reflects age old disconnects in political and administrative processes, short attention spans in media and political realms, and the harsh reality of competing priorities.  The remedy here lies in part in building stronger and transparent accountability mechanisms.  Another element entails concerted efforts to explore specific underlying gaps in understanding or doubts that come into force when priority decisions emerge.  An illustration is the importance of demonstrating real progress in fighting corruption to allay doubts that aid funds will be well used.

·         The gap between commitments – both political but also financial – and delivery.  This highlights the central importance of implementation issues and again spotlights the importance of harmonizing aid practices and building communication systems that reduce overlap and waste and encourage learning from experience.

·         The pattern of short term and spasmodic aid commitments versus the need for predictable, long term partnerships and support.  This highlights the need for new financing mechanisms but also the imperative need to highlight the message that development assistance – for example in building education systems and fighting HIV/AIDS - is a marathon, not a sprint, and needs long term and sustained engagement to succeed.

·         Addressing doubts, critiques and skeptics.  However clear and compelling we find the arguments for the MDGs and for development aid, voices of critics remain strong.  Part of the process of building strong advocacy coalitions needs to be continued engagement with those who see development priorities very differently.  Dialogue about the central issues and mutual listening to varying perspectives can only enrich both development programs and advocacy strategies and coalitions.

No message emerged more clearly this morning than the importance of political will, which in turn highlights the importance of broadening public support of the development agenda.  This effort to reinforce the political will to fight poverty exemplified in the Millennium Declaration also has a strong foundation to build on.  The growing importance of civil society action and advocacy at both global and national levels is an essential pillar.  Heightened interest in development issues from parliamentarians, youth constituencies, media, and business are all in evidence and all are essential.  The advocacy coalition will need the efforts of a large and multifaceted set of allies and partners that engage a wide range of actors, including both those already engaged and new groups and communities.

The example of advocacy coalitions for debt relief (and specifically the Jubilee debt campaign) over the past five years is both instructive and inspirational.  This campaign, mounted on what many saw as an irretrievably technical and practically intractable issue, demonstrated how far diverse communities could and would engage on a central development issue.  The energy, creativity, and stamina of the campaigners over time has been remarkable.  The Jubilee effort shows that when there is a combination of determined and creative civil society action, leadership from faith institutions and communities, and willingness of the official sector to listen and engage, there can be a powerful impetus for change.  The same zeal and coalitions are needed now to address the broader range of development issues, to mobilize financing at the scale and in the forms which can allow the global community to step up its action and to achieve the MDGs.

Faith Communities and the Advocacy Coalitions

At a fundamental level, a strong case can be made that the MDGs cannot be achieved without the full engagement of faith communities, in their many dimensions (thus including interfaith movements, faith-based NGOs, and faith communities and leaders themselves).  They are one of the largest global communities, most dynamic, and most directly concerned with poverty of the communities concerned with development goals, internationally and nationally.  We thus see them as essential parts of the advocacy coalitions that are needed.  Faith communities offer vast organizational networks that can mobilize support, their direct engagement and experience can enrich debate, they make specific contributions on many of the MDGs, notably in health and education, and they can help ensure the moral leadership and moral compass that are needed to keep the central issues of human dignity and the ethical imperative of concerted action at the fore. 

While faith communities have been and are now much involved across the development agenda, there is a vast untapped potential that we hope, together, to explore.  That is one of the central challenges for this meeting today and the follow up that can result.

The engagement of faith communities in the broader advocacy coalition presents significant challenges, some illustrative of the broader challenge we are discussing today of mobilizing a global coalition that engages widely disparate communities, and some more specific to faith communities themselves.  Their very diversity and the important differences in approach among faith communities – for example in their varying perspectives on labor issues, on priorities for action on water management, on appropriate mechanisms for investment finance – highlight the central importance of knowledge and engagement as a basis for alliances. 

A respectful and probing dialogue, among faiths and above all between faith and development actors is an essential foundation for the coalitions that we seek to build.  Faith traditions engage in a rich range of dialogue processes – ecumenical and interfaith – that exhibit the structure, tone, stamina and continuity that are needed well beyond theological and philosophical issues.  As an example, the World Bank’s World Development Report for 2005/6 will focus on the topic of equity.  A dialogue engaging faith communities on varying approaches to this topic will surely enrich the outcome on this most complex of topics.  It is our view that we should not shy away from difficult dialogue and difficult issues.  As an example, a dialogue between the IMF, World Bank and the World Council of Churches over the past two years began with seemingly irreconcilable mutual images of approaches to governance structures, economic models, and operating procedures.  Persistence in engaging in the dialogue has over time shed real light on the common history of the institutions since their foundation in the 1940s, the strong common ground of commitment to addressing both poverty issues and the needs of marginalized and excluded people, and specific areas of mutual action including, notably, quite complex and debated issues like water resource management and HIV/AIDS.  A conclusion of the dialogue to date is that alliances to address specific issues on the dangerous road ahead are essential and also feasible.

In building advocacy coalitions, alliances and partnerships with faith communities (as with the many constituencies that we need to engage), it is important to address both common ground and interests and apparent and real differences in approach.  I suggest ten issues below that have emerged from dialogue and practical work by the World Bank and the World Faiths Development Dialogue (WFDD) in exploring the common ground and differences among faith and development communities.  It is our conviction that to build strong coalitions we must and can address such issues.  The immediate challenge is to find and build effective mechanisms to do so.

Some challenges:

(a)    To convey with imagination both the broad vision and practical import of the Millennium Development Goals and the fight against poverty.  The message of the MDGs is compelling and critical but it is not always easy to translate into terms that a congregation or community leader will grasp as a priority and actionable subject that applies directly to them.  Finding ways to convey the message that this framework has broad application and needs to engage each and every community is a central and continuing challenge.

(b)    The message that success in the fight against poverty is not only essential but also achievable needs to be conveyed forcefully and effectively.  Fatalism – a sense that poverty shall always be with us, that little has been achieved – needs to be addressed and combated with evidence and fervor.  Bono’s message that ours is the generation that can and must address and defeat the ancient scourge of poverty resonates and bears constant repetition and deepening.

(c)    The elements of success of the Jubilee campaign, which captured public imagination in remarkable ways, deserve exploration and discussion.  We can all learn from Jubilee.

(d)    Common efforts to look to the agenda beyond debt are needed.   The Jubilee campaign focused on a clear and comprehensible action (debt cancellation at the Millennium year), founded in moral imperatives and a parallel with ancient Biblical wisdom.  But the Jubilee year is long past and the complexity of building sustainable debt mechanisms presents a continuing and long term, not a one off, challenge.  Hopefully we can engage together in shaping the agenda for dialogue, debate and action “Beyond Jubilee” in directions that recognize how far and in what ways debt is part of the broader development challenge and needs both overall frameworks and individual country by country action.

(e)    Some of the tepid practical support for poverty issues that we discussed today is due to real concerns about how well aid is used.  These concerns, which may be spoken or unspoken, need to be clearly addressed.  Corruption is a classic illustration – it is hardly surprising that political leaders give low priority to aid allocations if they believe the funds are wasted and public and leader support for the broad public policy changes that promise to bring real social justice and change cannot be whole-hearted until people believe that corrupt practices are really being addressed.  Corruption is also a classic issue where alliances and partnerships between faith and development partners can help advance a critical element of the agenda.

(f)     Another frequent topic of concern heard in faith communities relates to the role of the state, including its effectiveness in delivering programs and services but also its role vis a vis private sector actors, notably where privatization is at issue.  These complex concerns and issues are not readily or simply resolved but they come up so often and in so many ways (for example in discussing HIV/AIDS strategies, water resource management, health and education delivery) that it suggests that doubts here impede real progress towards alliance and partnership.  Dialogue on these topics deserves a priority.

(g)    One of the most contentious and divisive issues among and within faith communities and between the worlds of faith and development is the role of women in society and particularly women’s reproductive health issues and rights.  These issues have both practical and symbolic importance, lying at the core of issues of identity, cultural heritage, individual versus community rights, and pitting tradition versus modernity.  No other set of issues seems so to have colored the relations between faith and development institutions over the past decades, generally in a negative light (on both sides).  Yet few issues have such vital importance for social welfare and stability – whether in education policy, child health and nutrition, small business development, and achievement of human rights.  We need to find ways to engage in dialogue on these sensitive issues in ways that promise to advance understanding, build on such common ground as concern for maternal health, violence against women, and HIV/AIDS, and address the areas where there is real disagreement.  Leaving this issue as a “sleeping dog” is both unproductive and damaging to the broader objectives that we share.

(h)    Work undertaken over the past eight years on promoting dialogue among faith and development actors about practical development issues has barely scratched the surface of the potential for deeper engagement.  There are vast areas of misinformation, apparent indifference, gaps in understanding, unresearched questions, and inherited hostility.  There is thus a large need for informed and thoughtful dialogue – with dialogue meaning an openness to transformation on both sides and a willingness to build on dialogue with action.

(i)      When we have looked we have found a host of creative and little sung examples of effective, working alliances and  partnerships engaging faith and development institutions.  Examples range widely, and include the partnerships involving the Communita da Sant’Egidio, the Aga Khan Foundation’s education initiatives in Africa and Asia, countless emerging partnerships to deal with HIV/AIDS, including the successful alliances that account for success in Uganda and Senegal, post-conflict interventions involving Jesuits in Colombia, Buddhist communities in Cambodia and many others.  It is important that such examples be examined and celebrated (some examples are outlined in the World Bank’s new publication Mind, Heart and Soul in the Fight Against Poverty, edited by Katherine Marshall and Lucy Keough, 2004).  There is a still greater need to remove obstacles that stand in the way of such common efforts.

(j)      The issue highlighted above – of injecting imagination and humanity into the MDGs so that they are meaningful to broad constituencies and audience – has a deeper dimension.  For many faith communities, the effort to assure a decent life opportunity, effectively a “floor” level, for the world’s poorest communities is not enough and campaigns for the MGDs and for development financing need to engage the issues that extend beyond.  Basic questions about equity, about safety nets and management of life risks, of quality of life, of sense of purpose, all come into the set of issues of social justice that engage the passions and energies of many in faith communities (and, of course, elsewhere).  It is rarely sufficient to stop with the MDGs, as the interconnectedness of issues and the need to address the broad range of issues is a persistent theme.

Thank you.

WB01277

C:\Documents and Settings\wb01277.WB\My Documents\Vatican July 9 Talking Points.doc

August 8, 2004 6:29 AM