IDentifiying the HDR 2005 theme by fdh56iuoui


									                                                                                                       Page 1 of 68

HDR-Net / RR-Net Consolidated Reply
Discussion - Identifying a Theme for the Global HDR 2005
Cross-posted with RR-Net
Sakiko Fukuda-Parr, David Stewart, Stefano Pettinato, Sharmila Kurukulasuriya and Laurel Gascho
23 April 2004

Table of Contents:

      Original Query
      List of Contributors
      Summary of Responses
      Responses in Full

Original Query:

Sakiko Fukuda-Parr, Human Development Report Office, UNDP New York
23 March 2004

Dear Colleagues,

As the Human Development Report 2004 begins to go to editors and translators our task turns, without a breath,
to HDR2005. The first step is to settle on a theme for the Report, and I’m writing to ask for ideas and open a
discussion on possible topics.

Over the years we have selected themes that have either contributed to cutting edge analysis on emerging
development challenges (such as new technologies in 2001 and MDGs in 2003), or extend thinking on
development by exploring new frontiers of what is meant by human development (such as human rights in 2000;
political participation and democracy in 2002; and cultural freedoms in 2004).

As you’ll note we tend to alternate one year focusing on a development challenge, and the next a new frontier of
human development. Given the HDR2004 is on a new frontier in development (cultural freedom), perhaps the
2005 report should focus on an emerging development challenge for 2005. This is a pointer but we shouldn’t let it
limit our thoughts or discussions.

There are some key areas that should guide the discussion. It is essential that the report has the potential to
contribute in at least one of the following areas:

- New concepts
- New measurement tools or approaches
- New Policy approaches

To start, but not limit, the discussion, here are some ideas which have already been thrown into the hat:

Global Governance: As the interactions between the world’s continents and countries increase with globalisation,
people’s lives are ever more determined by decisions made at global rather than national levels. For example, the                                                 10/5/2004
                                                                                                         Page 2 of 68

rules that govern trade have impacts from the price of cotton at the farm gate to the availability of life saving anti-
retroviral drugs. Not only does global governance play such an important role but there are huge asymmetries in
how the rules – or lack of them – are set up. However, a report on global governance would need to do more than
strive towards utopian ideals but try and tackle the realities of global power politics and come up with concrete
and feasible suggestions to move the world forward.

HIV/AIDS: With over 40 million people infected and over 20 million already dead HIV/AIDS stands alone as the
greatest shock to development in recent decades. Conquering this disease is a necessary condition for
development to progress and yet only one or two countries have successfully reversed its course since it reached
crisis proportions. Furthermore many countries – including India, Russia and China – stand on the cusp of an
epidemic. Much is known about preventing HIV/AIDS – but the gap between what’s known and what’s happening
is huge: the global fund for HIV/AIDS is under funded; people aren’t getting anti-retrovirals; prevention strategies
are not getting off the ground; high risk groups such as intravenous drug users are not being adequately targeted.
An HDR on HIV/AIDS would focus on how these gaps can be closed to stop the fight against HIV/AIDS becoming
an accepted failure of development.

Conflict: Between 1990 and 2001 there were 57 major conflicts in 45 locations. In almost every previous HDR
there have been good arguments to include a chapter relating the theme to conflict situations. However, one
chapter has never seemed sufficient to do the topic justice, and perhaps the time has come for a report dedicated
to this incredibly pressing issue. Even for one report the topic remains huge, with issues including conflict
prevention; dealing with conflict situations; and post conflict reconstruction.

Global inequality: The controversies surrounding global inequality continue unabated. How can it be measured? Is
it increasing? What role is within country inequality playing? How are the perceptions of inequality changing
around the world? And these questions need to revolve not only around income, but all aspects of human
development. Much more work could also be done on the drivers that can increase or reduce inequality – for
example the role that globalisation and trade play. The area that has received perhaps the least attention is the
consequences. Beyond the moral issues are questions such as if inequalities (not just income inequalities) are
fuelling tensions between different parts of the world or whether inequalities are reducing the efficiency of the
global economy.

As ever with discussion on the HDR-net and RR-net I look forward a flood of ideas and lively discussion that will
help guide us towards the right theme for 2005. While there is no strict time limit on the discussion we are keen to
move forward and reach a set of possibilities in the next couple of weeks.


Responses were received, with thanks, from:

  1.     Kalman Mizsei, UNDP/RBEC New York
  2.     Paul Andre de la Porte, UNDP Kenya
  3.     Moises Venancio, UNDP Bosnia and Herzegovina
  4.     Alfredo Marty, UNDP Bolivia
  5.     Mourad Wahba, BRSP, UNDP New York
  6.     Lebogang Motlana, UNDP Zambia
  7.     Robert Piper, UNDP Kosovo
  8.     Niels Maagaard, BOM, UNDP New York
  9.     Antonio Vigilante, UNDP Egypt
 10.     Shoji Nishimoto, BDP UNDP New York
 11.     Fikret Akcura, UNDP Kazakhstan
 12.     Inyang Ebong-Harstrup, UNDP Trinidad and Tobago
 13.     Rene Mauricio Valdes, UNDP Ecuador
 14.     Yeshewa Merine, UNDP Malawi                                                   10/5/2004
                                                                            Page 3 of 68

 15.   Anne-Isabelle Degryse-Blateau, UNDP Republic of Korea
 16.   El-Mostafa Benlamlih, UNDP Saudi Arabia
 17.   Yves de San, UNDP Lebanon
 18.   Cihan Sultanoglu, UNDP Lithuania
 19.   Ali Al Zatari, UNDP Syria
 20.   Bruno Pouezat, UNDP Moldova
 21.   Jo Scheuer, UNDP/SURF Kathmandu , Nepal
 22.   Bjoern Foerde, UNDP Botswana
 23.   Beat Rohr, UNDP El Salvador
 24.   Moin Karim, UNDP Yemen
 25.   Yves de San, UNDP Lebanon
 26.   Anne-Isabelle Degryse-Blateau, UNDP Republic of Korea
 27.   Sakiko Fukuda-Parr, HDRO UNDP New York
 28.   Alfredo Jefferson, UNDP/SURF Panama , Panama
 29.   Pablo Ruiz Hiebra, UNDP/BCPR Disaster Reduction Unit , Switzerland
 30.   Andrey Ivanov, UNDP/RBEC, Slovak Republic
 31.   Geoff Prewitt, UNDP/SURF Bratislava , Slovak Republic
 32.   Frederick Lyons, UNDP Iran
 33.   Richard Leete, UNDP Malaysia
 34.   Jan Mattsson, Bureau of Management, UNDP New York
 35.   Georges Nzongola-Ntalaja, UNDP Norway
 36.   Dotcho Mihailov, UNDP/NHDR Coordination Bulgaria
 37.   Ahmed Driouchi, Al Akhawayn University, Morocco
 38.   Nabila Zouhiri, UNDP Morocco
 39.   Angela Lusigi, UNDP Nigeria
 40.   John Oohiorhenuan UNDP South Africa
 41.   Jafar Javan, UNDP/SURF-Bratislava, Slovak Republic
 42.   Tajeddine Badry, UNDP Morocco
 43.   Sally Fegan-Wyles, DGO/UNDP New York
 44.   El-Mostafa Benlamlih, UNDP Saudi Arabia
 45.   Diene Keita, UNDP Senegal
 46.   Knut Ostby, Evaluation Office, UNDP New York
 47.   Frode Mauring, UNDP Macedonia
 48.   Sakiko Fukuda-Parr, UNDP/HDRO New York
 49.   Aleksi Hokkanen, University of Helsinki , Finland
 50.   Ngila Mwase, UNDP Uganda
 51.   Richard Ponzio, UNDP Kosovo
 52.   Ramanathan Balakrishnan, UNV Bonn , Germany
 53.   Alfredo Jefferson, UNDP/SURF Panama , Panama
 54.   Magdy Martinez Soliman, UNDP/BDP - Democratic Governance, New York
 55.   Maxine Olson, UNDP India
 56.   Cecile Molinier, UNDP Mauritania
 57.   Akiko Yuge, UNDP Tokyo
 58.   Tegegnework Gettu, UNDP Nigeria
 59.   Mbaranga Gasarabwe, UNDP Djibouti
 60.   Ana Gaby Guerrero, UNDP Laos
 61.   Patricia De Mowbray, UNDP Cameroon
 62.   Gabriele Köhler, UNDP Latvia
 63.   Alvaro J. Rodriguez, UNDP/BDP New York
 64.   Paolo Galli, UNDP/RBEC, New York
 65.   Margherita Serafini, UNV Programme Officer, Eritrea                      10/5/2004
                                                                            Page 4 of 68

 66.   Arkadi Toritsyn, Cabinet Office, Government of Ontario , Canada
 67.   Jan Mattsson, Bureau of Management, UNDP New York
 68.   Sennye Obuseng, UNDP Botswana
 69.   Georg H. Charpentier, BCPR, UNDP Geneva
 70.   Isabella Waterschoot, UNDP/SURF- Caribbean , Trinidad & Tobago
 71.   Philippe Rouzier, UNDP Haiti
 72.   Mutar Ahmed Abdullah Juma, UNDP United Arab Emirates
 73.   Moncef Ghrib, UNDP Algeria
 74.   Lance Clark, UNDP Georgia
 75.   Sarah Burd-Sharps, UNDP/HDRO New York
 76.   Masood Hyder, UNDP Democratic Republic of Korea
 77.   Ibrahima Djibo, UNDP Guinea
 78.   Abdou Ibro, UNDP Niger
 79.   Anna Stjarnerklint, UNDP Albania
 80.   Luke Wasonga, SURF-Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
 81.   Florent Munkeni, UNDP Chad
 82.   Isabella Waterschoot, UNDP/SURF- Caribbean , Trinidad and Tobago
 83.   Seeta Prabhu, HDRC, UNDP India
 84.   Aida Robbana, UNDP Tunisia
 85.   Liliana De Riz, UNDP Argentina
 86.   Linda Ghanime, UNDP/BDP-Energy and Environment, New York
 87.   Joseph Opio-odongo, UNDP/SURF-CEA, Kenya
 88.   Ove Bjerregaard, UNDP/BDP-Energy and Environment, New York
 89.   Philip Dobie, UNDP/BDP Drylands Development Centre , Kenya
 90.   Sakiko Fukuda-Parr, Human Development Report Office, UNDP New York
 91.   Pascal Girot, UNDP/SURF-Panama, Panama
 92.   Sakiko Fukuda-Parr, Human Development Report Office, UNDP New York
 93.   Alejandro Grinspun, International Poverty Centre/BDP/UNDP, Brazil
 94.   Sakiko Fukuda-Parr, Human Development Report Office, UNDP New York
 95.   Neil Buhne, UNDP Bulgaria
 96.   Anuradha.Rajivan, UNDP/HDRC, India
 97.   Ove Bjerregaard, UNDP/BDP-Energy and Environment, New York
 98.   Denise deSouza, UNDP Guyana
 99.   Margaret Andoseh, UNDP Cameroon
100.   Antonio Serra, Technical University of Lisbon , Portugal
101.   Massoud Hedeshi, UN Resident Coordinator's Office, UNDP Mongolia
102.   Douglas Evangelista, UN Volunteers, Germany
103.   Ali Salman, UNDP Bahrain
104.   Isabella Waterschoot, UNDP/SURF- Caribbean , Trinidad & Tobago
105.   Abla Amawi, UNDP Jordan
106.   Sukhjargalmaa Dugersuren, UNDP Mongolia


107. Philippe Rouzier, UNDP Haiti
108. Bethany Donithorn, UNDP/BDP/EEG, New York
109. Laurel Gascho, UNDP/BDP, New York

Summary of Responses:                      10/5/2004
                                                                                                        Page 5 of 68

Dear Colleagues,

Thank you so much – both through the RR-net and the HDR-net discussion networks – for the fantastic
contributions and suggestions for the theme of HDR 2005. Going more carefully through the past month’s
discussion I have realized even more how rich and informative the various comments have been. After this
experience we are left with an excellent range of options, which will serve not only for this year’s Report, but for
future reports as well.

What we have tried to do here is an annotated summary of the discussion. It is impossible to review in depth the
many suggestions, so allow me to focus on the broad criteria by which the final decision will be made. I also want
to stress that we seek a theme that will allow us to produce a cutting-edge report, with breakthroughs in concept,
measurement and/or policy.

The full discussion is below so that the detail and nuance will not be lost. Beyond the wealth of ideas from the
discussion, two general observations struck me most. First was the clear and broad support for some themes
away from others, embracing those presented in the discussion opener I sent, but also going beyond those. Over
one-third of the nearly 100 participants thought that conflict should be the focus of next year’s Report. Global
governance (including issues of development assistance and its effectiveness and trade) was supported by 18
percent of the discussants, and global inequality 17 percent. Finally, migration and environment also stood out in
generating interest and debate. For the exact results please consult the table at the end of the summary.

Second, was how often issues of crossover and overlaps arose in the discussion. In looking in depth at one of
the above ideas the discussion would often stress the importance of not losing sight of the other areas. This
underlines how interrelated these issues are, suggesting that a report around one of these themes would
inevitably need to be cross-cutting and think out-of-the-box conceptually.

As you probably know, HDR 2004 will be my final report after 10 fantastic years. A new director is being
appointed for HDR 2005 onwards, and the final decision on the theme will be made between the administrator
and the incoming director of the HDRO. This discussion will be taken into consideration not only for the decision
on the theme, but also for ideas on how to tackle these issues. The next stage of the dialogue will begin where
we can delve into the details behind the chosen theme, which are already emerging through this discussion.

Best wishes,


Main themes from the 2005 HDR Theme discussion:

Global Governance

The theme of global governance garnered wide (although not universal) support. The discussion revolved
particularly around the contribution that the report could make in the policy area, with there being an urgent need
for innovative policy proposals on global governance that are realistic and pragmatic.

What emerged so clearly was how Global Governance is at the centre of so many issues – including so many
among the other possible themes and ideas we’ve been discussing. More specific issues related to this theme
are: development assistance and its effectiveness; trade agreements and the precarious situation of the current
trade round; the need for a global response to global inequality; the role and response of the international
community in conflict situations and global tensions; the role of Global Public Goods; the environment; the debate
on UN reform; the emergence of new ways of understanding and dealing with globalisation and new actors on the
global stage such as civil society were all underlined.

An HDR on global governance would be timely and offer room for the Report to make a real contribution. Such a
report would be a broad based one bringing in many different areas. This theme would enable us to weave
together the complementarities and overlaps which emerged throughout the discussion.                                                   10/5/2004
                                                                                                          Page 6 of 68


Inequality appeared not only as a proposed theme for HDR 2005, but also and repeatedly in the discussion of
other themes. Again, the links and overlaps are clear: with global governance (seen both as a reflection of
current inequalities, and a policy stage for tackling them); with conflict (the role of the UN); with migration (global
migration regimes, globalization); with the environment (global fora to address global environmental challenges,

Perhaps of all the possible subjects inequality offers opportunities in more areas where HDRs hope to make an
impact. The open debates surrounding inequality provide a unique opportunity to address the issue form multiple
perspectives (concept, measurement, policies). The report could redefine what types of inequality matter – away
from simply income into other dimensions of human development. Much more can be done in measuring
inequalities in political power, health outcomes, and educational opportunities, particularly between different
groups (language, religion, ethnicity, age, sex, location…). Vertical and horizontal inequalities could be
reassessed. The Report could also examine the role that perceptions plays in understanding inequality, where is
it more tolerated and why, as well as the different scales in which inequalities can be considered (local, national,
regional, international, global).

The debate over measuring income inequality still rages (and differ with different geographical dimensions) – and
that is only the tip of the iceberg since most of that debate looks exclusively at income as a dimension of
inequality. Is the Gini coefficient the right measure to use when measuring income distribution? What else is out
there? How can the HDI be adapted to capture distribution?

Finally, despite the tough conceptual and measurement issues this would need to be a report grounded in policy
approaches: what policies work, what has been the impact of ODA, how does trade play into the equation, what
links exist between inequalities and other areas such as conflict and global tensions, and how these issues can
be resolved. A report on inequality would be very timely, but also a tour de force as inevitably many vital areas of
human development would need to be addressed. Because of that, were inequality not to be chosen as the
central theme, understanding, measuring and addressing inequalities will play a role.


The theme that produced the most discussion was conflict. The urgent relevance of this issue was heard loud
and clear in the discussions. While understandably the policy issues rose to the fore, important conceptual
questions also arose. Levels of health, education, standards of living, participation are always vital, but priorities
may be shifting, to look at inequalities, and, ultimately, at issues of security. A critical question to be addressed
today is: what does development mean in a country in turmoil?

The bulk of the discussion focused on issues of conflict prevention. A powerful way in which the question could
be put is “what could have been done, and by whom, to stop the conflicts that unfolded in the last decade?”
Again, any answer would lead to a range of other issues. Global governance is vital not only in terms of effective
recognition and early warning of danger spots and prevention, but also for the legitimate use of international force
in domestic settings and how development assistance can be used in these settings. Recent research has
focused on the role of inequalities in influencing conflict nationally – and perhaps more could be done on the role
of international power disparities in global tensions. Notions of risk and vulnerabilities, akin to work done in
natural disasters would be a revealing way to approach the size and potential location of the problem.

There is much academic work, and experience within the UN and UNDP on these issues. The Human
Development Report offers the opportunity not only to bring it together in a rigorous policy focused way, but in the
style of the editorially independent HDR, push a little harder and ask more difficult questions than can be
traditionally done from within the organization.


Another excellent option that emerged from the discussion was that of migration. As this year’s report will
document the numbers of people moving between countries is increasing – and while this can bring enormous
benefits, it is also becoming an explosive political issue nationally and internationally.                                                     10/5/2004
                                                                                                       Page 7 of 68

Much work has been done on the impacts of migration – both on country of origin and on receiving country. Much
has been written on phenomena such as the brain drain, the role of remittances, and the transfer of ideas. The
economic benefits for receiving countries are clearly (if quietly) acknowledged through the economic migration
policies of richer countries, and yet the voices often heard loudest in these countries are those who feel displaced
and angry. There is enormous scope to try and synthesize these issues – giving a clearer understanding of
winners and losers, to help us move to policy approaches for all the world’s regions and offer win-win solutions.

Migration is an issue that is growing, and of growing concern, and one that builds on recent Human Development
Reports. It should be noted that HDR 2004 will further look at some aspects of the migration question – but many
questions will remain unanswered, questions that a Human Development Report could fruitfully tackle.


The HDR 1994 focused on the conceptual linkages between the environment and human development. HDR
1998 instead analysed the impact of unequal consumption patterns on the environment, and in turn the unequal
impact on well being around the world.

Much work on measurement has been done, and while the HDR could signal such progress, it should avoid
overlap and duplication with past and current work. But there is more room to focus on how to measure
environmental issues related to human development. Beyond this discussion alone there have been many
comments on the lack of an environmental dimension to the human development indices. But there is a reason
why this element has so far been omitted from the indices. Because of the diverse nature of geography,
environmental measures cannot readily be universally measured, nor can their impacts on human development.
In fact, it is precisely these questions that could be usefully tackled and fully discussed by a Human Development

What emerged clearly from the discussion was that whether or not this is the theme for this year, there is more
space for HDRs to address links between human development and the environment. Building on work relating to
environmental issues in the 1994 and 1998 Reports, there is room for future HDRs to build on the relationships
and policy issues that have been established, and on new challenges ahead.

Other areas of interest

One interesting outcome of the discussion was the relatively low number of participants who have suggested
HIV/AIDS as a theme for HDR 2005. The vital importance of the issue was underlined, but this perhaps reflects
the feeling that there is limited value the HDR specifically could add in this field relative to others. Overlaps
between HIV/AIDS and other issues remain crucial, including its links with conflict, inequalities, migration and
global governance.

A number of very interesting alternative options were suggested which deserve close consideration. Including
unleashing entrepreneurship, the role of civil society, gender disparity and education, a call for greater humanity
around the world, development and religion (to be covered to some degree by the 2004 Report), and disasters
and mechanisms to prevent them and mitigate their impact.

Among additional ideas for the 2005 HDR theme were consistently related to the themes discussed in full above.
Worth mentioning are the role of trade on human development, as well as that of international development
assistance. Both fit most closely with global governance since any discussion of that theme must involve detailed
consideration of these issues. However, such issues are relevant for other general themes discussed above.

                                  HDR 2005 THEME SURVEY (as of 20/4/2004)

                                                  RR-NET        HDR-NET         TOTAL          %

                 Number of proposals                  55            39             94

                  CONFLICT                            24             8             32           34                                                  10/5/2004
                                                                                                           Page 8 of 68

                   GLOBAL GOVERNANCE                    8              9              17            18
                   GLOBAL INEQUALITIES                  9              7              16            17
                   ENVIRONMENT                          0              6               6             6
                   MIGRATION                            4              0               4             4
                   HIV/AIDS                             2              1               3             3
                   RELIGION & DEV'T                     0              3               3             3
                   TERRORISM                            1              1               2             2
                   TRADE and POVERTY                    1              0               1             1
                   ODA EFFECTIVENESS                    1              0               1             1
                   INT'L INTEGRATION                    1              0               1             1
                   EDUCATION/GENDER                     1              0               1             1
                   ROLE OF PRIV.SECT.                   1              0               1             1
                   CALL FOR HUMANITY…                   1              0               1             1
                   GPGs AND ACCESS…                     1              0               1             1
                   DEMOCRACY & MKTS                     0              1               1             1
                   ECON./POL. DEMOCR.                   0              1               1             1
                   INTL. PWR.
                  STRUGGLES                             0              1               1             1
                   POVERTY                              0              1               1             1

Responses in Full:

Kalman Mizsei, RBEC, UNDP New York

Dear Sakiko,

First of all, let me express that I am very impressed with your set of ideas. Each of the 4 have merits. Whereas I
am sure the discussion will come up with many more, let me reflect first on the ones you have put forward. I like
particularly the first and the last. Global governance: it is vital and the way you have approached is also brilliant -
to see what can be very realistically, very pragmatically be done. It also directly relates to Inge kaul's global public
goods. We have a major challenge in UNDP in general how to use our intellectual products in our work. We have
superior intellectual prducts such as HD and GPG but it is reflected very modestly in our country efforts. An HDR
on global governance would bring us a step ahead in sorting out how to relate to GPG in practice.

I should also say that there is an almost twin issue, global development assistance, that is always on my mind. It
also has a major global governance component but in itself is a major issue. Whether teh way we organize
ourselves towards assisting the world is OK or should we again realistically think about some incremental reforms
of the system?
Finally global inequalities is a good one too. The reason I like it, besides its obvious merits, is that it can lead us to
rethinking the HDI. Of course, the greatest problem with the HDI is NOT that it does not incorporate inequality --
implicitly, in a very imperfect way, it does -- but the study on inequality can perhaps open up elegantly the avenue
to rethinking the HDI too. As you know, my major problem with the HDI is that its annual publication lends itself to
a very absurd misinterpretation of the index. On one hand it is clearly an alternative index to GDP, on the other
hand, the way it is constructed means that the only parameter that ANNUALLY moves the HDI is GDP on the
PPP basis and, since this only changes strongly annually in case of a devastating conflict/catastrophe or if a
major devaluation of a currency during the year is NOT CAPTURED in the GDP properly. So, we end up with an
HDI that is typically moved on the short run by nothing else but statistical imperfection/mistake, bad measurement
- which is absurd. Of course, in the span of let us say, 10 years, HDI is moved by human development issues but
only then, And people typically look at the annual changes - that are irrelevant. Whereas an HDR on global
inequalities would not address this structural mistake but by addressing another one -- lack of direct measurement
of inequality in teh HDI -- it opens up the possiblity to think over again the HDI. And of course, an HDR on
inequality can ask very important questions that you have posed. And they are hugely relevant.

I am glad you have started this debate already now - in fact I think that by the time the HDR debate starts is                                                      10/5/2004
                                                                                                         Page 9 of 68

already too late. I am seeing with the production of the HDRs that time and again the allocated time is just too
short and quality suffers. Maybe next year it should start even earlier, let us say the subject of 2006 should be
decided by the end of 2004.
So, my vote for 2005 is either global governance or global inequality. Many thanks for the very useful thoughts.

Director - RBEC

Paul Andre de la Porte, UNDP Kenya

Hi Sakiko!
Certainly the four ideas that you present here are all very attractive, and they are also largely interlinked. From my
Kenya perspective, is Africa today more plugged into the international trade system than say 30 years ago, or
less? Is it more or less marginalized? Why? Is that exacerbating poverty and conflict for scarce resources?
HIV/AIDS? Another topic which seems to be looming large on the horizon is the Rome declaration on
Simplification and Harmonization, its implications for aid in general and the future configuration of the role of the
UN system.

Resident Representative - Kenya

Moises Venancio, UNDP Bosnia and Herzegovina

Dear Sakiko,

I think all of the issues are excellent possibilities and yet it seems that the greatest topic of our time when it comes
to international relations and the greatest challenge to people everywhere is growing conflict,hatred, distrust and
violence. In this past week alone, we have witnessed Madrid, renewed conflcit in Kosovo and worsening conflict
in Sudan, just as a peace process seemed so close to ending years of suffering in that country. More importantly,
I feel the current situation could still worsen, as reflected in the declarations of EU ministers this week, and lead to
a still growing spiral of violence, fear and animosity between peoples and parts of the globe.

This situation also profoundly affects UNDP given that since the mid nineties some 70 percent of our activities (if I
remember well from my SRF/ROAR days at HQ) dealing with some form of crisis or post crisis/recovery. Growing
violence and hatred can only harm global HDI improvements and in cases undermine precious gains to date.
It seems that we in the UN have a moral responsibility to speak out now, to be corageous, and to contribute to
breaking the current cycle of violence by reasserting the value and values of the UN charter, and its imperative
emphasis on peace and development.

The 2005 HDR could be entitled" Re-establishing International Peace and Security". Lets be bold and propose
how best to envigour the UN Charter and what an effective collective system of international peace and security
really entails today. The report could:
- explore the current cycle of violence and what it means for global development as well as for relations between
the different civilisations of this planet,
- what an effective intervention really entails in terms of ensuring desired changes in different contexts ( linking
these with development and sustained aid over time as well as other issues),
- the criteria for intervention with an emphasis on rights-based approaches;
- preventive early warning conflict prevention/monitoring (which seems to have dissapeared from UN concerns
sine the mid-nineties); and lastly,
- what the UN system of collective security needs to look like in the 21st century to be more effective and relevant.

Some of these issues already are and will be increasingly voiced by member states as recent rhetoric already
indicates- so why don't we take the initiative in a debate the affects the Organisation we serve?
I am sure others will have even better points/ideas but i do fell we have to do something to put peace back as the
top international priority so here is my contribution
Warmest and good luck.
Moises Venancio
Bosnia and Herzegovina                                                    10/5/2004
                                                                                                      Page 10 of 68

Alfredo Marty, UNDP Bolivia

Dear Sakiko,
Thank you very much for sharing with us your thoughts on the 2005 HDR's main topics. From my perspective,
working in Bolivia, there are two important themes you have mentioned in your proposal: Conflict prevention and
Global inequality. I consider that the second one topic should include, in a relevant way, the Aid Coordination
function which must be performed by the National Governments with strong support of UNDP and other donors. A
lot of efforts duplicity in the international cooperation, sparsed and isolated projects, lack of a programme
approach are in the middle of the problems to be solved with an appropriate Aid Coordination system. Thanks for
giving us this opportunity. Best regards.
Alfredo Marty
Representante Residente Adjunto
PNUD Bolivia
Telf: (591 -2) 279 5544
Cel: (591) 715 59068
Fax: (591 -2) 279 5820

Mourad Wahba, BRSP, UNDP New York

Dear Colleagues,
If I’m not mistaken, then 2005 is the time when we should have attained one of our MDGs (they’re not all 2015):
which is “preferably” to have eliminated gender disparity in primary and secondary education. It may be
interesting to focus on education, and what is needed to “really” implement that MDG.
Whether we achieve or not the goal on gender disparity in education, causes and consequences should have an
interesting bearing on the 2005 summit on MD. Would it be worth considering in an HDR?
Best wishes
Director – BRSP

Lebogang Motlana, UNDP Zambia

Dear Sakiko,

The topics that have been recommended are challenging and interesting, and yes, I agree with Andre that the first
two are intertwined. HIV/AIDS is a multi-faceted, multi-dimensional issue that incorporates three fundamental
areas of care, prevention and mitigation. Care would involve issues relating to the international trading regime
(including food subsidies that render rural farming families vulnerable through lack of livelihoods and income),
intellectual property rights on brand name ARVs and access to these by the poor, the on-set of the generic drug
production and the reality of LDC debt and their inability to construct the needed infrastructure for care delivery

Condom utilization as the number one and acceptable prevention strategy has interesting global dimension in
terms of the production and distribution aspects. Note here that the global economy and the role of some
multinational companies has been a boost for rural isolated families who have benefited from the distribution
networks of some of these companies. On the other hand, importing condoms in sufficient quantities and at a cost
that is realistic in the developing world poses a challenge. The ideal would be the manufacture of condoms in
developing countries through support of international donors where feasible, a public-private sector partnership in
the fight against the disease. Other measure for prevention including education, information and communication
have had impressive results in countries such as Uganda and could be exploited even further through
technological initiatives that bring information on HIV/AIDS in a user friendly and culturally sensitive manner to the

Mitigating the impact of HIV/AIDS brings into play the very essence of UNDP - safeguarding the capacity gains of
decades of development assistance against erosion by the disease and ensuring the future existence of the                                                  10/5/2004
                                                                                                     Page 11 of 68

nation-state, as we know it. Interesting aspects of the debate on mitigation is the pull factors of migration of the
most talented of the developing worlds young to the developed world. Whereby medical institutions and
universities are raided for the best brains produced at inordinate cost to developing countries by the lure of riches
in the developed world leaving developing countries having to cope with HIV/AIDS with dwindling human resource
capacities and ineffective state machinery to compensate for the losses. Compounding such losses is the impact
of HIV/AIDS that further diminishes the capacity of the state not only to plan and implement development
programmes but also to address key aspects of the fight against HIV/AIDS including the absorptive capacity for
such financial aid flows as
the Global Funds against HIV/AIDS, Malaria and Tuberculoses.

A combination of Globalization and HIV/AIDS, how the two interact to exacerbate poverty, including their impact
on the attainment of the millennium development Goals by the Least Developed Countries would be an interesting
take on the debate and provide for the possible rethinking of the globalization debate.
Lebogang Motlana

Robert Piper, UNDP Kosovo

Dear Sakiko
Thanks for opening this debate.
Unsurprisingly perhaps, my vote goes to the "conflict" theme, though I think the time has come for an exclusive
focus on conflict prevention and human development rather than the usual spread of pre-,during,post-conflict
discussions. We have yet to narrow the conceptual links convincingly between our development work and conflict
prevention, yet the need has never seemed greater. Notions of "risk" may hold the key to a new framework here -
this year's "Reducing Disaster Risk" report by BCPR has explored the debate with regard to natural disasters, but
we need to extend these ideas to violent conflict, ie. Man-made ones. The poorest members of society are those
with the thinnest margins for survival, yet they are invariably the ones that bear the brunt of civil upheaval.
Not incidentally, a new approach to conflict prevention would also require some major changes in global
governance, a second theme identified by you. Whilst everyone agrees it is important, there is no consensus yet
on how preventive work should be overseen, managed, measured or financed. (Interestingly, I think this debate is
now a more important one in the Board rooms of global corporations who are reassessing their risk-management
strategies post 9/11 - the private sector may well come up with innovative approaches that could assist the public
sector as they have done in many other fields).
Robert Piper
UN Development Coordinator &
UNDP Resident Representative

Niels Maagaard, BOM, UNDP New York

Dear Sakiko and Colleagues,
Just a quick thought. Talking about an emerging development challenge for 2005. How are we going to work with
Civil Society in future? The traditional role of UNDP has been to work through national governments and their
agencies and institutions but will that continue in future? How does Civil Society link up with the UN Reform
initiatives at the CO level? How do we mobilize Civil Society in our efforts to develop national strategies for the
implementation of the MDG’s? I could continue raising questions and maybe the 2005 HDR could give us some of
the answers??!!
Best regards,

Antonio Vigilante , UNDP Egypt

I tend to agree that the two more attractive and urgent themes seem global governance and inequality.
Global governance would be my favorite, but I am not sure if the forthcoming report of the group of wise people
established by Kofi Annan will be a constraint or an asset for an HDR on this topic. Before the end of the year we
should have a report touching on global governance issues and UN reform . Whatever the level of expectations                                                 10/5/2004
                                                                                                     Page 12 of 68

we may have on its ground-breaking capacity, it will make noise. Depending on its contents, the 2005 HDR could
build on it or may come up with an alternative construct for a similar topic. This may confuse the international
debate or support it. It is probably a gamble to decide now, before knowing the scope and the depth of the
forthcoming report.
I haven't seen the draft HDR 2004 but I believe that it has revisited the moral fundaments of global coexistence,
and fought the distrurbing trends (in the north and in the south) towards ethnic, religious and cultural
fundamentalisms, the widespread tribalism, the human rights relativism, the scientific aparthaid, the privatization
of knowledge, and has brought forcefully back tolerance, solidarity and equity values. If this is the case, a down to
earth report on global governance, also focusing on a pratical agenda on global public goods, could represent a
nice follow up. Finally, the Report could potentially touch on global governance in relation to environment, which
needs a refound sense of urgency.
In conclusion, having considered all the above pro and cons, I still would go for it.
Resident Representative – Egypt

Shoji Nishimoto, BDP UNDP New York

Dear Sakiko,
Many thanks for the opportunity to consider the topic for the HDR 2005.
Your suggestions are all very relevant and interesting to the development community as a whole. I have asked my
BDP colleagues to provide their feedback to your suggestions.
My immediate reaction would be "HIV/AIDS", viewed from the HD angle. There have been many discussions on
HIV/AIDS from socio/economic angles, as well as from education/health angles. These discussions has been
useful, but they have not been able to address the fundamental causes and remedial actions both from the
individual, and the societal levels. Monica has a lot to offer, I am sure, and given the seriousness of HIV/AIDS as
the major source as well as consequence of crisis and misery of millions of people, the 2005 HDR can take up
this for generating wider debate, and actions at various fronts. The topic has plenty to offer in terms of the three
criteria you have mentioned in your note.
Director – BDP

Fikret Akcura, UNDP Kazakhstan

Dear Sakiko,
I propose that HDR 2005 look into either one of the following:
a) Impact of WTO Accession on Poverty Reduction. Might be a bit too specific but I think it is also timely for HDRs
to go into more focussed areas and try to guide the discussions on such topics. Almost all developing countries
have seen WTO membership as an acknowledgement of their global integration and most have rushed into it. It
would be good to have a neutral entity like UNDP to study the record so far and draw out that the new
accession candidates can benefit from those in their negotiations and those already in can increase the benefits
of their membership.
b) Global Inequality. It was most disappointing to read the Economist's special report on the subject (in the 13-19
March 2004 issue, pages 65-68) and have it confirm that our knowledge is very murky, to say the least. One
eminent study (by Sala-i-Martin, et al) shows inequality rapidly shrinking and makes the incredible claim that MDG
1 has already been achieved!
Another, by Chen and Ravallion of World Bank, claims that there has been relatively little reduction in poverty
over recent decades. It would be well for UNDP to enter the fray and, as the global anti-poverty organization
clarify the matter. In order to be results-oriented in our chief mandate, we have to study this matter in depth and
bring intellectual clarity to it.
Fikret Akcura
UN Resident Coordinator
UNDP, UNFPA Resident Representative

Inyang Ebong-Harstrup, UNDP Trinidad and Tobago                                                  10/5/2004
                                                                                                        Page 13 of 68

Hi Sakiko,
I would tend to agree that HIV/AIDS and the state of play today, in terms of access to treatment, managing the
capacity gap, holding on to the strides made in the area of development could be compelling. However I think that
given the sheer trauma the UN system has faced in the area of conflict prevention and management as well as in
the area of global and even regional inequality which I think is underpinning our perceptions today would be even
more compelling and brave to write. I would be willing to share my views on this with you verbally should this view
be a dominant one. If not. I will go with HIV/AIDS. All the best Inyang Ebong-Harstrup
Resident Representative – Trinidad and Tobago

Rene Mauricio Valdes, UNDP Ecuador

Dear Sakiko and colleagues: I would like to endorse Robert´s proposal. Various NHDRs have already addressed
this issue and their review could prove useful for our discussion. I would like to draw your attention, for example,
to Colombia´s 2003 NHDR which presented an innovative approach to the link between human development,
complex emergencies, and conflict prevention and transformation. Various NHDRs in Guatemala and in Eastern
Europe have also dealt with this matter.
Thanks for your attention. Regards

Yeshewa Merine, UNDP Malawi

Dear Sakiko,
Many thanks for giving us an opportunity to contribute ideas for the most important vehicle of UNDP - The HDR.
In my view, one of the future HDR should be dedicated for stock taking of development assistance channeled
from all partners to programme countries and the related impacts. Obviously, UNDP, being a major development
network, is best positioned to do this. The HDR should be able to assess, in concrete terms, whether or not those
resources were appropriately utilized for the intended purposes. Such analysis should prompt revisiting the
policies and approaches the development partners apply in channeling assistance. The result will then hold
programme countries accountable for appropriate use of such resources.
Basically, Sakiko, what I stating is here similar to what came out in the famous book entitled 'Rethinking of
Technical Co-operation' ??? in which you were very much involved and imparted a lot of knowledge. No doubt
that the subject matter will be controversial whichever way one looks at it. However, the overall objective of the
process will be rewarding. I hope this idea will get some attention. Best regards.

Anne-Isabelle Degryse-Blateau, UNDP Republic of Korea

Dear Sakiko,
Thank you for bringing us all early in this challenging debate.
The four themes do touch on the very core of our every day work and of the issues we strive to address. And all
are pressing issues. No easy choice.
I would also see a clear link between the first Global Governance and the 4th Global inequality.
Considering the growing rate of conflict outbreaks, each time more devastating in terms of human life losses,
destruction of countries, economies, of any development work , the increasing threats of terrorism, the whole
questioning of the role of the UN in conflict prevention, mitigation, etc..I would favor this theme , which takes us off
the more "traditional" themes. Peace & security are a pre requisite for real development.
I liked the points Moises made on this subject.
The study could look also:
- try to revalidate the various reasons for conflicts : inequalities, culture, religions, personal agenda, "mafia", etc,
- take a critical and maybe more "humble" look at to what we as the UN can do to help carry out early warning
assessments, prevent, mitigate, etc..
- exploring all the fora, tools which can be used to take practical actions to move towards an agenda of peace and
warmest regards,
Resident Representative – ROK                                                    10/5/2004
                                                                                                       Page 14 of 68

El-Mostafa Benlamlih, UNDP Saudi Arabia

Dear Sakiko,
My felling is that global governance would be timely and would have a tremendous impact on various areas of
concern, including HIV/ AIDS, global trade, ITC, Knowledge privatisation, and conflict prevention. In fact this topic
would bring up a key dimension in HD philosophy. There is no point in developing peoples capacity to act,
expanding options, hoping for the better and at the same time raise all kinds of obstacles to prevent these same
people and their societies from translating these options into real value and benefits, sell their cotton or access
ITC. The result is increasing vulnerability, frustration, instability and terrorism (all kinds: North and South, State
and civil). The Human development concept will gain further depth and offer a more solid ground for any UN and
global governance reform process or debate. Only UNDP will have the courage to raise these issues from a
global perspective and contribute to the process that would result form the report to be produced by the group of
wise persons established by Koffi Annan, in a positive, honest and constructive way.
Best regards.
Resident Representative – Saudi Arabia

Yves de San, UNDP Lebanon

Hi, Sakiko.
I join my voice to those who recommend Global Governance as the central theme. It meets the criteria you set
forth and has become a crucial factor in so many areas, hence very sensitive too, of course…
Resident Representative – Lebanon

Cihan Sultanoglu, UNDP Lithuania

Dear Sakiko,
Thanks for sharing your thoughts with us. It would seem that the topic of global inequalities would be a very
pertinent issue to tackle in the next HDR. I don't know if I would go so far as to say that it is an emerging
development issue - inequalities have always been with us - but it would definetely capture the essence of what is
needed now for sustainable human development. With growing inequalities, what we see is actually the failure of
national, regional and global governance mechanisms. A lot of the problems that we face - from the spread of
HIV/AIDS to the spread of conflicts - are by and large a by-product of inequalities. Having a growing proportion of
people with a lesser and lesser share of the resources of the world at a time of unprecendented accumulation of
wealth, knowledge and technology does make not a sustainable future. This is over and above the technical
aspects of measurements or more intangible aspects of perceptions or the questions of ethics and morality - it is
simply a question of a vision of a viable future for our world with security, safety and growth. What is the
opportunity cost of inequalities? Not only in terms of productivity and better trade flows and more efficient markets
that a more equitable world would engender but from the point of view of the human capital (intellect, skills,
creativity) that is being wasted without a chance to deliver on its potential as a result of inequalities. One can also
look at the inequalities from the MDG perspective. How the MDGs can contribute to a more equitable world.
Resident Representative – Lithuania

Ali Al Zatari,   UNDP Syria

Dear Sakiko,

Greetings from Syria.                                                   10/5/2004
                                                                                                         Page 15 of 68

Indeed, "Global Inequalities" captures the day, and is, on top of that, a thorny issue to handle, bringing to the fore
contention and divergence, which the report should attempt to provide an acceptable compromise. I do not think
you could escape addressing under this title the broader concern of "Global Governance." Hence, you could
tackle both intertwined in a crisp HDR 2005 that drives to the depth of the two and produces practical steps to
follow to reduce the former and rationalize the latter. I wonder, in addition, if it would not be too much to suggest
another topic (sub-topic) or two, perhaps on their own or as an annex or a background paper. The efficiency of
our coordination of UN developmental activities, and the impact of the HDRs, NHDRs and regional HDRs on
policy change in a world that suffers. How did we fare out producing coordination tools, and issuing these global,
national, and regional reports / instruments that should have promoted positive trends in global governance and
equality? Best. ali

Resident Representative – Syria

Bruno Pouezat, UNDP Moldova

Dear Sakiko,
You have put us, again, in the position of the proverbial donkey -- too many goodies to choose from.
With HIV/AIDS coming close second (on account of speed), conflict is the easiest and fastest way to set
development back by decades. Both simmer for many years before they flare up. Both can be seen coming, for
those who want to look, from far away. Yet, few countries are prepared to acknowledge the risk until the house is
on fire - many issues are just too hot to handle. We know what comes of sweeping ambers under a carpet. For
both issues, an HDR might make a decisive impact on awareness as well as on resource mobilization, whether
for prevention or cure.

On balance, I'd go after conflict, emphasizing "preventive development", the nexus of good governance (local, but
also regional and global), open societies, sustained growth, reduced inequalities, low corruption, cultural tolerance
- essentially everything individual HDRs have been saying over the years.

One often gets the impression that politicians (and sometimes civil society) play with conflict like fools with
matches, fanning hatred for short-term gain, ready to burn the place down in the hope of ruling over the ashes.
Even great powers, sometimes, get their fingers burned. A Darwinian view of development, indifference and non-
interference limit the development community to the wasteful role of the firefighter.

Could the HDR sow the seeds of wisdom: what are the global and local costs of conflict? What makes some
societies fire-prone and others fire-resistant? How does one raise the alarm without precipitating the blaze? What
about a fire code, a fire-safety audit, (dare I dream) a global or regional fire inspectorate? If prevention fails, there
is a lot of experience already with physical reconstruction, but in the rush to return to "normality", the fundamental
tensions are not always addressed. What is the experience with how best to heal the body politic?
Best. Bruno.
Bruno Pouezat
United Nations Resident Coordinator
UNDP/UNFPA Resident Representative
tel:373 22 22 00 43; fax:373 22 22 00 41
131, 31 August str.

Jo Scheuer, UNDP/SURF Kathmandu, Nepal

Dear Sakiko,
Thanks for the opportunity to provide our input in the selection of a theme for 2005. Living in Nepal for the last
three years, it seems obvious as you have suggested that inequalities (not just income) fuel tensions and, worse,
lead to conflict. Why is it that we see countries sliding down slippery slopes, year after year, deeper and deeper,
and we don¹t see the warning signs? Or may be we see them and can¹t do anything? Or maybe we can do
something, but don¹t know really know how to go about prevention? So I agree with Robert that the theme for
2005 should be conflict prevention. It provides at the same time an opportunity to deal with inequalities, rights and                                                      10/5/2004
                                                                                                         Page 16 of 68

global governance issues in a focused way, and, as Moises wrote, it is a timely input to put peace on the agenda.
My second choice would be an HDR on inequalities (which could include a chapter on conflict?).
Best regards

Bjoern Foerde, UNDP Botswana

Dear Sakiko!
To choose between such interesting, relevant and also urgent topics as those mentioned in your invitation to
participate in the discussion for the 2005 HDR is not easy, but this then is precisely what the UNDP global
advocacy agenda is about: to try and figure out where we can get the most mileage from our intellectual
investments and bring the global debate effectively forward.
Discussing the topics with staff in the office does not necessarily make it easier for me to provide comments and
clarity. While we may not necessarily agree on our priorities, most discussions end up recognising the inter-
connectedness among most of the topics, at some level or other. We know that from past HDRs as well, and we
know it of course from our daily work with the MDGs.

In Botswana we are of course acutely aware of the added value we could get from HIV/AIDS being the topic
chosen. However, I would personally caution against it. I do believe, very strongly, that we are already doing a
reasonably great job in developing Nation HDRs on this issue, and I hope we will some day have a regional HDR
for Southern Africa. One that could push
the new Southern Africa Capacity Initiative forward, and make convincing arguments for dealing with the
'sensitive' issues - like intergenerational and transactional sex. It is also an area where timing is crucial - and if we
had done it for 2004 and made it an input to the Bangkok Conference in July, I believe we could have made a
dramatic difference. But this not being the case, and with the market flooded with many publishing
actors/agenciers, I think we should wait.

I would love to have something on Global Governance, for the reasons several others have highlighted. But
UNDP has recently dealth with some of the issues in the Trade Report, and there are governance dimensions in
the 2002 HDR, although I appreciate that the perspective was different. Also the governance aspects related to
CSOs will come out in the Eminent Persons
Report soon, and various aspects of UN reform and Security Council reform are in the pipeline I guess. So while
this is somewhat of a 'pet' for me, I am not convinced that this is where we could, at this point, make the biggest

There there is the topic of Conflict, which I believe is crucial, although I would suggest that we focus on Peace
and Security and Human Development. Not only would this give UNDP an opportunity to be bold and
controversial in focusing on an issue where we see the world's dominant power(s) pursuing controversial
strategies that impact seriously on the entire development framework [with ODA to some extent being diverted to
areas, countries, regions that are conflict prone or insecure. It also brings together many of the issues you list as

It will interrogate new concepts developed by some countries in the quest for peace and security. One is the
strategy of pre-emptive action, recently championed by the US and its allies. We can add unilateralism, use of
military and economic power to shape the world, the spread or "imposition" of "our values" and others, also
championed by the world's dominant powers.
If we accept that peace and security are international public goods, then we need to reflect on two related issues,
a.. how the conduct of the war on terror and the principles on which it is based, contribute to global peace and
b.. how the pursuit of national security goals by individual nation states impacts on global peace and security
c.. How putting the spread of "our values" on fast track mode contributes to or negates peace and security

This provides an opportunity for us to reflect on both the worth and the role of multilateralism in development. In
the conduct of the war on terror, scant regard was shown for multilateralism, international law and what history
teaches us. In many respects we have moved close to full circle to the Hobbesian order that preceded the birth of
the League of Nations and subsequently the UN. An important question to ask is: is it possible to do away with
multilateralism and still have peace, stability and security?                                                     10/5/2004
                                                                                                          Page 17 of 68

It is an opportunity to bring back to the centre of the debate complementary, if not alternative ideas for peace and
security. Things like poverty, horizontal inequality, justice, HIV/AIDS and how these, especially extreme forms of
deprivation and hopelessness contribute to conflict and insecurity.

[A staff member gave the following example as something to ponder on: "Last year I was part of an online
dialogue on terrorism that largely could not find no reasonable basis to describe Palestinian suicide bombers as
anything other than terrorists. A very small minority saw them as "freedom fighters". A few weeks back the District
Commissioner in Kweneng reported that some
poor people were disappointed when they were diagnosed HIV negative because that made then ineligible for
HIV/AIDS welfare support. I dismissed his arguments. Then this Sunday, the Sunday World of South Africa had a
front page report on how poor people in Cape Town were going for HIV Testing in the hope that they would be
diagnosed positive and qualify for disability
grant support. Why then should we be surprised when more and more Palestinians, including very young ones,
turn themselves into bombs? It is it correct or is it merely a matter of convenience that we blame such
developments on religious fundamentalism."]

We will be preparing this report at a time when security concerns are shifting decisively from inter-country wars
and regular forms of civil war, where a political cause could be used as the rationale, to a form of terrorism whose
purpose is not always easy to identify. Why not look at these and how we are responding? How it impacts on the
development agenda, the MDGs, etc. And how does the growing tendency towards isolationism and exclusionism
- in trade and in politics - contribute to lack of peace? How
do these men and women with no discernible constituency help promote peace?

Ever since 9/11 we have had a global debate on the link between terrorism and development, often used very
superficially by politicians either in one or the other direction. To some extent the entire future of the [legitimacy] of
the UN rests on this I believe, and some of the important reform agendas of the UN is linked to this. For UNDP,
our 'business' is influenced by this
as well - Afghanistand and Irak are examples of this. And our daily lives with increased insecurity and increased
security training is an indication of the importance we are forced to attach to this. So....

Regards from Bjoern/Botswana
Resident Representative – Botswana

Beat Rohr, UNDP El Salvador

Dear Sakiko,
thanks for sharing your initial thoughts. I want to weigh in on the issue of inequality. Critically, we should explore if
we can develop useful alternative tools to the Gini coefficient as this will help us track progress in a more publicly
comprehensive way. In most societies (North and South) inequalities appear to be growing, fueling social tensions
and affecting potential for progress in governance. From my perspective, a time bomb if we do not start to put
more emphasis on the issue including propositions on how Societies can make poitive progress in an
environment of few solutions that seem to fit the trends for polarization of captial and power.
Best regards

Moin Karim, UNDP Yemen

Dear Sakiko,
Thank you for sharing these ideas with us so early on.
I would like to throw an additional idea into the ring, one that resonates within three of your four excellent ideas for
HDR 2005 - that of migration.

Given continued global inequalities, migration, and the fears associated with it, is a more timely topic than ever
before. In addition, with restrictive policies being introduced following 9/11, and with Europe's expansion, it is also
a topic that lends itself to presenting new policy approaches to all the regions of the world. It also builds on all
previous HDRs, especially recent ones on democracy, new technologies, human rights and cultural freedoms.
After all, migration raises fundamental questions related to human development and expanding choices.                                                      10/5/2004
                                                                                                        Page 18 of 68

Moreover, the topic of migration opens up doors to exploring, defining and measuring new concepts. For
example, an effort could be undertaken to examine how the migration of labour from developing to developed
countries affects the "donor" country and the "recipient" country. What is the affect of the brain drain of qualified
individuals on poor countries? What about the positives brought about by the brain drain to the donor country- in
terms of remittances, increased investments from expats abroad (look at India), knowledge and experiences
brought by those returning? What about the positives brought to the recipient country- in terms of expertise, new
cultures, cheaper labour, increased tax base (and stronger pension systems) in countries with low birth rates (look
at Italy, Germany)? And the negatives- the impact on welfare systems etc? All these questions could be examined
and perhaps attempts could be made to measure them.

Furthermore, studies of migration also raise interesting questions of trade. How does movement in labour relate to
trade in goods and services, or result in changing economies? How can countries work together to facilitate
remittance flows (related to issues of global governance)? How should new migrants be best included into
societies and be given full and equal rights?
As with the other topics presented, migration is connected to a plethora of other concepts, and questions.
Best regards, Moin

Yves de San, UNDP Lebanon

Interesting topic, Moin. Were it to be selected, I believe the same issues apply, whether migration is to other
developing or to developed countries.

Resident Representative - Lebanon

Anne-Isabelle Degryse-Blateau, UNDP Republic of Korea

Dear Moin and Yves,
Definitely a great idea too.
Working on this now for nearly 2 years here in Korea, we can clearly see the linked issues of human rights
protection, trafficking in persons, equity, the critical need for broad partnerships with all partners involved to make
it a win-win endeavor.
Anne-Isabelle Degryse-Blateau
UNDP Representative
Seoul- Republic of Korea

Sakiko Fukuda-Parr, HDRO UNDP New York

You’ll see some of it in HDR2004 currently in the making. In that sense, migration would be a good ‘follow up’
Director – HDRO

Alfredo Jefferson, UNDP/SURF Panama, Panama

Dear Sakiko,
I understand UN-DESA is working on the issue of Migration to be published end 2004.

Pablo Ruiz Hiebra, UNDP/BCPR Disaster Reduction Unit, Switzerland

Dear Sakiko                                                    10/5/2004
                                                                                                    Page 19 of 68

I think that global governance could be a good topic for several reasons:

a) Social movement around the World Social Forums have provided a solid ground for alternative ways to look at
globalization .
This movement is not seen any more as a group of violent radicals and there is a momentum for a rethinking of
global structures (WTO negotiations are an example of this new dynamic), taking into account global powers and
political realism.
b) There is an important discussion on UN Reform, which could feed the discussion (for good or for bad).
c) HDR have been more innovative in proposing global governance issues than other global reports.

However, I think that a HDR on global governance should also address the role (and size) of the state in this new
context. As far as I remember, the HDR has not concentrated in this particular aspect of development (we
focused more on democratic governance from a political perspective). Is it possible to keep peace and stability in
countries with small security forces as Haiti (3.000 people for 8 million inhabitants)? Is it possible to meet the
MDG -an increase state legitimacy- with public budgets around 10% of the GDP-particularly in poor countries ?
How shall we finance the public spending -who pays for that? Can a weak state participate actively in global
discussions (i.e. trade and debt) and defend seriously their interests? How can aid be better integrated around
national priorities? Are PRSP making a change on those issues? We certainly have some answers in the HDR,
but not a consistent vision of these challenges...

The WB proposed in their 1997 WDR a vision of the state "in a changing world" that gives to the state an
important, but subsidiary role in development (complementary to the private sector, even in public services). This
vision is shared by other regional banks, with an "economicist" point of view. Other institutions -such as ECLAC-
have advocated in the late 90's for a more strategic, equitable and strong role for Latin american governments.
What is our position on that? I think that this aspect could be also addressed in a report on global governance...
This input can also provide a more solid basis for NHDR, which sometimes present contradictory views in these
critical issuea...

Best regards
Pablo Ruiz Hiebra
UNDP/BCPR Disaster Reduction Unit
Programme Specialist

Andrey Ivanov, UNDP/RBEC, Slovak Republic

Dear Sakiko,
"Global Governance" seems to be the most interesting (and least researched). But are we ready for tackling the
issue? A report in global governance will make sense only if we manage to suggest practical approaches to really
difficult issues (including the role of UN, UNSC, limits of national sovereignty, acceptability of interference in
sovereign states' affairs and rules of doing so, ways of "compliance enforcing", opportunity costs of non-
compliance etc.).
As you see, the challenge is huge. Hence despite the obvious potential problems, "Global Governance"!!!

Geoff Prewitt, UNDP/SURF Bratislava, Slovak Republic

I tend to agree that “global governance” proves most appealing but most demanding. A judicious balance will be
required between the sovereignty of state choice and pragmatic recommendations for an open and pluralistic
society. I remember that G. Hyden and J. Court through the UNU (?) did some extensive research in the area
and, of course, our own HDR 2002. The larger dynamics, however, of global politics have changed since 9/11 and
more current research is required.
But the main point is governance – not politics or government - and this would be an interesting opportunity to pull
in the angle of social movements and global civil society (as suggested by Pablo). Some are trying to address this
issue (i.e. - J. Keane’s recent book, the work of John Hopkins, CIVICUS, etc.) but not entirely satisfactorily. The
research often disaggregates (perhaps rightly so) to the national level and leans toward a western orthodoxy or
conceptualization (not rightly so). The HDR could very much push the agenda - empirically based, analytical, and
Southern-defined - on this relatively new phenomena dating to the Seattle events, the advent of internet
organizing, Social Forums, etc. As with conflict, the HDR has always given civil society and participatory                                                10/5/2004
                                                                                                        Page 20 of 68

processes (especially in 1993) due recognition but one could argue for more attention and focus.

Frederick Lyons, UNDP Iran

Dear Sakiko,
Go for global inequality. "Economist" gloss aside, I think that we owe it to ourselves to clear the methodological
undergrowth on inequality issues. To the extent that we are engaged in rights-based development, the now-you-
see- it now-you-don’t way we deal with inequality (take the Declaration on the Right to Development, for
example...) is surely a source of problems for us both where advocacy and programmes are concerned. A richly
argued and documented HDR 2005 on this would be of great help.
Earlier HDRs have built a powerful case against inequality, with a variety of statistical approaches including Gini.
One of our most interesting efforts looked at the dynamic evolution of the HDI for countries over time, from the
early 60s, I think. Could we now look at the trends, at inequality over time in a similar way? With success stories
as well? Applied to public goods? I think that this could produce some very powerful messages, and no doubt
some useful methodological innovations.
Warm regards, Frederick.
Resident Representative – Iran

Richard Leete, UNDP Malaysia

Dear Sakiko
Yet another idea, and topical given UNDP's increasing engagement with the private sector and the release of the
SG's report on "Unleashing Entrepreneurialship", would be for the HDR to focus on the potential contribution of
buisness to human development, linking to MDG8, the Global Partnership for Development, and the Global
Compact. There are potential new conceptual arguments that could be made in relation to globalisation, and we
could name and shame, so to speak, by developing a Corporate Social Responsibility Index.
Just a thought, Richard
Richard Leete
UN Resident Coordinator
UNDP Resident Representative for Malaysia,
Singapore and Brunei Darussalam
UNFPA Representative

Jan Mattsson, Bureau of Management, UNDP New York

Dear Colleagues: it's been interesting to see all the contributions: clearly, there is an abundance of good options.
In my mind, conflict prevention would be a great candidate. This has been a much discussed subject for a few
years now in both the development and humanitarian circles. If anything, it has become even more topical over
the past year. Yet, conflict prevention is not well conceptualized in literature or in practice. There is an opportunity
for the HDR to fill this vacuum, and by the way, to provide the link the MDGs. (I was amazed at a meeting among
humanitarian agencies about good donorship, less than two years ago, that the ?humanitarians? did not want to
use the MDGs as a reference point or justification for their work.) Best regards, Jan
Jan Mattsson ( )
Bureau of Management

Georges Nzongola-Ntalaja, UNDP Norway

Dear Sakiko,                                                     10/5/2004
                                                                                                      Page 21 of 68

All four themes are important, and deserve a volume of the HDR. However, in terms of current developments in
the world, I am of the opinion that global governance is more important as a theme within which the other issues
may be discussed at length. My first reaction was to go for HIV/AIDS, given the interest that a paper by Lee-Nah
Hsu, Manager of our Southeast Asia HIV/AIDS Programme, has attracted. This is a paper she produced as part
of the Democratic Governance Fellowship Programme at the Oslo Governance Centre last year on HIV/AIDS and
governance. The paper looks at how democratic governance may contribute to preventive strategies or to greater
HIV resiliency, and how its attributes of responsiveness, accountability, transparency and participation may play a
positive role in the treatment of people infected with the deadly virus. It would be useful to look at the role of
global governance, together with its relationship to both national and local governance with respect to both
prevention and cure.
What is true for HIV/AIDS is also applicable to conflict prevention and global inequality, all of which are salient
issues for global governance. This year, the Bergen Seminar Series is devoted to governance in post-conflict
situations. It would be great to extend the post-conference discussion from national to global governance. Global
inequality was part of last year's Bergen discussion on MDG-8, the goal of promoting a global partnership for
development and mutual accountability of North and South in implementing the Millennnium Declaration and the
Best regards, Georges

Dotcho Mihailov, UNDP/NHDR Coordination Bulgaria

It seems that the report could benefit if three of the suggested themes interact for deeper analysis and stronger
messages: How does global governance impact prevention of conflicts and reduction of global inequality? And
vice versa, did current inequality measures put off conflicts or did global governance take a lesson from the
conflicts (or the Conflict)?
A common dominator of these interrelated themes could be the concept of participation - participation in
governance, participation in conflict prevention (or conflict creation) and participation in fighting (or generating)
inequalities. Where is the division line between “global” and “national” responsibilities about all that? And most
importantly, where is the “citizen” in all that “global” topics?
Yes, these issues were partially tackled by the HDR2002, which I think was excellent. However, looking at global
realities duplication will not be a weakness for the report.
Dotcho Mihailov (NHDR 2003 National Coordinator, Bulgaria)

Ahmed Driouchi, Al Akhawayn University, Morocco

Dear Sakiko Fukuda-Parr and other colleagues and network members:

Thank you for initiating the discussion on the HDR 2005. I am pleased to submit my own view on what would be
an innovative topic along the lines you described in your message. I am sure that my suggestion can be further
enriched by the other colleagues that are working in the area of human development. through further discussion
and participation. My contribution is composed of three parts. The first one (part A) is an attempt to develop a
rationale for the topic, the second (part B) is related to practical matters and issues that can enhance the
understanding and usefuleness of the topic while the third part (part C) addresses the baic definitions and
measurements that are needed.

A. Rationale:
Human societies have been also faced with larger amounts of uncertainties as the world is becoming more
turbulent and countries and regions facing larger risks and uncertainties from both exogenous and endogenous
sources. Those risks and uncertainties are also becoming more and more unpredictable. Futhermore, with the
globalization and integration of world economies and societies and with the expanded role of media, any disaster
occuring somewhere affects most of the world. This implies that the transmission of the effects and impacts of
disasters is becoming increasingly rapid and can attain most countries. So human development is consequently
under the effects of different disasters that take place in different places. As such, human development both
globally and locally, suffers from these uncertainties and disasters. Both the economic and social systems at
country, regional and international levels are affected. The poor segments of the population in a given country, in
regions and globally, appear to be those who suffer much from these uncertainties. Besides direct victims from
disasters, eldery, children and women are also immediate victims. People in general are affected not only in
accessing goods and services but also in accessing to a bright future. How different segments and generations                                                   10/5/2004
                                                                                                         Page 22 of 68

can perceive the future while continuous disasters can affect their abilities and capabilites towards building
positive expectations about the access to prosperity and access to normal life ? It is also known that countries,
regions and international organizations have been developing means to deal with different types of uncertainties
but the central question is how these means are being adjusted to the needs and to the required efficiency. How
further enhancements can be made at all country, regional and international levels ?

B. Practical matters:
In relation to the above observations, questions can be addred to the international, regional and country systems
that are dealing with anticipation and implementation of programs that are related to different types of disasters
(whether progressive or sudden) in order to know:

The existing processes of disaster anticipation, relief and treatment,
The efficiency under which different systems have been operating during
the past twenty years,
The problems and issues to be raised in relation to the efficiency under
which these systems have been operated,
What other instruments can countries, regions and international
organizations mobilize in order to better anticipate, deal with and treat
How market solutions can be emphasized (insurance and other financial
means) ?
How public and communal solutions can be enhanced ?
How the roles of NGOs can be enhanced ?
How to satisfy better and quicker the needs of populations affected by
disasters ?

C. Definitions and measurement issues:
The above observations and questions lead to prior issues to be well defined and addressed:
1. The types of uncertainties that should be considered (local conflicts,
regional conflicts, attacks, diseases and epidemies, market craches and instabilities, natural disasters, epidemies
on animals and then on human consumption,....),
2. The means to measure amplitude of these uncertainties,
3. The means to measure impacts on human development dimensions,
4. The means to evaluate the enhancing properties of new instruments to be promoted,
5. How developing economies are more affected by uncertainties ?
6. How developed economies are affected ?
7. How country comparisons can be made in relation to responsiveness to different types of uncertainties.

Based on the above aspects, it appears clearly that your suggestions about conflicts, HIV can be enlarged to
include different types of uncertainties in relation to their impacts on human development. This contribution can
add another building block into the process of human development report through inducing the set up of new
strategies and means that would enhance capacities of countries and regions to better anticipate and manage
effectively the likely impact of uncertainties. I hope that this proposal will be of interest and it will encourage data
collection and analysis in order to push further the frontier already opened by the past human development
reports. One formulation can be among others as "Human Development and World Turbulence or uncertainties".

Sincerely Yours,
Dr. Ahmed Driouchi, Professor of Economics, Dean of the School of Business
Administration, Al Akhawayn University, Ifrane, Morocco

Address: PO Box 104, Avenue Hassan II, Ifrane Morocco
Phone: 212-55-862311/22; Fax: 212-55-862060

Nabila Zouhiri, UNDP Morocco

Dear Networkers,                                                     10/5/2004
                                                                                                       Page 23 of 68

Global Governance was a "catchword" for me indeed. As I did not know anything about, I looked at its meaning in
some of the search engines and I found that it could be an interesting issue to tackle especially "if" we could offer
a framework of rules necessary to tackle global problems (poverty, environmental degradation, HIV-AIDS, human
rights violations etc), "with a view to inform the interested public, and to encourage a debate and dialogue about
the problems and their positive solutions in order to influence agencies and organisations engaged in seeking and
implementing solutions to these urgent problems".
This means that writing on such issue definitely requires involving non-governmental as well as governmental
organizations, citizen's movements, multinational corporations, the global mass media, etc.
And this also means that we should be able to respond to many questions, among which I can cite the following :
   a. Are we able to offer this framework ? of "global civic ethic" based on "a set of core values that can unite
        people of all cultural, political, religious, or philosophical backgrounds" ?
   b. What is the strategy to advance the global governance agenda ?
   c. What is the ultimate goal of this new kind of paradigm ?
   d. Will this framework help the world to live/not live in a "global neighbourhood managed by world wide
        bureaucracy "?
   e. Who are the accredited parties/decision makers who are responsible to set the rules and the agenda of
        Global Governance ?

In addition, I do share the opinion of Sakiko that a report on Global Governance wil make sense only if we tackle
particular issues as the ones he indicated in his e-mail (limits of national sovereignty, the role of the UN
What do you think dear networkers?
UNDP Morocco

Angela Lusigi, UNDP Nigeria

Dear Sakiko,
While I agree with my colleagues that the global governance is a pressing issue. At the same time it has also
been suggested that perhaps the scope may be too large for one report.
It may be a good idea to use conflict as an entry point in addressing global governance issues and suggesting
new policy and institutional approaches to address the range of governance issues at every stage from conflict
prevention, to dealing with conflict situations and post conflict reconstruction. This could be done for the regional,
national and sub-national levels.
Managing conflict is indeed a pressing issue for most developing countries and is linked to all UNDP's thematic
focus areas and has a significant impact of the potential of achievement of the MDGs. This HDR, like previous
ones could go a long way in highlighting the issue, clearly delienating roles and responsibilities and bringing
together lessons learned from UNDP interventions all over the world to provide a guide for policy makers and
Angela Lusigi
UNDP Nigeria

John Oohiorhenuan UNDP South Africa

From the Southern cone viewpoint, I think conflict will be an excellent topic. And it would really challenge us
intellectually. John

Resident Representative – South Africa

Jafar Javan, UNDP/SURF-Bratislava, Slovak Republic

Dear Network friends,
I'm not really sure if a report on global governance could really stir up much debates and thus interests. Beside
those of us involved in development, there are not too many people around who would understand what global
governance is all about. I suggest we go for a topic which is more controversial and would really stir up serious                                                   10/5/2004
                                                                                                        Page 24 of 68

debates. The topic that I vote for is: Religion and Development. This report could cover issues such as the notion
of development in the context of different religions view development (and its various dimensions -
e.g., poverty reduction, democracy, justice, HIV/AIDS, new technology, etc.), the role of religious institutions in
promoting development, and more. Of course this will not be the first publication on the subject, as there are
publications already out on the topic (e.g., the Danish Institute for International Studies report on the subject), but
it may be the first time that a UNDP supported publications is addressing the issue. Just an idea.

Tajeddine Badry, UNDP Morocco

Dear all,

Definitely, Global Governance, perhaps (as suggested by a colleague) combined with global inequality, would
seem an appropriate and most timely theme for the 2005 HDR, at a time when a new international disorder (oops)
is in the making, when the world witnesses mounting fanaticism and exacerbated antagonism, which nurture a
sentiment injustice and desperation and ultimately the resort to violence. The report would need to revisit the rules
governing international relations, look into issues such the right to interference, sovereignty, relations between the
powerful and the weak, the rich and the poor. Explore means to bring about a more equitable and fairer handling
of world conflicts, to promote constructive and tolerant dialogue, and identify (recommend ?) measures to make
universal values (not western vs eastern) prevail again.

A daring and challenging enterprise indeed !!!

UNDP Morocco

Sally Fegan-Wyles, DGO/UNDP New York

Dear Colleagues,
I would agree with Jan, but add post conflict stabilization measures. We are currently trying to provide guidance to
UNCTs on what activities the UN should support in post conflict nations that would prevent re-occurrence of
conflict. But there is surprisingly little that is within the immediate body of knowledge of the funds and programs.
Director – DGO

El-Mostafa Benlamlih, UNDP Saudi Arabia

Just one personal comment, Jan. The humanitarians do not want to use the MDGs as a reference for their work,
for one simple reason ( they may have other reasons): They do not want to see development agencies (UNDP in
particular)play an important role in any of the crisis phases except that of return to normality. This is for thier own
visibility and Res Mob. The interest of the people and country comes later.
Resident Representative – Saudi Arabia

Diene Keita, UNDP Senegal

Dear Sakiko and Colleagues
I second these points of view. I believe that there are issues yet to be explored regarding conflicts . The
international community seems to be at the best moment to reflect on how to prevent conflicts and /or how to
control damages in the aftermath. UNDP could knowledgeably feed discussions at this very moment.
Best regards,
Diene Keita
DRR UNDP Senegal                                                    10/5/2004
                                                                                                              Page 25 of 68

Knut Ostby, Evaluation Office, UNDP New York

Dear Colleagues,
May I add my vote for the area of conflict prevention. For several reasons, including those mentioned, this is
probably one of the most difficult to deal with among the crisis and post conflict related topics. Many governments
would not even want to talk about this, saying "in our country the government provides perfect stability", or "we
don't need outside help to solve internal political problems", etc. But in the HDR UNDP has always dared to go a
little further and explore areas where not all the answers are in hand. What we see around us is that this issue is
either not addressed, or it is addressed with enormous amounts of resources using high level diplomatic
maneuvers or military interventions. We could not (at least not in the short to medium term) have the ambition to
replace all such initiatives or fill all the holes that exist in this field, but this is definitely an area that could benefit
from global debate and sharing of experiences. Also on the UNDP side we are much better equipped now than
what we have been in the past to enter into a real debate on this issue. Over the last year or so, BCPR has not
only undergone an enormous strengthening and deepening of its capacity and competency, it has also moved to
a more comprehensive approach.So - we should be rather well equipped to enter into a global debate on this
Knut Ostby
Evaluation Advisor
Evaluation Office / UNDP
1 UN Plaza, DC1-450
NY, New York 10017
Tel: +1 212 906 5157

Frode Mauring, UNDP Macedonia

Dear colleagues,
Indeed it has been an interesting discussion.
We dwelled on this issue in a meeting today with programme staff. Also here was a support for having Conflict
Prevention as a theme. Put to expand somewhat on Sally’s message, there is a need to expand on the post
conflict measures recognising that almost half of post conflict countries have reemerging conflicts within 5 years if
I recall the BCPR statistics correctly. We need to know more about the best way to channel aid and assistance,
and what policies to advocate for in such situation. I do not think this has been adequately addressed. I believe a
focus on conflict would also incorporate the issue of global governance and inequalities when investigating the
potential linkages on root causes of conflict. In the days of TV and internet, does huge inequalities become more
visible and actually become such a factor. In other words is it real or perceived inequality that matters? The
extreme levels of unemployment seem to be a factor, not only for poverty in itself, but also fuelling potential
problems by being easy recruits for trouble-makers. At least this seems to be the case in the Balkans.
Best regards,
Resident Representative – Macedonia

Sakiko Fukuda-Parr, UNDP/HDRO New York

Dear colleagues, I am following this debate with enormous interest. I have not responded but have read each
message and will respond to your ideas collectively!

Aleksi Hokkanen, University of Helsinki, Finland

Dear Mrs Fukuda-Parr,
First of all, thank you for giving us the opportunity to contribute to the thinking of the theme. I am sending my                                                          10/5/2004
                                                                                                          Page 26 of 68

contribution to the pool of ideas and will speak on behalf of the inequality theme:

Your introduction is good, but instead of focusing only into global inequality (=income inequality between persons
on global level), one could concentrate to inequality in general, and thus include within-country inequality
(=income inequality between rich and poor within a country) and cross-country inequality (=inequality in average-
incomes between countries) to the analysis. An extremely interesting question to address is how all these three
interact with each other. E.g. we can have a situation where
global inequality is rising at the same time with within-country inequality. We can also have a situation where
global inequality is rising but within-country inequality is declining in a specific country. Could a situation of global
inequality declining but within-country inequality rising be possible? Would be interesting to see how many
countries and which fall under which category. And which form the biggest groups? These could show interesting
tendencies where we are going. One could also ask whether those countries that have been able to keep within-
country inequalities low, stagnating, or that have reversed their tendance from
rising inequalities to declining, have done it because of successful public distribution policies or because of other
factors. Why have some succeeded and what is the story behind? The issue of redistributive policies could be
dealt in a greater detail. And not to forget that an equitable income distribution advances the fulfillment of human

Then, the question does not have to be studied only in terms of inequalities measured by incomes, it can be
widened to other components of human development as well. One could look at the "access to" and "provision of"
education and health care just to mention. This is also where the social safety nets come into the picture. In fact,
these factors have been the biggest redistributive elements in the Nordic societies since the development of what
they call a "Welfare-state".
Furthermore, one could add development assistance into the analysis by looking to the effect of development
id/policies/programmes towards inequalities. Is ODA reducing global inequality? More complex is the same
question for within-country inequalities in a specific country. Can assistance that widens within-country inequality
be justified? Do widening
inequalities have to be accepted as a necessity in some stages of development? Can aid's effects to inequalities
be measured or evaluated? What could donor and recipient countries do together so that redistributive aspects
and inequalities are fully addressed?

I don't have answers to these questions, rather I believe that they leave enough room to treat the three areas
mentioned by you:
- concept: different dimensions of inequalities and their introduction
- measurement tools and approaches: first, it is very difficult to measure inequalities at global level. Even at
country level, there is a large number of countries in which a GINI-coefficient has never been calculated. I see
also a demand and potential for new measurement approaches/proposals to ODA's impact in inequalities.
- policy approaches: presentation of successful redistributive policies, experiences and failures
Lastly, there's nothing new under the sun on these issues in my message, but it's always good to remind even
basic issues to the large public. The yearly HDR can have a huge impact on policy makers at country level as
they compare their existing policy set-ups to others presented in the report. This is also why I prefer a more
operational topic such as one addressing inequalities/distributional questions that could eventually lead into
changes to "business-as-usual" policies, rather than a more philosophical topic - also in your topic list.
Best regards,
Aleksi Hokkanen
PhD Student
University of Helsinki

Ngila Mwase, UNDP Uganda

I agree entirely that the topic of "global governance"" would be inappropriate. We have in fact addressed some of
the issues in some of our previous HDRs. And I think there was a global governance report issued by an
international group co-chaired by the former Commonwealth Secretary General, Sir Shridahl Ramphal some
years back. Regards.

Richard Ponzio, UNDP Kosovo

Dear Sakiko and HDR Network Members,                                                      10/5/2004
                                                                                                      Page 27 of 68

One more vote for "Conflict & Human Development" for 2005 ... with reference to the other points made in this
discussion, there could be a highly relevant chapter on religion and conflict (eg, addressing some of the sources
of militant extremism), as well as one dealing with global governance and conflict (note: global governance has
been a recurring theme since the earliest HDRs, but except for perhaps HDR '94, none have directly tackled
issues of demilitarization, conflict, and political decision-making in relation to current, inequitable global
governance systems and practice.)

With 53 major armed internal conflicts in the 1990s resulting in an estimated 3.6 million deaths (mostly civilians),
war and intrastate violence are the worst enemies of human development, especially for the poor and most
vulnerable. Besides the recurrence of traditional forms of warfare and violence among state and well-funded
insurgent groups, the rise of heavily armed criminal and terrorist actions jeopardize the tremendous gains
achieved in many regions over the past two decades in terms of social, political and economic progress. The “root
causes” of the sustained deadly conflicts executed by these armed elements range from diverse political motives
or, more simply, the basic desire to aggrandize power to ethnic, religious, and economic motivations. Often violent
struggles are also fuelled by widespread feelings of powerlessness, poverty, and other threats to human dignity. It
is in this context that a Human Development Report that examines the many complex dimensions of the conflict-
human development nexus would provide a significant contribution to current policy and intellectual debates.

More than twenty-five percent of UNDP’s field offices deal with countries either experiencing sustained armed
violence or recovering from devastating—in human and material terms—armed conflict. Perhaps another twenty-
percent, to make a conservative guess, can be labelled “conflict-prone” countries. The alarming number of
conflict-prone countries underscores the need for a broader approach to conflict prevention—one that avoids
artificial segmentation between pre-conflict, crisis and post-conflict. It also indicates the need for an appropriate
mix of political, security, humanitarian and developmental responses. These are some of the issues that could be
addressed in detail in a future HDR on conflict and human development. Other topics to be explored could

· The concept of preventive development (how development underpins peace and its relationship to political,
security and humanitarian approaches to conflict prevention);
· Understanding violence (new theories/understanding of conflict: eg, structural versus operational prevention);
· Non-military actors and violent conflict: civilians in war, women, children, refugees, IDPs…a growing literature
has emerged dealing with the unique experiences of each group in violent conflict and war, as well as their
special roles in preventive conflict;
· Military actors and armed groups: organizations authorized to use force, civil management and oversight bodies,
justice and law enforcement institutions, non-statutory security forces, and non-statutory civil society groups;
· Military expenditure and the global arms bazaar: revisiting the peace divided concept, illicit arms transfers,
weapons of mass destruction, small arms and light weapons, the UN Arms Register, landmines etc.;
· The Business of Peace: the role of the private sector in preventive development;
· “Do No Harm”: development and violence. Examining how development aid/projects can contribute to violence
or the continuation of violence (see work of Mark Anderson);
· Tool-kit for conflict prevention: diplomacy, sanctions, use of force, local, national, regional and global responses
etc. (see: Carnegie Commission on the Prevention of Deadly Conflict);
· The concept of democratic peacebuilding (both as a strategy for post-war reconstruction and for preventive
action by establishing an environment of civic peace for national democratic institutions to develop)--an idea first
raised in HDR 2002.

Major Statistical Resources on the Human and Material Costs of Armed Conflict:
- SIPRI Armed Conflicts Database
- IISS new Armed Conflicts Database (with support from Dfid)
- University of Maryland (Monty Marshall and Ted Gurr)
- International Crisis Group
- Saferworld Project on “The True Cost of Conflict”
- US Arms Control and Disarmament Agency
- UN Department for Disarmament Affairs

Possible Advisers and Consultants:
Oscar Arias, Arias Foundation for Peace and Human Progress
Eilene Babbit, Program on Negotiation and Conflict Resolution, The Fletcher School                                                   10/5/2004
                                                                                                      Page 28 of 68

Nicole Ball, Center for Conflict Management and International Development, University of Maryland
Andrea Bartoli, Director, Center for International Conflict Resolution, Columbia University
Alejandro Bendana, Center for International Studies, Managua
Michael Brzoska, Bonn Internationcal Centre for Conversion
Richard Caplan, Oxford University Centre for International Studies
Jacklyn Cock, University of Witwatersand’s Peace and Security Project
Gareth Evans, President, International Crisis Group (former FM of Australia)
David Hamburg, President Emeritus of the Carnegie Corporation (Carnegie Commission)
Ian Johnstone, The Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy
Jane Holl Lute, Vice-President, UN Foundation
Keith Krause, Director, Small Arms Survey, Graduate Institute of Int’l Studies (Geneva)
Edward Lawrence, Monterrey Institute
Patricia Lewis, UN Institute for Disarmament Research
David Malone, President, International Peace Academy
Andrew Mack, University of British Columbia
Saul Mendlowitz, Unversity of Rutgers Law School
George Mitchell, Senior Fellow, Center for Int’l Conflict Resolution at Columbia University (former US Senator)
Michael Renner, Worldwatch Institute
Barnet Rubin, Senior Fellow, Center for International Cooperation, NYU
Ramesh Thakur, Director, UNU Peace and Governance Programme
William Ury, Harvard Program on Negotiation
Peter Uvin, The Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy (Institute for Human Security)
Herbert Wulf, Bonn Internationcal Centre for Conversion

Possible Outline Ideas (in addition to the ideas presented above):

I. Human security through preventive development
· Rethinking security in the 21st century (moving beyond the conventional cold war as well as post-cold war
security agendas to a new age of human security, responding to threats emanating from non-state agents
primarily within states)
· Preventive development as an essential instrument for war prevention
· Human development and the conflict-security-development nexus

II. Human costs of conflict, military expenditure and surplus weapons
· Measure the millions of people who have been killed, the loss of community and trust the living have suffered,
the material damage, and how tens of millions have been pushed back into insecurity, poverty and illiteracy over
the last two decades. Why has every major famine in recent years taken place in a war zone?
· Revisiting the peace dividend concept (devise new tools both to calculate the military expenditure-human
development trade-off and to analyze the conflict-security-development nexus since the cold war). Measure the
costs to development of conflict, sanctions, and military expenditure, with particular reference to health and
education. Also attempt to assess environmental costs.
· The war system by the numbers: amount spent on arms vs. peacekeeping (250:1); the 53 armed conflicts since
the end of the cold war have virtually all been intra-state affairs; 23 million people have been killed in wars since
1945; 84 percent of those killed were civilians - compared to 50 percent of casualties in WWII; and about 42
million displaced persons in the world today are victims of wars and fighting.
· Surplus weapons (especially small arms) and the global arms bazaar. The ever-present global trade in surplus
weapons is a dangerous by-product of disarmament which contributes to the perpetuation of conflict and often
interferes with post-conflict peacebuilding.

III. Democratic governance foundations for post-conflict situations
· Measure the success of those countries that have recovered from conflict situations. Document the governance
rehabilitation strategies employed. How can trust and reconciliation be achieved among former combatants?
Address why strong democratic institutions (including civilian control of the military), human rights, and SHD are
essential for a just and lasting peace.
· The role of development actors in building local and national capacities to govern in the immediate post-conflict
· Case studies: E. Timor, Kosovo, Bosnia, Rwanda, Cambodia, Mozambique, Iraq, and Central America
· Governance where there is no government: Afghanistan and Somalia

IV. Converting defense resources to human development                                                   10/5/2004
                                                                                                    Page 29 of 68

· Demobilization and reintegration of armed forces personnel
· Defense-sector restructuring and transferring resources to the civilian economy (including base closure and
· Reorientation of military research and development
· Reallocation of military expenditure to social services

V. Sustaining peace when civil wars end
· From peacekeeping and peacemaking to democratic peacebuilding: an integrated approach to problem-solving
in crisis and post-conflict countries involving a range of military, humanitarian, and development assistance
activities within an overarching political framework. (Case studies on the SG's new Peacebuilding Offices at the
country level)
· Democratic peacebuilding as an integral part of human development and a key ingredient to
overcoming/transforming deep-rooted conflict
· The role of the United Nations and regional organizations in peacebuilding
· The role of development actors in building peace during and after conflict situations
· Achieving reductions in military expenditure and conflict through an alternative human security system (involving
interlocking community, national, regional and global approaches).

Hope these ideas help fuel further discussion on this possible theme.

Ramanathan Balakrishnan, UNV Bonn, Germany
Dear Sakiko

Some thoughts . . .

Human Development Reports offer us a unique opportunity of drawing international focus, of donors, bilaterals,
multilaterals, academic institutions and more importantly national governments to a particular development issue/
concept. While the idea of using HDRs to explore development frontiers is no doubt commendable, I believe there
is an even more urgent need to use the HDRs to target more tangible and imminent development issues, and
spur the national and international community to action in addressing such an issue.

In this background, among the topics that you have indicated, HIV/AIDS ranks the highest in terms of importance
and timing. Specialist organisations such as WHO/ UNFPA have declared the current period as the last available
window of time to address the issue, before the development challenge morphs into a epidemic of exponential
proportions nullifying the precious development gains achieved by developing nations so far. At a time when UN
agencies and other development allies are striving to increase the priority given to the HIV/AIDS issue in national
development processes, the 2005 HDR focusing on HIV/AIDS would no doubt come in as a shot in the arm. Also,
one of the key highlights of the HDR is the way in which it contrasts and presents a particular development issue
in terms of its treatment in different and distinct social and political contexts. Such a mosaic of experiences/
strategies of various nations in dealing with the different facets of the HIV/AIDS challenge would indeed be a
concrete value addition to the efforts of the partners addressing this issue.

Given the deficit experienced in funding HIV/AIDS interventions, the report could also highlight the need for
increased contribution/ investment in this sector and thus make a strong case for increased donor commitment in
terms of financial support.

On the treatment of the topic (HIV/AIDS) itself, I would suggest a focus on the different dimensions of the AIDS
challenge, the effects on the national economy, the service sector and of course, the effect it has had on social
structures; families and kinships. This could be complemented by the world-wide experiences in addressing these
challenges, in terms of strategies, planning processes and unique experiments such as GIPA (Greater
Involvement of People living with HIV/AIDS). It would also be an ideal platform to showcase experiences
highlighting the twinning of IT with substantive interventions to address the HIV/ AIDS issue.

Thanks & regards

Ramanathan Balakrishnan
Programme Specialist                                                10/5/2004
                                                                                                          Page 30 of 68

APEC (Asia Pacific Europe CIS) Section
UNV Bonn

Alfredo Jefferson, UNDP/SURF Panama, Panama

Dear colleagues
I have read most of the interesting proposals put forward and I would like to add another topic for consideration:
Democratic governance and Market liberalization

Much has been done in research about failures or solutions to governance issues and yet it seems that there is a
gap between market liberalization and its connection to democratic governance. It can be argued that for the
markets to operate efficiently you need strong democracies which in turn require good governance; however, it
can also be argued that for democracies to be sustainable you need markets with social responsibilities and not
those that promote increased unemployment and greater inequalities. In summary, you cannot talk realistically
about democracies if people are not even able to bring food to the table, or find employment, or access
information and adequate social services.

The question then remains: what characteristics should markets possess to contribute to the management of
good democracies, and how can democracies contribute to an enabling environment in which businesses can

Magdy Martinez Soliman, UNDP/BDP - Democratic Governance, New York

Dear Sakiko,
Having read the initial reactions from colleagues to your proposals, and on the basis of your trilogy, I felt naturally
inclined to choosing the topic of global governance, and morally obliged not to neglect the suggested topics of
HIV/AIDS and conflict. It seems almost impossible, because of the focused structure of the HDR per se, to find a
hypothetical container for all three very important issues. A recent development in our approach to HIV/AIDS, the
Southern African Capacity Initiative, and a discussion today with policy advisors at the Bratislava Regional
Centre, prompted however the following ideas, which I submit to consideration and discussion. The basic
assertion of the SACI, after analyzing the incredible impact the pandemic is having on the Southern African
countries and their internal human capacities, is “if it has the effects of a war, treat it like a war”. The discussion in
Bratislava today turned around the concept of “Governance Disasters”.
Governance Disasters are those where human organization collapses and finds itself unable to provide solutions
to very serious problems, resulting in a severe distortion of social life. Wars, insurmountable internal conflict,
HIV/AIDS devastation out of control or statelessness are, apparently, the most blatant expressions of governance
disasters nowadays. But profound inequalities resulting in exclusion, gross accumulation of wealth by a short
minority beside vast masses of poor people, generalized famine and lack of the slightest opportunity for the
majority to carry our a decent life and enjoy the minimum of dignity is as much a governance disaster. In all these
cases, something has clearly failed in the governance system, be it basic organization of the state or of the
international community, minimal levels of inclusiveness, peaceful coexistence, response of public and private
mechanisms, including international governance, to threats of major proportions to mankind, or minimal levels of
redistribution of growth or of growth full stop –again internationally and at the national level. Governance
Disasters occur when basic governance systems are not in place or fail to accomplish their basic mandate: the
community doesn’t find the way to prevent a pandemic, to prevent exclusion, to prevent unacceptable levels of
inequality, to prevent violent conflict or to maintain basic decision-making institutions. I find this approach
acceptable insofar it immediately leads us to another question, that of delivery of basic services in crisis context,
or the upholding of minimal public goods, such as life, security, healthcare, equity and representation. It is a
discussion about citizenship and future, because when such public goods are not provided and basic services not
delivered, the poor are no citizens anymore, just survivors if they are lucky and victims if they are not, and an
entire generation looses its future.
Magdy Martinez Soliman
Democratic Governance Practice Manager                                                      10/5/2004
                                                                                                       Page 31 of 68

Bureau for Development Policy

Maxine Olson, UNDP India

The fundamental issue for us in the UN family is global governance--it pervades all of the other topics, and what
the role of the UN is in addressing them. How can the institution respond to inequity, to conflict, to abuse of
power, as well as to decisions on global public goods? With the report of the High Level Panel on Security being
released later this year, or early next perhaps, we could serve to maintain the momentum and broaden the
debate. If we do not get this right, another Iraq could sink the UN. The topic is risky, however, because UNDP is
not central to the global governance mechanisms, and an HDR on it could embroil the organization in a debate on
why we are addressing the issue.
Whatever topic we choose, let's weave in the governance issues, in terms of what is the role of decision-making
at each level--local, national and global, to at least contribute to the thinking on this.

Resident Representative – India

Cecile Molinier, UNDP Mauritania

Dear Sakiko,
Congratulations for launching that debate. The number and quality of the reactions to your query bear witness to
the relevance of your suggestions.
For my part I would weigh in on the side of conflict. Having worked for several years in West Africa, it has become
clear to me that conflict strikes at the heart of everything we try to achieve as development practitioners. Unless
and until an in-depth reflexion is conducted on the deep-rooted causes of conflict, in particular the psychological,
historical and sociological causes, which have not been sufficiently explored, conflict will continue to erase the
progress made in all of the areas of human development and the prospects of reaching the MDGs by 2015 will
recede further and further. Besides, focusing on conflict will lead you and your team to reflect also on global
governance and inequality. It seems to me that UNDP is well positioned to address that issue, since it has now
been acknowledged by the UN General Assembly that peace and development are intrinsically linked and our
cooperation with the UN's political departments has been institutionalized, as exemplified by the United Nations
Office for West Africa in Dakar, headed by SRSG Ould Abdallh, which now includes as Director a former RR/RC.
Best of luck and best personal regards.
Cecile Molinier

Resident Representative – Mauritania

Akiko Yuge, UNDP Tokyo

Dear colleagues,
Let me add my voice in support of conflict prevention. This is clearly a subject that developed and developing
countries as well as many development agencies are struggling with. It's an area that UNDP can and should take
a lead to strategically place ourselves as a leading and dynamic agency to promote and support peace-building
from the preventive viewpoint. It will attract much attention from many partners all over the world, including
Japanese partners.
Akiko Yuge
UNDP Tokyo

Tegegnework Gettu, UNDP Nigeria

Conflict would be more interesting this time around. Conflict in general with specific focus on Ethnic and
communal conflict. Causes and implications on Human Development. The implications of different kinds of
communal and ethnic conflicts, the nature and roots of these conflicts. Possible political, institutional and other                                                   10/5/2004
                                                                                                       Page 32 of 68

solutions to the conflicts, ethnic and communal conflicts and their impacts on Human development, population
movements, refugee and other problems. Governance, democratization and conflict. options available to
managing ethnic and communal conflict. As we all know substantial number of countries have been affected one
way or the other by such conflicts and human development has been affected. Afghanistan, Angola, Armenia,
Azerbaijan, Burma, India, Indonesia, Liberia, Siri lanka, Sudan, Tajikistan, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Bangladesh, Bhutan,
Burundi, Estonia, Guatemala, Iraq, Latvia, Lebanon, Israel, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Mali, Moldova, Niger, Northern
Ireland, Philippines, Romania, Rwanda, Spain, Turkey and we can go on. The world have been stunned by both
the breath and depth of these conflicts taking place in many regions. Therefore, defining this problem, looking into
the causes, systemic explanation, perceptual explanations, implications and the chain effects, possible solution
and recommendations will be in order. Regards.

Mbaranga Gasarabwe, UNDP Djibouti

I support this idea of Conflict prevention and resolution. It is challening but timely addressed (after so many
conflicts around the World!).It looks that "human" tends to forget " lessons learnt". What did we learn in order to
prevent upcoming conflicts? still challenging!! especially once it addresses ethnic, tribal groups...otherwise what
happened in Rwanda and the Great Lakes (Africa), Kosovo etc...should never be repeated elsewhere!

Ana Gaby Guerrero, UNDP Laos

Dear Sakiko and Colleagues,

Entering into this new millennium with changes on the social, cultural, economic and geo-political dimensions, I
think that the theme of Conflicts is very relevant at this moment and extremely important to be addressed. As
Sakiko mentioned there have been from 1991 to 2001 57 major conflicts around the Globe. Many of these have
been developing as well as Global conflicts, if we consider the extend of involvement in one way or another of
different states, IOs, and civil participation around the world.

The theme of conflicts is vast and all issues related to conflict might not be addressed in one report. But this
depends on the focus, the perspective that one have on conflicts and the definition. I like very much how Rodolfo
Stavenhagen has for example analyze the conflict of Chiapas in three different perspectives; Structural conflict,
Political conflict and Armed conflict.

The theme has a lot of controversy, but if this theme is selected and well developed, the HDR could play an
important and catalytic role. Some suggestion could be to focus on (1) emphazising the importance of conflict
prevention, difficulties of conflict resolution and challenges of the peace processes, (2) using a multi-disciplinary
analysis and approach to conflicts (3) having linkages to the HDR 2004 on cultural diversity, (4) looking into the
role of different stakeholders, the international community (UN, IOs, States, INGOs) but also the national actors.

Best regards, Gaby

Patricia De Mowbray, UNDP Cameroon

Dear Sakiko,
Having worked in the complex area of Central Africa (latest is attempted coup in Kinshasa) conflict needs to be
prevented and resolved. The UN Team based in Yaoundé, (most Heads of Agencies cover Central Africa) has
worked with the DPA-led mission to study whether or not it would be wise to have a UN Sub-Regional Office in
Central Africa. Choice of this topic would be a useful way of showing our organisation's comparative advantage in
defining the conceptual/analytical framework as well as establishing early warning related indicators, many of
which are developmental. As second choice, HIV/AIDS and, as third choice, socially responsible investment.
All the very best and warmest regards.                                                   10/5/2004
                                                                                                           Page 33 of 68

Resident Representative – Cameroon

Gabriele Köhler, UNDP Latvia

Dear Sakiko and dear all, the debate seems to be converging around the topic of conflict prevention and recovery
and [domestic] governance. I'd like to support this because

1) it is obviously a burning issue AND

2) there is some highly pertinent research and policy discourse on which such topic could build to develop new
concepts, new measurement tools and new policy approaches - Sakiko's selection criteria.

In this vein, I'd like to share with you some thoughts from a fascinating and absorbing conference on Ethnic
Inequality and Public Sector Governance, organised last week in Riga by the UN Research Institute on Social
Development (UNRISD), UNDP Latvia and the Latvian Ministry of Social Integration. To give a flavour of what
could be distilled from the conference, I am attempting an unsophisticated summary of the discussions and the
very rich conference paper by Yusuf Bangura, UNRISD, "Ethnic Structure, Inequality and Public Sector
Governance. An Overview of Research Findings and Policy Issues" (for the real thing, see www.unrisd

or the link at


1) Most societies are multi-ethnic and can be classified as uni-, bi- or multi-polar, depending how the dominant
ethnic group positions itself vis-a-vis minority groups. Interestingly, using this approach, countries with entirely
different institutions, histories & cultures come out as having the same "polarity" structure. Thus, rather counter-
intuitively, Belgium, Fiji, Latvia and Trinidad and Tobago are all in the same batch of bi-polar societies (subject to
much debate, of course!).

2) Ethnicity is a fuzzy construct and usually perceived, subjectively as much as objectively, around common
history, indigeneity, language, culture, religion, caste, and sometimes race (whatever that may be). Often, a
"minority" is defined as such by the majority.

3) Ethnicity can be a source of inequality. But of course there are many other causes and manifestations of
inequality in terms of income and in terms of access to private assets and to public goods.

4) Looking at the link between ethnicity and governance, countries follow different patterns for political
representation (majoritarian or proportional voting systems); party organisation (by ethnicity or programmatically),
or recruitment and selection of public administration elite (merit-based or by quota/affirmative action or a
combination etc).

5) Issues over social integration or minority rights have focused on citizenship rights, language rights, cultural
rights, representation and resource redistribution.

6) UNRISD measures immediate outcome differences with a "proportionality index" - the share of each group in
political institutions (such as parliament, civil service, cabinet etc) as a ratio of their share in the population. A ratio
of one does not imply socio-political/ethnic justice - but will help identify whether a country is moving towards a
nation state based on statehood or centred on culture/ethnicity/titular group (the latter risks to exclude - alienate -

7) The proportionality index can thus serve as one of many indicators of a simmering or pending crisis.

8) There needs to be power sharing among groups. But: Affirmative action can be divisive : if redistributive
ethnicity policies are mis-guided, they can of themselves create crises.

The UNRISD research and participants presented analyses of 18 multi-ethnic countries (Bosnia, Botswana,
Croatia, Estonia, Fiji, Ghana, India, Kenya, Latvia, Lithuania, Malaysia, Nigeria, Papua New Guinea, Suriname,
Spain, Tanzania, Trinidad and Tobago, Switzerland). We were all stunned by the similarities of experience,
approaches, political sensitivities & tensions, and policy challenges, and were alarmed at how easily well-meant                                                        10/5/2004
                                                                                                    Page 34 of 68

but ethnically-insensitive policy decisions can trigger violent conflict. All the national policy makers - and
colleagues from UN bodies such as the UN High Commission on Refugees (Stockholm regional office), UN High
Commission on Human Rights, UNDP-HURIST and COs in Latvia, Bhutan and Suriname, UNESCO, the World
Institute of Development Economics Research and from the OSCE - felt that this research deserved follow-up
discussions and meetings in the UN as much as in academe.

An HDR on conflict prevention and post-conflict governance policy could possibly use some of these findings and
if useful, commission similar analyses in other countries. Alternatively, I see some food for thought in perhaps
introduding the proportionality (and other political science) indexes as a proxy for "governance" to supplement the
MDG socio-economic indicators. And: I would love to see a meeting of ResReps where we could discuss such
questions from our respective country perspectives and governance practices.

Best regards.

Gabriele Köhler
UN Resident Coordinator
UNDP Resident Representative
United Nations Latvia
UN House
21, Pils iela
Riga LV 1167

Alvaro J. Rodriguez, UNDP/BDP New York

Dear Sakiko,
Thank you for the interesting discussion you have launched and for the opportunity to participate. I would like to
lend support to the consensus position that governance issues and conflict be given priority in the 2005 HDR.
In particular, I would like to see analysis of the rapidly evolving role of the state and the nation state in recent
decades and how it might continue to change in the future. Indeed, we are continuing to see a situation in which
the role of these actors, which has been so prevalent in the last few hundred years, is being challenged both in
the international community of nations in the form of new multilateral arrangements and compacts as well as by
national societies themselves which are finding new means of organization that often highlight deficiencies in
existing social contract arrangements between state and populations at large.
The impact on UNDP and other UN agencies is not always obvious as the arena for our involvement changes and
places new stresses in our operational modalities. Not least, it also challenges earlier assumptions about the
means to promote Human Development, and by implication the MDGs.
Alvaro J. Rodriguez
Policy Support Coordinator
BDP, UNDP, New York
Phone: 212-906-6337
Fax: 212-906-5857

Paolo Galli, UNDP/RBEC, New York

Dear Sakiko, I strongly support the conflict prevention and recovery theme for the all the reasons that have been                                                10/5/2004
                                                                                                      Page 35 of 68

mentioned by our colleagues. The report would also further cement UN/UNDP's growing leadership in this area at
a time when the UN system may be asked to play an even greater role in addressing conflict and other present
day global threats as a result of the work of the SG's high level panel.

Margherita Serafini, UNV Programme Officer, Eritrea

Dear HDR Network Members,

I would like to chip in... I am currently the UNV Programme Officer for Eritrea and previously worked on small
arms/development issues. I had the pleasure/honor to work for Edward Laurance, listed below as a possible
adviser/consultant, at the Monterey Institute of International Studies, California, while I was there to earn my
Master of Arts in International Policy Studies. He is a wonderful person and very dedicated to conflict and human
development issues. He is very passionate about his work and I highly recommend him.

I would also like to recommend the Small Arms Survey ( as a source of
information in this field.

Margherita Serafini
UNV Programme Officer, Eritrea
P.O. Box 5366
Asmara, Eritrea

Arkadi Toritsyn, Cabinet Office, Government of Ontario, Canada

Dear Sakiko and network friends and colleagues,

Thank you very much for such a unique opportunity to contribute to HDR process. This is a real participatory

A couple of ideas.

I support wholeheartedly the idea of Global Governance as the topic of the next HDR. The Report can address
the most challenging questions (conflict, HIV/AIDS, unequality) throught the prizm of governance. Also the Report
can position UN in the new world order of multipolarity, where the threats to governance are multidimensional and
the UN possess unique skills to address these challenges. However, in order to address the topic of global
governance, a number of issues has to be addressed. I believe that if these issues are addressed, the Report
would make a significant impact.

1. It is very difficult to conceptualize Global Governance. What is it? Participation, transparency and equal rights
for all states at the international arena? A new world order without war, inequality?

2. Even if we define Global Governance, how do we measure that global governance in 1990 was better or worse
than in 1980s? By measuring degree of inequality among and within states, for example?

3. What is the ideal picture of Global Governance? How to get there? How nation states, non-governmental
organizations and people can contribute to achieving this goal?                                                  10/5/2004
                                                                                                     Page 36 of 68

4. What is the role of UN and other international organizations can be in creating conditions enabling a new model
of Global Governance developed in this Report to work?

Global Governance is not an easy topic to pursue, but I am sure it is doable if the most challenging conceptual
and policy issues are addressed at the beginning. I believe that Global Governance is a timely topic that is worth
pursuing despite difficulties associated with it.

Thank you.
Arkadi Toritsyn

Jan Mattsson, Bureau of Management, UNDP New York

Mostafa: I'm not sure I agree with your conclusion as regards motive. To me, the development and the
humanitarian circles are like different worlds, or at least different language groups. I think we're both highly
committed to our work and the world as we see it, but as always - this is efficiency 101 - the real benefits come
when you're able to cross over between silos. If we could help this in the HDR, we'll do the world, or rather the
poor in the world, a great favor. (Having said this, of course there is competition for
resources.) Jan

Jan Mattsson ( )
Bureau of Management

Sennye Obuseng, UNDP Botswana


If HDR 2005 is to be bold and controversial in a manner that provokes worldwide debate, it has to pick on a theme
that is currently gripping the world's attention and one on which there is a leadership void, no clear global
consensus, or global consensus is being ignored. I would argue that at present, there is no subject that invokes
more genuine passion around the world than peace and security and quite frankly, the UN and poor countries
(whom we are supposed to give voice to), are absent from this debate.

We had an online discussion on the the theme for HDR05 in the Botswana country office and settled on "Peace,
Security and Human Development". Our collective position has been put on the rr-net by our resident
representative but I would like to take the debate further on this forum. In my view, "Peace, Security and Human
Development" best meets the criteria of "current, relevant, bold and controversial". Current and relevant for
reasons already stated. Bold and controversial because the UN would be entering and hopefully broadening a
debate that is presently dominated by the US and Europe. One could go a step further and propose "Peace,
Security and Human Development in the 21st Century", to narrow the focus on the emergent
issues/approaches. But the bottom line is that the manner in which the world pursues peace and security, and the
future conduct of the war on terror, cannot be left to the US and Europe alone.

The case for an HDR on "Peace, Security and Human Development" is twofold: First, the world has become very
perilous, thanks to two very potent threats to peace and security that have gained momentum in the recent past -
terrorism and unilateralism. These two strike at the very foundation of global cooperation. Whilst the dominant                                                 10/5/2004
                                                                                                      Page 37 of 68

view in the corridors of power is that terrorism has no rational basis [and is often carelessly ascribed to such
things as religious fundamentalism, the clash of civilisations and mindless hatred], it seems to me that this is an
unhelpful and extremely self-serving generalisation by those who wield power and privilege.

Second, the UN has itself been a major casualty of this war, its credibility having been eroded not only by
unilateral action and brazen violations of international law but also by deliberate actions to undermine its
credibility and justify action outside international law.

I do not want to suggest that HDR05 should pick up the cudgels in defense of the UN per se, but rather to do so in
defense of the global public good, multilateralism, and the principles of the UN Charter. The report could also put
in perspective the deliberations at the UN prior to the invasion of Iraq. In this debate, some dangerous precedents
were set. One relates to preemptive action. Should states, or is it sdome states, have the right to launch
preemptive strikes against their would be attackers. Another relates to the relaxation of standards of proof
necessary for a country to violate another's sovereignty if it felt threatened in any way. Should humanity accept
the standards on which Iraq was invaded?

Having watched part of the proceedings of the "911 Commission" [my own short from], I was shocked at how
easily powerful men in the US are prepared to relax standards of proof necessary for the US to invade another
country. Surely, with the benefit of the experience of Iraq, we should be more circumspect in setting criteria for the
violation of state sovereignty.

In broad terms, the issues we may want to look at include the following:

1. Have we, the community of nations, learnt anything from history? It seems to me that with regard to global
cooperation on peace and security, we have moved back to the period before the birth of the League of Nations
and subsequtnely the UN (hopefully, only temporarily), when powerful nations did as they pleased and plunged us
into world wars? Is it not the case that in global politics and diplomacy, power and power alone, has a pervasive
influence in determing right and wrong?

2. Are our diagnoses of the causes of conflict adequate? It must have been 1973, when then US Secretary of
State, Robert Macnamara, made the point that poverty and justice and deprivatiothe battle for peace and security,
a view that others such as Claire Short, former UK Secretary for Development, embraced very strongly. The
major conflicts - The Middle East, Chechnya etc - are all underpinned by a complete breakdown in confidence in
formal institutions - Government, mulilateral forums, etc by the aggrived parties - to deliver even space for fair
andhonest dialogue. I am yet to see broker who is both capable and honest in both the Middle East and

3. How big a factor is religious fundamentalism in stoking conflict. Islamic findamentalism is often cited as a
source of conflict, but is there any such thing as Christian Fundamentalism and what role does it play in stoking
conflict. It seems to me that Christian fundamentalism exists and is just as intolerant as islamic fundamentalism.

4. What does the conduct of the war on terror teach us? We have the opportunity to interogate and put up for
debate the viability of national security concepts such as "pre-emption", "with us or against us" etc., and the
adequacy of conviction about the culpability of one state in the commission of an offence against another as a
basis for retaliatory action by the vwronged state. Spetember 11 was a dark moment in history but is it not
ridiculous to suggest, even after 911, that "conviction" without hard evidence - could be the basis for one nation to
invade another? Iraq should teach us that greater circumspection is required in ascribing to nations, rights to
violate the soveriengty of others. Whilst the invasion of Afghansitan could be justified on the basis of 911 (The US
was invaded by people based in Afghansitan, who also had close links with the AGovernmentopf Afghanistan),
that of Iraq cannot.

5. Under what conditions would a state, or a group of states, under whatever cover, be justified in toppling the
Government of another sovereign state? It seems to me that some Governments are less legitmate than others,
that their people may be happy to see them go - Sadam's, the Taliban's and many others, including some in
Africa - but what should be the requirement for action against the Government of a sovereing state?                                                  10/5/2004
                                                                                                      Page 38 of 68

Georg H. Charpentier, BCPR, UNDP Geneva

Dear colleagues,

From my recent BCPR experience let me give you a slightly more encouraging picture. It is true that the
humanitarian and development circles are still using different language and to some extent looking at human
suffering from a different angle. However, the good news is that these differences are diminishing. Development
and humanitarian actors are recognizing increasingly the benefit of working more closely together : UNDP, FAO
and others are now more involved than before in determining the strategies for humanitarian response both in the
field and at HQ. This makes them more knowledgeable and sensitive to the 'legitimacy' of humanitarian purism. At
the same time humanitarian agencies are not so 'suspicious' anymore about collaborating with development
actors and are actually more incline than before to look beyond the life-saving line into the concrete opportunities
of out phasing long-standing humanitarian operations through well crafted recovery/transitionary strategies.
The donors have also proven to be more courageous in adventuring outside of their comfortable
compartmentalized response boxes. The Norwegian have established a Transition Funding line; so are the
japanese; most other donors are making real efforts to be more flexible in using humanitarian and/or development
pockets to fund recovery/transition initiatives.

So, the environment is presently conducive to increased collaboration by all UN and non UN partners in Transition
and Recovery . If the humanitarian actors are still relatively uncomfortable with the MDGs its because they are
used to think in one year terms not 25 ; its not because they disagree with the MDGs. No one weather
humanitarian or development will disagree that people in distress want opportunities and choices to lift
themselves out of poverty much more than hand outs. Within UNDP/BCPR one of our main preoccupations is to
accelerate the move from relief and recovery towards development.

Transition and recovery; the (nonexistent) gray area between relief and development are lively topics being dealt
with positively in different fora today. If we want to use the HDR as a global advocacy tool I think that we should
use it provoke more attention, understanding and support for Prevention both from Conflict and natural Disasters.

Here I mean true prevention, ie what we can do today in a relatively peaceful country or region to avoid or
mitigate the potential for conflict in the future (f.ex. what could/should have been done in IVC 10 years ago). A
living example of this kind of prevention is the initiative recently started in Ghana in terms of fostering social
cohesion. This is the kind of prevention that needs a lot of advocacy and convincing in particular to get donor

Furthermore, we should not drown ourselves in the over simplistic idea that conflict prevention is automatically
addressed by alleviating poverty. Some potential conflict triggers are known historically, others have to be
analyzed and defined through social vulnerability assessments. We could start by looking at how our development
programmes support or not social cohesion - a classic example is supporting 'host communities' in areas with
large numbers of refugees and IDPs. In other words we need to scratch the surface and invest in well targeted
initiatives that foster social cohesion, equity and justice taking into account specific religious, cultural, ethnic,
regional, racial aspects among others. In essence we would promote 'conflict sensitive' development.

The same applies again to Natural Disasters: we should keep a constant watch on how our development efforts
contribute to the ability of communities to cope with recurrent natural disasters. The logic is very much the same,
ie we relate more easily to disaster response and recovery than to the long term measures that could be taken to
mitigate or avoid future (especially recurrent) disasters. A good example here is Tajikistan that has a strong
response mechanism for recurrent land slides but has done little in the past years in terms of terracing, tree
planting, watershed management, land tenure policies ... to minimize the effects of these landslides in future.
Georg                                                  10/5/2004
                                                                                                    Page 39 of 68

Isabella Waterschoot, UNDP/SURF- Caribbean , Trinidad & Tobago

I second Jafar's suggestion. And if I may add to his suggested areas of categories, there is of course the
interesting and rather exciting topic of research on religion/development and gender issues which are
progressively coming to the front of contemporary development issues in all parts of the world.
Food for thoughts
Isabella Waterschoot
Gender Specialist - GenderNet Network Facilitator
Caribbean SURF
Trinidad & Tobago
For network subscriptions send a request to

Philippe Rouzier, UNDP Haiti

Dear Sakiko:
I suggest that you refer to the wonderful book by Frances Stewart on War and Underdevelopment which
undertakes an analysis of the depletion of the entitlements in moments of extreme crises.

Such a subject would be timely as there are many conflicts of all nature that nations confront worldwide. Not to
lose too much time on it I would stop there, but I really think that the subject is rich and offers plenty of
opportunities to make reference to the human development concept, as well as to original quantitative measures
of entitlements losses. Public goods enter the analysis also, and this has to do with global governance. And of
course that subject is at the heart of your own proposal on 'conflicts'.
Hope that this will be of little help
Best regards
Philippe Rouzier

Mutar Ahmed Abdullah Juma, UNDP United Arab Emirates

Dear Colleagues,

I think that global governance could be a good topic but not for this time. Where the world basing through
unstable era of development, I think more rabble topic for coming serious of HDR is Development Stability. It is
more important than global governance. How you can achieve good governance without having "Peace, Security
and stable Human Development"?
Thank you
Dr. Mutar
Dr. Mutar Ahmed Abdullah Juma
Programme Specialist
P.O.Box 3490                                                10/5/2004
                                                                                                     Page 40 of 68

Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates
Tel: +971 2 641 3600
Fax: +971 2 641 3535

Moncef Ghrib, UNDP Algeria

Dear colleagues,
I would like to share with you some comments regarding HDR Theme for 2005.
First of all, I want to congratulate the HDR team for their continuous and the extraordinary job they are achieving
every year to make the HDR reaching its overall objective of development.
My message today is to bring my contribution to Ms Fukuda-Parr's email.

General comment :
I am noticing these years after every launch of the HDR, that countries try only to compare their positions to
others. These comparisons put in a second position the message behind the report and the thematic developed.
Sometimes, we find lot of tables without any comment, which mean that we only suggest comparisons among
My proposition is to leave only the HDI table and having more explanation and policy recommendation to officials.
My second recommendation is to produce a report for individuals not for countries. How can we transform the
HDR in such way that every person felt that he is concerned by the report?
For the 2005 HDR Theme, themes I want UNDP to further analyze two themes:

Economic Democracy vs Political Democracy:
Many countries are making economic progress and their populations are more and more wealthier. In the other
side, we (UNDP, international community, etc) are recommending democracy promotion and human rights
freedom and we are saying that democracy and good governance should bring economic progress.
Some countries are not models in promoting democracy but they succeeded in increasing the livelihoods of their
population. Those people are now living in good conditions and the democracy is not yet applicable but
progressively they are coming to it.
Can UNDP, in its HDR, contribute to enlighten the debate on which is more important "Economic growth
achieving Good governance or the opposite". We can make comparisons among differents systems and policy
approaches in this theme.
Can we define Economic democracy?
I have my own to this concept, which is to make available to every people goods and services at a lower rate.
One country succeeded in this domain. It is CHINA.
For example, during the 70's and 80's, many people all arround the world couldn't buy TV, Toys, Playstation, etc.
But thank to the model of CHINA, every people is able to buy those goods.

The humanity is progressively changing. Border tent to disappear with new technologies and new countries
appearing (East Timor, Kosovo,....). Conflicts are surrounding us, terrorism, etc.
History showed us that many civilizations came and contributed to develop humanity. Egyptian, Greek, Roman
civilizations contributed largely to our current situation.
Are we a civilization?
How can we quantify a civilization?
Our contribution as a person to the current civilization?
What is the contribution of each country to our civilization?
What are the new challenges and menaces?
Can we have a Civilization Development Report rather than Human Development Report?
With my best regards.
Moncef GHRIB
UNDP Algeria
Tél: +213 21 69 12 12 ext 207
Cell: +213 61 69 71 78                                                 10/5/2004
                                                                                                       Page 41 of 68

Fax : + 213 21 69 23 55

Lance Clark, UNDP Georgia

Dear Colleagues,
1. I would like to support the idea of the HDR focusing on conflict prevention. And I would agree with Georg that
this would be of particular use if it could focus on prevention before a major conflict has occurred, as opposed to
transition and recovery.
2. This is not at all to negate the importance of transition and recovery, as indeed the highest risk of a future
armed conflict is having had one occur in living memory (i.e., when there are many persons alive who have
personal memory of that previous conflict). Rather, it is to agree with Georg that we have made much more
progress on getting acceptance and resources for actions regarding conflict recovery, and have progressed
further regarding methodologies, than for situations of what Georg calls "true" conflict prevention (do we have
another term for
3. Such "true" conflict prevention is now at a special point in its evolution. Within UNDP we have the
unprecedented situation of having a supportive S-G and UNDP Administrator, and a strong BCPR. What we need

more of is stronger external support (including political), and to give priority internal attention to further
development of our practical conflict prevention methodologies. An HDR focusing on conflict prevention would
help drive both processes.
4. Lastly, I would argue for including not only the kind of important earlier preventive work flagged by Georg, but
also those actions that can be taken closer to the onset of the conflict itself. There is crucial work to be done in
this "nearer to conflict" area. For example, the fact that most higher risk situations do not turn directly into
conflict reflects the existence of more coping mechanisms than traditionally recognized, and therefore more
possibilities for us to learn from and strengthen such prevention approaches. Another point - the recent research
showing that most conflicts are highly linked to economic interests (e.g., diamonds, or timber) also implies that
more can be done to identify such factors and advocate actions to deal with them, including by UNDP.
Thus, a vote for conflict prevention, and a thank you for the most interesting contributions so far to this discussion,
Lance Clark

Sarah Burd-Sharps, UNDP/HDRO New York

With a strong interest in conflict prevention emerging from these discussions, I wanted to draw your attention to a
paper commissioned by HDRO to draw some lessons from over 20 NHDRs on this topic. The paper was written
by Marc-Andre Franche, a member of the team that produced Colombia's ground-breaking NHDR2003 on conflict
and conflict prevention, with inputs from BCPR and HDRO.                                                   10/5/2004
                                                                                                    Page 42 of 68

Through a review of NHDRs from every region, and drawing on the conceptual thinking behind the Colombia
NHDR, the paper presents a reflection on how to integrate conflict prevention in development, and proposes a
framework for analyzing conflict and conflict prevention from the human development perspective. It looks at the
whole range of symptoms, triggers and root causes of violent conflict, and the conditions that generate conflict
(including the incentives and disincentives that development assistance creates for peace and for violent
conflict). The paper catalogues the causes and threats of violent conflict as presented in 18 NHDRs, and some of
the key policy recommendations that emerge from those reports. Finally, an extensive bibliography might point
the way to some additional reading for those interested.

It's online at

Sarah Burd-Sharps


Masood Hyder, UNDP Democratic Republic of Korea

I would suggestn that UNDP focus not on conflict but on development, and ask the following question: What is
development in a country in turmoil? This is the key question on which UNDP must give the lead..

Resident Representative - UNDP Democratic Republic of Korea

Ibrahima Djibo, UNDP Guinea

Dear Sakiko,
You couldn't do it better, allowing us to give it a shot at one of the masterpieces of UNDP?s works during the past
decade and certainly one of its most referred to output in the world: the HDR.

You have already outlined so well the possible avenues that we may take not only for 2005 but for some years to
come. All the four proposals sound excellent to me and it may prove very difficult to make another proposal.

All the other colleagues have also made excellent comments and suggestions and probably hit the head of the
nail very well in terms of substantive areas of coverage, references, UNDP's leeway and constraints in the
different areas, etc. Many more well worth suggestions will come around. But having said that and if you forgive
me, along the way of some of our discussions back in 2003 for the 2004 HDR, let me venture with some hints.                                                10/5/2004
                                                                                                          Page 43 of 68

The world is upside down due basically to some human factors and less so attributable to mother nature per se or
any mystic force. We may find ourselves with less resources (the natural ones have dwindled so much that
human race can barely survive another 50 years), but worst of all the human resources are not well used for lack
of global wisdom. So is there someone to call upon the world leaders in a provocative way by suggesting that we
stop wars, nepotism, waste and all forms of extremisms ? If you put all these ills ( if not evils) together in a small
jar and you shake it for a while you come up with one 'miraculous' solution to tackle them all
together, i.e. a standing call for more humanity. Is this wishful thinking? How can we package our thoughts in
order to get some messages through to our fellow ?world comrades? at all levels in order to get back to the
essence of
the human race, i.e. to live better in a world free of hatred and waste?.
I dare to believe that yes UNDP can send messages to others and we should keep on trying without fail.
Warm regards from Conakry. Amitiés. Ibrahima.
Ibrahima DJIBO
Deputy Resident Representative (Programme)

Abdou Ibro, UNDP Niger

[Facilitator’s Note: Many thanks to Philippe Rouzier and Bethany Donithorn for their translation of this message.

Dear Sakiko, Dear Colleagues,

I am joining the debate a little late, but as it’s always ‘better late than never’ please find herewith a few reflections
that might help to determine the theme of the Human Development Report 2005.

First, I agree that the fields related to global governance, conflict and finally, global inequality are all relevant, but
these themes are all take their cue from the “new international power struggles” that lack reliable legal and
theoretical structures.
Today we are witnessing the collapse of a model of consumption and regulation where the sphere of consumption
coincided with the political management of conflicts (between 1945 and 1970). Today, the globalisation of
consumption is set against the absence of a corresponding State, creating a new (unstable) model in which the
centres exert a monopolistic control in five main areas:
(1) Technological development and innovation
(2) Finance and creation of foreign reserves
(3) Access to natural resources
(4) Communications and the media
(5) Weapons of mass destruction
Four factors have brought about this transformation of international relations:
(1) Technical progress (the Industrial Revolution: the production processes, petro-chemical, information/nuclear
(2) International division of labour
(3) The growth of several economic poles
(4) Globalisation of free markets and integration into the global market with as a consequence an explosion of
international financial exchanges as well as a growth in investments with their corollary: international transmission
of economic phenomena, the acceleration of the policy of institutional change (such as the creation of the WTO,                                                      10/5/2004
                                                                                                        Page 44 of 68

replacing the GATT), the growth of a new category of goods: global public goods.

In the absence of a state able to deal with the globalisation of consumption, the result is global disorder, in the
form of new geopolitical crises. Indeed, the new global disorder creates new geopolitical crisis in its image: the
rise of destabilising phenomena, in a context which has become very difficult (a large demographic rise in some
regions of the globe, growing urbanization accompanied by the appearance of new centres of violence, the need
for education and adaptation due to widespread use of IT, threats to nature and the depletion of natural
resources, globalisation of financial exchanges, an increasing inter-dependence among nations, and finally, arms

Without a state able to meet the challenges of globalisation, the consequences of the conflicts that result from
global disorder become the responsibility of humanitarian agencies, which take on an increasingly large burden.
Humanitarian operations are undertaken by NGOs, associations, etc. Conflicts, being often of a political nature,
require political solutions, but as humanitarian action cannot be seen to be political, solutions to conflicts become
increasingly difficult to find.
Furthermore, East-West bi-polarism and guaranteed security through a strategy of mutual deterrence have now
been replaced by North-South conflicts. The framework for this new configuration is the following:
i) The emergence of new actors (networks, gangs, trans-national organisations) that exist alongside the traditional
State structure and are beyond its control;
ii) Due to the breakdown of the State, political agitators emerge within countries arguing for simple but
immoderate solutions, with violent leanings.
iii) A change in the type of conflicts (new conflicts are no longer directly controlled by states, but by individuals or
groups; they are no longer based on economics or ideology, but increasingly on cultural particularities, the line
between state responsibility and individual responsibility is no longer clear). This new situation increasingly
reveals the UN’s limits, a structure that was conceived in the context of traditional conflicts between states.
iv) The concentration of most conflicts and violence in a grey buffer zone between North and South, despite the
interdependence between the two.

More than all these elements, the new paradigm “Global Public Goods” (common goods shared by the whole of
humanity: safety, wealth, the right to a sustainable life, air, water, etc.), precludes any independent management
of public goods at the national level. In the name of world security, for example, states are forced to abandon
what appears to protect them – such as nuclear weapons, for example; a State cannot, alone, disturb the flow of a
river that provides water to a whole region, etc. This is detrimental to the governments of individual countries and
to their national human development. This new conception of public goods can be considered as at the root of
paradoxes which have now become the source of many conflicts that are difficult to manage due to a lack of
accepted legal structures.

Given this global situation, the question of global security becomes fundamental and we view questions of global
governance and conflict as an entry point. For all these reasons, I think that a theme like ‘New International
Power Struggles and Human Development’ could be a very rich theme that would lead to a debate on the true
causes of global conflicts, their management and control, and thence to questions of global governance and the
implications of all this for human development. This perspective could also shed light on the possible new
mechanisms to be put in place in order to manage global public goods and hence global governance, which
would then provide an opportunity for reflection on reform of the UN.
I thank you for your patience
Abdou Ibro
Economiste National
PNUD/Niamey /Niger

Original Message:
Chère Sakiko,
Cher(e)s Collègues,
Je rentre tardivement dans le débat mais comme "mieux vaut tard que jamais" ,je vous prie de trouver quelques
reflexions qui pourraient aiderà arrêter le thème du Rapport Développement humain 2005..
Au paravent , je soutiens que les pistes relalives à la gouvernance globale , au conflit et enfin à l'inégalité global
sont tous pertinents mais ces thèmes prennnent leur source dans "les nouveaux rapports de force                                                    10/5/2004
                                                                                                     Page 45 of 68

internationaux actuels " dénudés de supports juridiques et de socle théorique fiables.

Aujourd'hui on est dans une situation de rupture d'un modèle d'accumulation et de régulation dans lequel il y
avait une coïncidence entre l'espace d'accumulation et celui de la gestion politique de conflits ( entre 1945 et
1970). Aujourd'hui , la juxtaposition de la mondialisation de l'accumulation avec l'absence d'un Etat qui lui
corresponde crée un nouveau modèle instable dans lequel les centres exercent un contrôle monopolistique dans
cinq domaines essentielles ( création et développement technologique, financement et émission des devises,
accès au ressources naturelles, les communications et les média, les armes de destructions massives) et les
facteurs qui sont à l'origine de ce bouleversement des vrelations intrenationales sont au nombre de quatre: i)
progrès technique( révolution industrielle: sidérurgie, pétrole/chimie, informatique/nucléaire); ii) Division
internationale de travail; iii) apparition de plusieurs pôles économiques; iv) planétarisation du libéralisme et
intégration dans le marché mondial avec comme conséquence une explosion des échanges internationaux ainsi
qu'une croissance des investissements avec leur corollaire : transmission internationale des phénomènes
économiques, accélération de la politique des changements institutionnels (apparition de l'OMC à la place du
GATT); apparition d'une nouvelle catégorie de bien (biens publics globau

En l'absence d' un Etat qui corresponde à la mondialisation de l'accumulation ,surgit un désordre mondiale qui
transparait dans une nouvelle géopolitique des crises. En effet le nouveau désordre mondial donne sa
configuration à une nouvelle géopolitique des crises : montée des phénomènes perturbateurs dans un contexte
devenu particulier ( grand essor démographique dans certaines régions du monde, urbanisation croissante avec
création de centres de violence, besoins d'éducation et d'adaptation du fait de la forte utilisation du virtuel,
menace sur la nature et épuisement de ressources naturelles, la globalisation des échanges, une inter-
dépendance accrue, et enfin la prolifération des armes )., .

En l'absence d'un Etat correspondant à la mondialisation, les conséquences du désordre mondiale dans son
aspects conflits sont pris en charge par l'humanitaire qui prend de plus en plus de l'ampleur.Les agents
d'exécution des opérations humanitaires sont les ONG, les associations, etc. Les conflits qui sont souvent
politiques nécessitent des solutions politiques mais comme l'humanitaire ne doit pas définir la politique , les
solutions aux conflits deviennent de plus en plus difficile.
En outre , au bipolarisme Est/Ouest et à la sécurité permanente par dissuasion réciproque a maintenant succédé
une configuration Nord/Sud des conflits.Le cadre de cette nouvelle configuration est le suivant: i) émergence de
nouveaux acteurs (réseaux, bandes, associations qui sont transnationaux) juxtaposés à l'Etat classique et qui
échappent au contrôle de ce dernier; ii)         émergence à l'intérieur des pays, du fait de la décomposition de
l'Etat ,d'agitateurs aux solutions simplistes, sans modération et tournés vers la violence; iii)changement de la
nature des conflits (Les conflits nouveaux ne sont plus l'oeuvre directe des Etats, mais des individus ou groupes;
ils ne sont plus économiques et/ou idéologiques, mais sont de plus en plus culturel-particularismes, intégrismes-
, la frontière entre la responsabilité de l'Etat et celle des individus n'est plus nette ).Cette nouvelle situation
dévoile de plus en plus les limites de l'ONU, structure qui a été conçue dans une optique de conflits classiques
entre Etats;vi) Concentration de la plupart des violences/conflit dans une zone grise tampon entre le Nord et le
Sud , en dépit de l'interdépendance entre le Nord et Sud.

En plus de tous les éléments invoqués, le nouveau paradigme "Biens publics globaux" ( ces biens que partage
l'ensemble de l'humanité : la sécurité, la richesse, la droit du peuple du monde à vivre durablement, l'eau, l'air
etc...) vient perturber les gestions internes traditionnelles des biens publics nationaux ( au nom de la sécurité du
monde par exemple les Etats sont obligés de laisser tomber ce qui semble les mettre en sécurité à savoir la
détention d'armes nucléaires par exemple; au nom de l'intérêt d'une sous région, un Etat ne peut à sa guise faire
un barrage sur un fleuve et j'en passe.) au détriment des gouvernants et de ce qui aparait être des éléments
pouvant concourir au develoippmebt humain national. Cette nouvelle conception des biens publics peut être
considérée comme à la base de paradoxes qui sont devenus aujourd'hui la source de plusieurs conflits difficile à
gerer par manque de support juridiques accepté par tous, l'apparition de la notion ds biens publics globaux
Au regard de cette situation mondiale, la question de la sécurité du monde devient primordiale et nous pensons
que les questions de la gouvernance mondiale et des conflits en sont la porte d'entrée .. Pour toutes ses
raisons , je pense qu'un thème comme "nouveaux rapports de forces internationaux et developpement humain"
pourrait être un thème riche qui amènerait à débattre des vrais causes des conflits mondiaux, des tentatives de
gestions donc de la question de la gouvernance mondiale et des conséquence de tout ceci sur le développement

Ce regard permettrait également de mettre sur le tapis toutes les questions relatif au dispositif mondiale de                                                 10/5/2004
                                                                                                          Page 46 of 68

gestion des bien publics globaux donc de la gouvernance mondiale, ce qui ouvrirait une porte à la réflexion sur
la reforme de l'ONU.
Je vous remercie de votre patience
abdou ibro
Economiste National
PNUD/Niamey /Niger

Anna Stjarnerklint, UNDP Albania

Dear Sakiko,
Here is the contribution from the Albania Country Office:
"What about Terrorism rather than the broader concept of 'Conflict'?
Not just the immediate impact terrorist acts have upon the countries that it occurs in, but also the impact of the so-
called 'war on terror'. We are seeing governments change, the folding back of personal freedoms, an erosion of
civil liberties and government constitutional protection, increased restrictions on the flow of goods and people etc.
Not to mention the untold billions diverted to security away from aid. A focus on this topic would illustrate that the
key to success is human development, not further human conflict.

Perhaps this is a little too touchy of a subject, but it could be interesting....Besides, a little controversy goes a long
Joe Hooper"
" In my opinion, the issue of global inequality is very interesting. It is a challenge to analyse it and try to measure it
and to extend the concept to cover not only economics but also access to political influence and so on. Maybe too
radical...but such a discussion can be connected to an analysis of the roots of terrorism.
From the Albania perspective inequality both between countries globally and also nationally deserve more
attention. Versace shops in Tirana contra lack of everything in Kukes.
Internationally, the issue is relevant right now as the new member states of the EU meet resistance in being
equally treated within the union.
None of the topics suggested so far was gender related. Maybe it is time for an HDR discussing the opportunity
cost for not involving women in the development process....?
Lisa Mossberg"
" I would have thought something on 'global public goods and inequalities in access' might be interesting. Within
this overall topic one can address issues of lifesaving drugs, access to social capital and re-distribution of wealth
generated using GPGs like natural resources, gene banks etc.
Batkhuyag Baldangombo"
Finally, I would like to cast my own vote for migration. As an international civil servant I have been an 'errant' all
my life; it now seems that everybody is in the same seat, moving away from conflicts and wars, following the pull
of globalization.
Albania is of course a case in point with more people outside the country than inside and 25-30% of GDP coming
from remittances.

Best regards - Anna
Resident Representative - UNDP Albania                                                      10/5/2004
                                                                                                    Page 47 of 68

Luke Wasonga, UNDP/SURF-Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

Dear Sakiko,
One area that deserves deeper search is on the the Natural Resource Use. The prudent use of natural resource
wealth should be an important engine for sustainable economic growth that contributes to sustainable
development and poverty reduction, but if not managed properly, can create negative economic and social
impacts.It also important to recognize that a public understanding of government revenues and expenditure over
time could help public debate and inform choice of appropriate and realistic options for sustainable development.
This theme should underline the importance of transparency by governments and private companies in the
extractive industries and the need to enhance public financial management and accountability. The need to bring
this issue to the fore stems from the fact that resource reach countries of the world - particularly those in the
developing world are negatively affected with their very rich endowment.
Luke Wasonga
Addis Ababa

Florent Munkeni, UNDP Chad

[Facilitator’s Note: Many thanks to Laurel Gascho for her translation of this message. Sharmila]


Dear Sakiko,
Please excuse me for responding a little late with the risk of repeating what others may have already said. I think
that the global governance theme would be a very good choice for several reasons:
1. The development of this theme would occur at just the right time with respect to the big problems of the day
concerning global governance (insecurity, environmental degradation, regulating globalization, access of the poor
to new information technologies and to essential medicines,...)
2. The development of this theme would allow UNDP to go deeper and widely diffuse the concept of global public
goods and the conceptualisation of international cooperation that stems from that.
This brings me to the recommendation that the next report equally consider the concept of regional public goods
and in turn of regional governance which often turn out to be more significant on certain subjects.

Dear Sakiko,
Je m'excuse de riagir un peu tard avec le risque de ripiter ce que d'autres ont peut-jtre dij` dit. Je pense que le
thhme de la gouvernance globale serait un trhs bon choix. Ceci pour plusieurs raisons: (i) le diveloppement de ce
thhme tomberait ` pic par rapport aux grands problhmes de l'heure en matihre de gouvernance globale (insicuriti,
digradation de l'environnement, rigulation de la mondalisation, accessibiliti des pauvres aux nouvelles technlogies
de l'information et aux midicaments essentiels,...); (ii) le diveloppement de ce thhme permettrait au PNUD de
forger davantage et de faire une large diffusion du concept de biens publics mondaux et de la conception de la
coopiration internationale qui en dicoule. Ceci m'amhne ` recommander que le prochain rapport aborde igalement                                                10/5/2004
                                                                                                      Page 48 of 68

le concept des biens publics rigionaux et donc de la gouvernance rigionale lesquels s'avhrent souvent plus
significatifs sur certains

Isabella Waterschoot, UNDP/SURF Caribbean, Trinidad and Tobago

I am adding a comment at the end of our discussion. Having read almost all the contributions, I cannot help but
thinking that by choosing a theme such as Governance, Global Governance, HIV/AIDS, Inequities, we would just
walk over paths of research that either have been explored already or that are overwhelmingly available in other
forums of esarch (such as for HIv/AIDS for example).

I would strongly recommend Development and Religion which is a new, ground-breaking and path-breaking topic
for UNDP and represents a bridge of analysis towards the core practices and, definitely, gender mainstreaming.
In todays world religion has become a major aspect of foreign policy and if not, it definitely progressively
represents an an anchor for supporting people's commitments and involvement in activities which are not
primarily religious.

Not all religions are monotheistic, and/or there is a laic world out there which also is shaping opinions. There are
indigenous-based system of beliefs and many forms of beliefs which receive impact of mainstreamed systems.

Development aid is also delivered by faith-based organisations which operate on a very large base. It would be
intersting to have available a comprehensive report on how the linkages of religion and development are serving
the primary goal of development.
Last but not least, I would like to congratulate the team of HDR-Net to continuosly provide an dynamic interactive
forum of exchange and seek the comments of the community of practices on feeding into an important research
and advocay report such as the HDR Annual Report.

Isabella Waterschoot
Gender Specialist - GenderNet Network Facilitator
Caribbean SURF
Trinidad & Tobago
For network subscriptions send a request to

Seeta Prabhu, HDRC, UNDP India

The topic of the next global HDR has evoked great interest. Of the four topics that have been listed, despite the                                                  10/5/2004
                                                                                                      Page 49 of 68

overwhelming response to the themes of conflict and HIV/AIDS, I would suggest that we opt for the theme of
inequality for the following reasons.

1.     The current globalization and privatization trends across countries have accentuated inequalities across
countries and within countries, across gender and social groups. Debate on equity is now a rarity and government
policies have increasingly been shying away from addressing issues pertaining to equity even as rising
inequalities due to unequal access to the opportunities opened up by the globalization process have been
generating tensions and strife.
2.     UNDP has been the main, indeed even sole, advocate of policies to enhance equity and it is important that
the unequal nature of development be highlighted so that remedial action can be triggered in at least a few
countries before the consequences of increasing inequality in the form of increased discontent and unrest
explodes into dimensions that cannot be controlled. This HDR would indeed strengthen UNDP's role as a
champion for
a fair and just world order.
3.     Additionally, by placing inequality as a core issue, the root cause of conflict, and HIV/AIDS get addressed
as well. In fact, the Regional HDR on HIV/AIDS and Development for South Asia (with which we were associated)
argues that gender inequality is a key contributing factor for the prevalence and spread of HIV/AIDS. The Report
demonstrates the positive relationship between the gini coefficient and HIV prevalence in South Asia.
4.     I would also argue that with respect to HIV/AIDS there have already been several regional and national
HDRs on the subject and if there is a Global HDR on this subject, the value addition of the analysis would need to
be demonstrably significant, say for instance in comparison with the annual reports by UNAIDS. We would of
course be very happy if the HDR on HIV/AIDS carries further the research that was conducted for the South Asia
HDR 2003 on HIV/AIDS.
5.      The issue of conflict is indeed tricky -if it is to be an honest report, it would have to make some
unfavourable remarks about some countries' questionable role in interfering in the internal issues of others- and I
am not sure how that will be managed politically-if it is managed by making the argument weak and the text non
committal, the credibility of UNDP would be at stake. The issue of global governance is also not preferred for
similar reasons.

In view of this, I would once again argue that we should focus on inequality as the theme for the global report
because it with in our corporate mandate, articulates an issue that is at the core of development today, and UNDP
is a leading advocate of global and local public action to reduce inequality and needs to consolidate its brand
equity as such - especially now that Francois Bourgignon is placing this at the centre of the Bank's research
Seeta Prabhu
Head, Human Development Resource Centre
UNDP, New Delhi, India

Aida Robbana, UNDP Tunisia

Dear all,

Grasping the opportunity given, we would like in the office of Tunisia to stress the problematic of the new 'class' of
poor being increasingly identified. That is, the people who although live above the poverty line (officially defined
as 1$/day), do struggle to survive with a daily income of 3$ maximum. We have all experienced the issue of how
to define and measure poverty -merely the confusion between international vs national measures- during the
efforts of a reliable tracking and comparable reporting on MDGs.                                                  10/5/2004
                                                                                                    Page 50 of 68

Thus, now we suggest to take this issue a step further and consider an official embracement of this new class of
people. We propose the consideration of new, well defined measurement tools, that would allow the efficient
design of consistent policies to tackle this social problem. Moreover, this would provide a link with and an
enhancement of the MDGRs conducted so far, a new dimension to the efforts for a better Governance (i.e. what
should be done at the national level to meet the diversified needs of people at different levels of poverty) and a
reflection of the results of the Porto Allegre meeting .We believe that, addressing this problem effectively in HDR
2005 would primarily facilitate the problematic of poverty levels identification and elimination in a number of
countries, including Tunisia. It would also untie the hands of a number of country teams and offer them a new
base for consulting initiatives with governments reluctant to acknowledge poverty per se. Finally, it would target
and effectively address the needs of a big part of the global population that has been marginalised from any
ongoing national/international policies against poverty -in its traditional definition.Concluding, we think that an
official acknowledgment and presentation of this new social class would give voice to a large number of people,
who could do better for themselves and the society as a whole given the appropriate support.
With best regards

Aïda Robbana
Advisor for studies and coordination, NHDR focal point
UNDP Tunisia
61, boulevard Bab Benat
1006 Tunis

Liliana De Riz, UNDP Argentina

Dear all,

We've been carefully reading all your persuasive arguments and discussing vividly about them. We finally
favored as the 2005 global topic, influenced by the Latin American context, 'inequality.' Despite economic growth
in the region during the 90s, most nations did not succeed in reducing their distribution gaps. In fact, inequality
systematically increased in some countries. This apparent paradox clearly shows, as often discussed in the HDR
forums, that economic growth is not necessarily an end in itself. Thus, the challenge would be, first, to identify
those nations where economic development has led to widespread well being and those where growth worsened
the opportunities of important sectors of their societies; secondly, to analyze if there are commonalities within
each group; thirdly, to study if it is viable to learn some lesson from these experiences and designed upon them
nation-specific policies. In this sense, we're proposing, as Aleksi Hokkanen suggested, both a cross-national and
case-study perspective.

We know that this topic implies a difficult challenge, among other things, as also mentioned by Aida Robbana,
because the complexity of capturing poverty and inequality in a comparative setting. Still, we think that the
centrality of inequality to approach development is more fundamental than ever before.
Best wishes,
Liliana De Riz
Coordinator, NHDR Argentina                                                10/5/2004
                                                                                                       Page 51 of 68

Linda Ghanime, UNDP/BDP-Energy and Environment, New York

Dear Sakiko,

Here is a suggestion for the 2005 HDR:

The report would tackle issues of how natural capital, and services and how the management of this capital
affects human development. This would be an opportunity to explore the Millennium ecosystem framework and
assessment dealing with ecosystems regulatory, provisioning, supporting and cultural services, and how they
affects livelihoods and well-being. Issues of environmental management and governance from local to
global could be analysed and discussed. Through perhaps the angle of geography it would allow to influence
some of the variant theories of economic development and policy strategies. Obviously not limited to inherent
constraints stemming from geography but rather on the importance to devise management and governance
policies and strategies accordingly.

We must grapple the fact that as strange as it may seem, there is no explicit link between the concept of human
development and environment nor are environmental measurements of environment sustainability used in
the compilation any of the HD indices. While the initial writings on human capabilities implicitely referred to links
with natural assets, there is a disconnect when it comes to explicitly linking the quality of environmental assets
and services as a determinant to human development. The review of NHDR on the environment theme and
thematic guidance note carried out jointly with the NHDR highlights
this point. and outlining the links to vulnerability, livelihoods and human health.

We are always available to discuss.

Best wishes

Linda Ghanimé

Environmental Operations and Policy Adviser

Energy and Environment Group

Joseph Opio-odongo, UNDP/SURF-CEA, Kenya                                                   10/5/2004
                                                                                                  Page 52 of 68

Good suggestion, the proposal would enable us to build on the initial brief analysis 1993? HDR and the review of
the NHDR that Philip and Natasha initiated.

I am currently in dialogue with the Uganda CO on the possibility of dedicating the next issue of the NHDR on the
same theme as a means of seizing the enthusiasm and momentum aroused by the interest in greening the
Poverty Eradication Action Plan (PEAP) on which Uganda’s PRSP is anchored and the operationalization of
MDG7. The idea is to demonstrate how good management of natural resources makes good pursuits of poverty
reduction, sustainable livelihoods and MDGs.

Ove Bjerregaard, UNDP/BDP-Energy and Environment, New York

Dear all,

I would like to echo the comments made by Joseph and to support the basic idea put forward by Linda. When I
served in Jordan we initiated a NHDR on Poverty and Sustainable Livelihoods and it brought up a number of
interesting issues. Chief among those was of course the fact that we do not have a strong overarching conceptual
framework that allows us to integrate the environment with Human Development. We followed the British
framework for sustainable livelihoods but even that was not easy. In short there is a strong need for some
conceptual work in this area.

Linda points out that environment measures are currently not included in the HD indices. I am not too worried
about that since the income measure to some extent reflects also environmental concerns. From the perspective
of UNDP/GEF I am more concerned by the fact that our interventions do not fully reflect the UNDP brand, which is
about Human Development and cross cutting approaches. If UNDP is serious about maintaining the environment
as one of its fundamental pillars as reflected in the Practices, the HDRs should endeavor to demonstrate explicit
linkages between the environment and Human Development.

Best regards,

Ove                                              10/5/2004
                                                                                                    Page 53 of 68

Philip Dobie, UNDP/BDP Drylands Development Centre, Kenya

Linda et al

This is a good suggestion and very timely. The issue of the links between poverty and the environment are being
hotly debated. UNDP’s Poverty and Environment Initiative has been very effective in influencing donor policy, and
has recently spawned the Poverty and Environment Partnership which brings all of the major donors around the
theme. UNEP has recently set out to enter the field with their mirror project which should tackle issues of
ecosystem health and its relationships with poverty. The Drylands Development Centre has helped Tanzania to
launch a process of integrating environmental issues into the PRSP, and similar efforts are being pursued in a
number of other countries. UNDP was a co-author (with the World Bank, DfID and the EU) of a keynote paper for
WSSD on poverty and the environment. Many donors are struggling with the question of how to “operationalize”
the links between poverty and environment: for example, DfID has come up with a set of poverty/environment
indicators. UNDP’s Poverty and Environment Initiative is working in several countries to better understand the
issues and how to “operationalize” them. The “disaster community” is steadily increasing its understanding of the
importance of environment in determining the severity of a natural disaster. The first UNDP “World Vulnerability
Report” (sorry – I know they changed the title of it at the last minute, but I cannot remember the new title and do
not have a copy to hand) recognizes the importance of environmental issues in disaster management. We have
been working with both BCPR and the International Strategy for Disaster Reduction on the importance of drought
as a trigger of crisis. All of these are examples that demonstrate the timeliness of an “environmental” HDR.

One thing we would have to be careful of in the data part of such a HDR will be to focus on the human
development aspects and not duplicate data collection carried out elsewhere. The World Resources Report (co-
sponsored by UNDP) and UNEP’s Global Environment Outlook both publish comprehensive data on a regular

With best regards

Philip Dobie
Director, Drylands Development Centre
United Nations Development Programme
P.O. Box 30552, GPO, Nairobi, Kenya.
Physical Address
Drylands House
United Nations Aenue
Next to Warwick Centre, Opposite Littlewoods School
Gigiri, Nairobi, Kenya
Tel: +254 20 622057
Fax: +254 20 624648

Sakiko Fukuda-Parr, Human Development Report Office, UNDP New York                                                10/5/2004
                                                                                                    Page 54 of 68

I am struck by the comment that ther is no conceptual framework. There is a huge amount of work going on
already in this area that whatever HDR would do would need to clearly fill a gap or take the debate forward. Over
the years, two HDRs have focussed on the links between HD and the environment, one was 94 which was
conceptual, and the second was 98 which was on consumption.

Can you elaborate?

Sakiko Fukuda-Parr


Human Development Report Office

United Nations Development Programme

Pascal Girot, UNDP/SURF-Panama, Panama

Dear Colleagues,

I too would like to add to the chorus of praise for Linda's proposal. As we had seen during our 2002 e-discussion
series on the hdr network on mainstreaming environment in HDR, the debate produced contrasted views on how
to portray the complex interaction between human development and environment. There is indeed much to
explore and much to gain from a global assessment of how geography and nature have a bearing on Human
Development. By insisting on separating our analysis of society and nature we are indeed creating myths and
fiction about human development as something that occurs in a vacuum, and not in a geographical and
environmental context. To paraphrase Kenneth Hewitt, every society is constructed as a complex negotiation
between artifice and nature, a two-way flow of energy and materials on the one hand, and of controls and mutual
adjustments on the other. This is after all what sustainable human development should be all about: i.e. how well
we adapt to changing environmental conditions which are in turn affected by our policies and patterns of
consumption and waste production. As such a geography and ecology of human development would require an
assessment of natural processes in terms of their relations with and significance for human society.

During the first half of 2003, I was involved in coordinating and editing the chapter (Cap5) on the environment for
the II Regional Human Development Report on Central America and Panama. This exercise we worked with
inputs and contributions from over 15 renowned social and physical scientists from Central America, and
developed a conceptual framework inspired from Inge Kaul's work on Global Public Goods. The result was a
comprehensive assessment of how Human Development in Central America is intimately related to changes in
environmental assets, and that the progressive degradation of these regional public goods such as biodiversity,
forests, water resources, marine resources are undermining human development options for future generations of
Central Americans. The risks involved with these concomitant and interrelated processes of impoverishment and                                                10/5/2004
                                                                                                      Page 55 of 68

environmental degradation led to heightened conditions of vulnerability and risk, tragically illustrated by the impact
of Hurricane Mitch in 1998. You can find the electronic version of this Regional HDR for Central America at the
following address:

Hopefully, as Phil Dobie suggests, we can build on recent contributions by UNDP and other UN Agencies (UNEP
GEO4), by reflecting on the relationship between Human Development and Disaster Risk, as BCPR's Reducing
Disaster Risk has clearly pointed out the interactions between poverty and vulnerability to natural hazards.
Similarly, since many of our country offices are engaged in MDG reporting, it would be enlightening as Joseph
Opio Odongo points out, to illustrate how MDG7 performance can be improved in terms of reducing vulnerability
by enhancing resilience to environmental changes within a given society. This would be an important contribution
to enhancing our analysis of human development and MDGs.

I would be delighted to contribute to this effort.


Pascal Girot
Environmental Risk Management Advisor
Asesor en Manejo de Riesgo Ambiental
Panama SURF
San José, Costa Rica
Tel: (506) 296 15 44 ext 149
Fax:(506) 296 15 45

Sakiko Fukuda-Parr, Human Development Report Office, UNDP New York

Dear Linda,

Thank you for your comments. I'd like to take up one comment you make about there being no explicit link
between the concept of HD and environment and that there is no environmental measure in the HDI. I'd make a
few points.

1. the link between the conceptof HD and environment was explored in HDR94 and there is a whole chapter on it
authored by Amartya Sen. HD is about human well being and choices that human beings have to lead lives they
value. It is about the well being of ALL human beings so we are particularly concerned with equity. The
conceptual link is relatively straightforward. The environment affects well being and choices, but of both present                                                  10/5/2004
                                                                                                        Page 56 of 68

and future generations. The whole complexity of conceptual issues then arise, pa.

2. from that perspective, we can evaluate environment debates.

3. environmental measure - Then there are both conceptual and methodological issues. Conceptually, it would
be more appropriate to have an environmentally adjusted HDI rather than to have environment as a dimension of
HDI. HDI should not have an environment measure in as much as the environment is not a human well being
outcome. It is one of the determinants of it.

On measurement, there is a basic dilemma which is that most environmental measures are difficult to use for
inter-country comparison purposes. YOu can't say that Canada is better than Djibouti because there are more
areas under forests.


Sakiko Fukuda-Parr


Human Development Report Office

United Nations Development Programme

Alejandro Grinspun, International Poverty Centre/BDP/UNDP, Brazil

Dear Sakiko,

I strongly believe the time is now ripe for an HDR on inequality -- both global and within countries.

Here in Brazil it seems HDI gaps decreased during the 1990s between the country's regions, states and
municipalities at the same time that within-group inequality (i.e. disparities within municipalities) rose. It would be
interesting to know why. Different patterns may be at work in other countries. What drives these processes?                                                     10/5/2004
                                                                                                          Page 57 of 68

Inequality is undoubtedly about governance -- not only in terms of "governing the market" but also in its spillover
effects over the polity itself. Worsening inequality trends in Latin America during the 1990s show, for example, in
the high level of disaffection among the region's citizens with the quality of democracy there, as revealed by the
Latinobarometro surveys. Could democracy be placed at risk if worsening inequality continues unabated? Outside
Latin America, countries with very different political systems and great success in reducing poverty rates, such as
China and Vietnam, have also seen inequality rise considerably in recent years. Could widening inequality
undermine tight party control there?

Discussions about inequality, and distribution more generally, have been largely absent from development
discourse for many years, perhaps going back to the 1970s. This has been so even after the international
community elevated poverty reduction to one of its key development objectives -- as if it were possible to address
one without being concerned about the other. Hence the emphasis on targeting and the 'benign neglect' of
structural, embedded inequality in anti-poverty strategies over the past decade.

At the same time, recent years have seen a remarkable resurgence of interest in questions of inequality and how
it affects poverty reduction and even the pace of growth itself, primarily from the perspective of the 'new growth'
theory and the 'new economics of poverty and inequality'. There is thus a lot of theoretical and empirical
groundwork to build on that requires systematization and a 'big push' to take the debate to a new level, as only
the HDR can do.

And there is also a tactical reason why an HDR on inequality is now needed. Following the appointment of
Francois Bourguignon as Chief Economist and Senior Vice-President, the World Bank seems to have shifted its
attention back to these questions, as demonstrated by their recent major report on inequality in LAC (which we
featured in the first issue of In Focus). This may be only the first in a series of reports that 'bring inequality back to
centre-stage'. Should this be so, I don't think the UN can afford to remain aloof and let the Bank, once more, set
the tone of the debate in this most critical development issue.

For all the reasons above, I cast my vote: AN HDR ON INEQUALITY!!

Thanks for this opportunity and regards,


International Poverty Centre


Sakiko Fukuda-Parr, Human Development Report Office, UNDP New York                                                      10/5/2004
                                                                                                      Page 58 of 68

Dear Alejandro,
You make a very important point that this may be the right TIMING to put inequality back on the map of global


Neil Buhne, UNDP Bulgaria

Dear Sakiko,

If it is not too late yet to comment, and for fear of being repetitive - my choice among the ones discussed is
Human Development and Human Inequality.

The treatment of this could bring together the alternating global HDR annual themes of "development challenges"
and "new frontier topics":

Development challenge: Inequalities of opportunities, and inequalities in barriers to human development, along
with the perceptions people have of these inequalities, are a problem here and today within societies and among
countries - as was dealt with in the HDR with the yellow champagne glass on the cover (1993?). Devising policy
responses to change this remains as complex as ever, and where progress has been made among countries (e.g
China vs OECD countries), the situation within countries has worsened. In other cases the perception
(sometimes real) that inequality has worsened, has undermined support for polices that have increased overall
welfare and reduced some inequalities, but not all (e.g in the first round of the Slovak Presidential election people
voted for the two candidates most critical of the reforms of the last years, which by most measures are perceived
to have been very successful. Their criticism talked of inequalities). Our Bulgaria country report this year also
dealt with the issues or rural/urban inequality in a rapidly transforming economy and society, and implications for
overall reform/development policies.

New Frontier: The report could examine the changing nature of inequalities in the world, and the changing
implications for human development of such "new" inequalities. Such new inequalities include those in areas in
near permanent conflict, new inequalities of access to the globalized world, and (as follow-up to this years report)
new inequalities in cultural opportunties. Many of these themes have been dealt with in earlier HDRs, but it may
be good time now to link them conceptually. The conflict element is an important aspect in inequality, and it may
be possible to deal with some of the points raised on the RR net about conflict and human development.

So something else into the pot. Whatever the result which we see in mid 2005 should be very tasty and

Easter regards from Sofia!                                                  10/5/2004
                                                                                                     Page 59 of 68



Neil Buhne


UN Resident Coordinator in Bulgaria

Anuradha.Rajivan, HDRC, UNDP India

Dear Sakiko,

I would like to cast my vote for Inequality.

And also to propose that as a new policy approach, the HDR could consider underlining the 'NEED TO BE
UNEQUAL FOR MOVING TOWARDS EQUALITY'. Those at a lower or more disadvantaged starting point (due
merely to an accident of birth or macro circumstance beyond their control) cannot compete as equals

if the opportunities were merely equal. The disadvantaged need additional

compensatory support/compensation for a specific period...

The compensatory support shd be combined with an 'exit strategy' also for 'graduating out' of special privileges as
circumstances for the formerly disadvantaged improve, so others who are/remain disadvantaged can then benefit
(rather than the same group/family/descendents continuing to draw benefits indefinitely), given resource
limitations..Thus 'entry criteria' as well as ' exit criteria' are important. This will facilitate acceptability and
legitimacy as well and discourage promoting a dependency mindset.

Cheers and best,

Anuradha                                                 10/5/2004
                                                                                                      Page 60 of 68

Anuradha K. Rajivan

Programme Co-ordinator

Asia Pacific RHDR Initiative (APRI)


55 Lodi Estate, New Delhi 110003

Tel: (00-91-11) 24628877 Extn 277

Ove Bjerregaard, UNDP/BDP-Energy and Environment, New York

Dear Sakiko,

I am surprised that you do not see the need for further conceptual work related to the link between Human
Development and the Environment. True a lot is going on outside UNDP, but the point is that UNDP is not seen
as a thought leader in this area.

Linda is right in pointing to Geography as a discipline that could offer ideas for the unifying approach we are
looking for. My own background in Cultural Geography and Development Economics certainly makes it easy for
me to see that culture expressed as values, beliefs, customs and practices is the key to sustainability and that it is
the cultural perception of nature and hence the environment that will guide local practices and determine whether
they will move towards sustainability.

I am familiar with the argument in 94 about the indices and the definition of Human Development and accepted it
at the time – albeit reluctantly – on the grounds that there was a need to focus on further development and
consolidation of the ideas of Human Development and that an expansion to Sustainable Human Development
could dilute that effort. But that was 10 years ago. Not only has a lot of work has been done since then on the
various aspects of Human Development but the world has also changed. So perhaps it is time for us to revisit the
issue, not necessarily to reinvent SHD but to ensure that the environment is given a clearer place in the debate on
Human Development, and in particular in the debate on practical strategies, knowledge products and project
interventions, that together will define UNDP’s brand.

Moreover, the environment is the subject of considerable controversy in the international debate, not only in terms
of its general importance but also on how specific environmental concerns ought to be addressed. UNDP needs
to join that debate and to voice a clear position from a Human Development perspective and could there be a
better way of doing this than using a HDR to explore the issues and the linkages?

On the indices, I actually do believe that they also have to be updated from time to time to remain relevant. On
can debate whether the time is ripe for that at this point in time. But the role of globalization and the concerns
about the environment do point to the need for inclusion of measures of economic integration and of the health of
the environment, which together perhaps could move us towards a measure that can capture sustainability.

In summary, I believe that it is time to reinforce the notion of Human Development as an approach and a brand
that is focused on people in the context of their environment and culture and one that has internalized the idea
that advancement of the human condition is intimately linked to, indeed determined by our ability to make use of                                                  10/5/2004
                                                                                                      Page 61 of 68

the natural resource base in a way that will not endanger the options of future generations.

I hope this clarifies the issue, but would welcome further debate.

Best regards,


Denise deSouza, UNDP Guyana

Dear Sakiko,

I am also on the side of HD and Human Inequality. This topic has relevance not just for the poorest countries but
also for the rich ones. It would be interesting to explore the factors that supposedly cause inequality both globally
and locally, which can range from the geographic to the political and biological; to examine how this is manifested
and reacted to, and to think of ways of overcoming these disadvantages. This topic is linked to all the other
issues - Global Governance, Conflict and HIV/AIDS. Best regards Denise

Margaret Andoseh, UNDP Cameroon

Dear colleagues,

It could be interesting to explore the possibility of creating and /or determining linkages between religiousity ,
socio-economic development and improved welfare. In countries where a significant part of the population belong
to one religious grouping or another one cannot undermine the contribution of religion to enhancing economic life.

Deeper analysis needs to be done on the contribution of religious groupings to peace, poverty alleviation, political
stability, governance issues etc. Are there linkages between the fight against national and global corruption given
that citizens belong to religious denominations ?? There are possible positive by products of shaping a better
world and the religious factor.

Perhaps an ecumenical application needs to be exploited and broadened to embrace wider views.

In my country Cameroon, enjoying good repute for peace and stability in the region, for instance it could be
estimated (optimistic) that at least 20 % of the population belong to a religious group of some sort. What could be
the impact of this religiousity on curbing corruption and other governance related issues, improving on quality of
life ?????                                                  10/5/2004
                                                                                                     Page 62 of 68

This same reflection could be broadened to continental and other levels.

With best regards

Margaret Andoseh

Habitat Program Manager


Antonio Serra, Technical University of Lisbon, Portugal

Dear all,

In a time where almost everyone "feels" and "sees" (namely in Iraq...) that the highest dangers for Peace in the
world comes from inequality (not only of incomes but, as Denise just put it, of political power) among nations, I
think that the best contribution of the HDR05 would be on this inequality in all the different grounds.

So I "vote" for inequality

Be happy!...



Antonio M. de Almeida Serra (Prof.)


R. Miguel Lupi, 20

1249-078 LISBOA

PORTUGAL                                                 10/5/2004
                                                                                                           Page 63 of 68

tel: ++.351.213925983 fax: ++.351.213976271

e-mail: URL:

Massoud Hedeshi, UN Resident Coordinator's Office, UNDP Mongolia

Dear Colleagues,

I would like to propose "the role of the state in human development" as a possible theme for the 2005 HDR. This
theme has several interesting dimensions that fit in well with the big questions in today's (highly insecure and
unstable) global environment, and can also cover, at least in part, issues related to 'Global Governance' and
'Conflict'. An important utility of such a report would be to try and extract the ‘technical’ from the fog of ‘ideological’
in the discourse on the state, and thus to feed into institutional development efforts, particularly in the context of
failed and weak states.

Such a report may cover the following topics, inter alia:

         A comparative review of human development records under strong states, weak states, and failed states
        (not to be confused with the 2002 HDR’s coverage of democratic governance specifically). This would
        also require an outline/review of the different types of states and ideologies, together with a clear
        distinction between and definition of 'state', 'regime' and 'government', the three of which are regularly
        confused, particularly by the global media;

         Shifts in the development discourse: from ‘state-centredness’ (central planning) to ‘rolling back the state’
        to ‘bringing back the state’ and then on to ‘the partnership paradigm’, which, rather ironically, emerged
        just as multilateralism was about to face its gravest challenge in decades.

         Whatever happened to national sovereignty? National Sovereignty - per the UN Charter – versus a)
        regionalism, b) global governance, and c) abuses of human rights and international interventions; What
        implications for the Charter, institutional structures and role of the UN?

         Predominant ideologies underpinning state legitimacy today; and inherent contradictions and potential
        sources of conflict among these ideologies (and how to pre-empt them)

         What are the commonly identifiable institutional characteristics of ‘good/successful states’ as informed by
        available human development performance records?

         Commonly identifiable early warning signs of failing states (i.e. prior to the onset of conflicts and crises,
        e.g. sharply deteriorating living conditions, crisis of legitimacy etc, which can help to develop an early
        warning system for the international community with Rwanda being a particularly telling example). How to
        use lessons learnt to enhance the UN’s crisis prevention capacities?

         Lessons learnt from (including large scale) humanitarian interventions by the UN, NGO's, MDB’s and
        bilaterals in failed states/complex emergencies (Afghanistan, Cambodia, East Timor, Congo, Iraq, Sudan                                                       10/5/2004
                                                                                                        Page 64 of 68

    etc). Questions to address include:

            o   How have complex emergency humanitarian interventions performed in terms of human
                development and state building?

            o   What commonly identifiable state building good practices and structures can be identified in crisis

            o    Is there a need for a different approach?

            o   What are the concrete differences between ‘development’ and ‘humanitarian’ assistance in the
                context of chronic conflicts?

         How to reconcile the principles of the Millennium Declaration and the new partnership approach to
        development cooperation (per the Rome Declaration on Harmonization and OECD/DAC Guidelines on
        best practices) with state building efforts in crisis situations (e.g. partnering with communities, the private
        sector and other local resources and skills to establish legitimate, locally led and locally staffed state

Kind regards,

Massoud Hedeshi

Partnerships and UN Coordination Officer

UN Resident Coordinator's Office-Mongolia

Douglas Evangelista, UN Volunteers, Germany

Dear Sharmila

I just read, in UNDP's bulletin, the on-going discussion and call for proposals on news themes for next HDR.
Although I am not part to the HDR Network, I followed the suggestion in the Bulletin to send you my modest

I believe it would be opportune that UNDP's HDR could take a bold step, by bringing up the thematics of violence
and terrorism (of all sorts) which permeates the world's daily news, concerning ordinary peoples in the North and
in the South.                                                    10/5/2004
                                                                                                          Page 65 of 68

It would be reinvigorating to get a hard look into the development problems, among many others extreme poverty,
that are in the root causes of urban violence, as recently seen in Rio caused by overt war between drug lords and
police or the violence of terrorist acts in cities like Madrid as result of new terrorist cells living in European cities.
In one case or the other, out of the examples mentioned above (which are only representatives from the two
extremes) inequity, corruption, governance issues, etc may be part of matters at stake, be it in a local or a global
dimension of the phenomena.

Taking the Brazilian case, a very recent study by the National Census Bureau (IBGE), publicized this week,
makes an in depth look at the problem in numbers to arrive at depressing conclusions. From the analysis, it also
becomes obvious that in the last 3 decades (despite of economic growth and relative overall improvement of
Brazilian economy, as compared to the 60s) millions of people "excluded" of such human development
progresses are not only victims, but many times perpetrators, of urban violence like with the scenes witnessed in
Rio and many Brazilian cities during the last years...

As for the world's unrest, in view of increased terrorist actions and its lasting menaces today, I wonder if analysis
would lead to different conclusions?

Thanks for your attention.


Douglas Evangelista


Arab States, Latin America and Caribbean (ARLAC)

"making human development happen, one person at time"

UN Volunteers -Bonn-Germany (

Ali Salman, UNDP Bahrain

Dear All,                                                      10/5/2004
                                                                                                  Page 66 of 68

I have been thinking this over and over, and I do not seem to take away the good governance as a prospective
theme. As I see it, inequality is not more than a symptom of bad governance. Probably, through such a report
other symptoms can be introduced and tackled either directly or in series technique. The Arab Human
Development Report series can be used as an example.

Good luck,


Ali Salman

Programme Analyst

UNDP, Bahrain

Tel. +973 17 319 423

Fax+973 17 311 500

Isabella Waterschoot, UNDP/SURF- Caribbean , Trinidad & Tobago

Further to the reference made by Salah on a writing on linkages between westernized societies and Japanese
ethos, I would like to make an additional reference to a publication which represents a compilation of articles
contributed by eminent scholars and experts and amongst others Mahbub ul Haq, "Towards a Compassionate
Society" published by the Women's Learning
Partnership explores the many linkages between religion and development and I would recommend it, ultimately
for its references on women's rights, religion and development.


Abla Amawi, UNDP Jordan                                              10/5/2004
                                                                                                     Page 67 of 68

Dear All,

I think the idea of inequality captures a great deal of what has already been discussed whether in terms religiosity,
socio-economic development and improved welfare mentioned in previous exchanges. However, I think we have
also to take into account how can SHD takes place apart from a discussion of international power relations, i.e.
foreign interference in countries and directing their development.

Sukhjargalmaa Dugersuren, UNDP Mongolia

Hello to everybody,

With a change of my EM address (reformatted to match the standard form first I
lost my link to the network and am restarting membership. Have read our CO colleagues Massoud's contribution
and would like to support his proposal on the theme (role of the state and perhaps governance). My country
Mongolia is caught up in a transition from the traditional public administration system to the contractual, output
based performance system (what many would call the NZ model). Many countries are in transition. In fact every
government claims it is in some sort of transition. In such a context the theme Massoud proposes appears to be
highly relevant.

In addition, would like to air an idea that might be worth considering. Why not do this GHDR in a participatory
manner? In a word, is it possible to involve COs in the preparation?

The HDRO could develop a generic ToR/Workplan defining the scope of work for content/substance, process and
research methodology. COs put together teams - national consultants and CO staff - and get down to work. There
could be even cost-sharing from HDRO and country level projects. Could be a winner in terms of capacity
building, coverage, real life information, new GHDR preparation methodology. There is also an aspect of
programme synergies: BDP is thinking of working on democratic governance indicators, many other donor
partners are promoting work on civil society indicators, etc. The ToR should very thorough and detailed and one
and the same for all COs to meticulously follow in order to ensure the quality of GHDR. Best regards.

If you have more information that you would like to share with the network on this topic, please send it to:                                                 10/5/2004
                                                                   Page 68 of 68

                                  View past consolidated replies
                                Visit the NHDR Resources website              10/5/2004

To top