ATD Fourth World
Contact:
Cristina
Diez
Cristina.Diez@atd-‐fourthworld.org
Constructing
a
Post-‐2015
Review
and
Follow-‐Up
Mechanism
INTERNATIONAL
MOVEMENT
ATD
FOURTH
WORLD
Intervention
at
Informal
interactive
hearings
with
representatives
of
Non-‐governmental
Organizations,
Civil
Society,
Major
Groups
and
the
Private
Sector
on
the
Post-‐2015
development
agenda
26-‐27
May
2015
[Thanks
and
introduction]
ATD
Fourth
World
grounds
its
work
in
the
will
of
communities
afflicted
by
poverty.
All
of
our
positions
come
from
research
carried
out
alongside
these
communities.
In
places
like
Madagascar,
we
work
with
families
that
have
no
legal
identity.
In
New
Orleans
we
work
with
families
that
have
been
excluded
from
the
workforce
for
years.
Yet,
working
with
them
to
evaluate
policies
was
more
than
an
exercise
in
social
inclusion
and
participation;
it
was
a
truly
professional
work.
We
learned
with
these
communities,
and
now
we
better
understand
the
impact
of
various
policies
on
them.
Beyond
that,
we
uncovered
many
“why’s”.
Why
are
anti-‐slum
policies
in
Manila
resisted
by
slum-‐dwellers?
Why
are
conditional
cash
transfers
problematic
for
marginalized
communities
in
Brazil?
Why
are
health
centers
not
decreasing
maternal
mortality
for
indigenous
communities
in
Bolivia?
This
is
knowledge
that
exists
but
is
ignored,
expressed
by
voices
that
are
unheard,
and
people
that
are
left
behind.
When
evaluating
policies
and
recommendations
ATD
Fourth
World
asks,
“What
might
this
mean
for
a
person
living
in
poverty?”
We
need
to
understand
how
a
follow-‐up
mechanism
for
the
post-‐2015
agenda
can
impact
communities
living
in
poverty,
whether
in
high
or
low-‐income
countries.
We
believe
that
for
these
groups,
a
review
and
follow-‐up
mechanism
can
do
two
critical
things:
provide
a
political
basis
for
accountability,
and
enhance
the
contribution
of
communities
to
the
review
process.
In
many
of
the
countries
where
we
work,
legislation
protecting
people
living
in
poverty
exists.
Yet
too
often
people
lack
the
resources
or
access
to
demand
accountability
before
the
law.
With
a
review
mechanism
that
commits
their
governments
to
leave
no
one
behind,
people
living
in
poverty
will
have
a
new
avenue—with
Contact:
Cristina
Diez
Cristina.Diez@atd-‐fourthworld.org
global
reach—by
which
they
can
work
to
secure
their
essential
services
and
protections
and,
challenge
social
exclusion
and
discrimination.
Language
from
the
Secretary
General’s
synthesis
report
grasps
this
idea:
If
we
are
to
succeed,
the
new
agenda
must
become
part
of
the
contract
between
people,
including
civil
society
and
responsible
business,
and
their
governments—national
and
local.
Yet
in
order
for
the
review
to
serve
this
purpose,
people
living
in
poverty
and
the
organizations
that
work
with
them
have
to
be
viewed
as
partners
in
development.
The
act
of
holding
government
accountable
should
not
be
viewed
as
a
shaming
exercise
but
rather
as
a
constructive
one.
If
a
government
is
falling
short
on
the
SDGs,
the
global
community
needs
to
come
together
to
support
–
not
oppose
–
that
government.
A
critical
step
for
that
change
in
paradigm
is
to
welcome
the
inputs
of
civil
society
organizations,
and
of
communities
themselves,
to
reporting
that
will
take
place
at
the
various
levels
of
this
review
mechanism,
including
the
global.
Furthermore
reports
like
national
reports,
the
global
sustainability
report,
and
additional
stakeholder
reports
should
include
data
produced
by
communities
affected
by
development
policies.
So,
we
propose
the
following
concrete
language:
Member
states
will
implement
national
mechanisms
for
participatory
monitoring
that
can
complement
standard
initiatives
for
national-‐level
review
And
A
national
stakeholder
report
with
contributions
from
national
non-‐governmental
actors
will
form
part
of
main
written
inputs
on
individual
country
progress
Now
that
we
understand
the
added-‐value
of
a
follow-‐up
and
review
mechanism,
and
some
of
its
vital
components,
we
are
worried
by
the
conversations
we
heard
at
last
week’s
intergovernmental
negotiations.
The
inclination
of
member
states
to
use
language
of
“principles”
in
the
September
Summit
Outcome
instead
of
concrete
“mechanisms”
or
“actions”
weakens
the
potential
review
framework.
In
this
regard,
we
propose
a
few
pieces
of
language
to
re-‐strengthen
the
follow-‐up
and
review
section
of
the
document,
especially
its
global
component:
Firstly,
we
encourage
member
states
to
borrow
from
resolution
67/290
and
use
language
orienting
the
global
review
towards
a
Contact:
Cristina
Diez
Cristina.Diez@atd-‐fourthworld.org
“dynamic
and
action-‐oriented
agenda,
ensuring
the
appropriate
consideration
of
new
and
emerging
sustainable
development
challenges”
Second,
in
an
effort
to
give
the
framework
definition,
we
hope
member
states
will
clearly
link
its
global
thematic
reviews
to
other
ongoing
review
“platforms”,
as
the
SG
synthesis
report
states:
While
such
thematic
reviews
could
be
carried
out
under
the
auspices
of
the
HLPF,
they
would
rely
on
relevant
coordination
and
review
“platforms.”
Finally
–
and
we
understand
that
this
is
our
most
ambitious
proposal—we
emphasize
that
this
global
component
of
the
review
mechanism
must
aim
to
implement
actions
and
commitments.
The
global
review’s
added
value
is
that
it
can
mobilize
resources
and
people
at
a
global
scale
for
a
universal,
ambitious
and
comprehensive
agenda.
This
is
the
one
thing
that
the
other
levels
cannot
accomplish,
and
it
must
be
highlighted
with
language
like:
“with
the
aim
of
enhancing
engagement
and
implementing
commitments”
which
come
from
resolution
67/290
Or,
“to
help
to
identify
challenges
and
bottlenecks,
and
to
mobilize
action
to
address
them.”
From
the
SG
report
We
hope
member
states
will
consider
delving
more
deeply
into
the
definition
of
this
mechanism
so
that
it
can
truly
serve
as
a
support
for
vulnerable
people
around
the
world.
Cristina
Diez
Cristina.Diez@atd-‐fourthworld.org
Constructing
a
Post-‐2015
Review
and
Follow-‐Up
Mechanism
INTERNATIONAL
MOVEMENT
ATD
FOURTH
WORLD
Intervention
at
Informal
interactive
hearings
with
representatives
of
Non-‐governmental
Organizations,
Civil
Society,
Major
Groups
and
the
Private
Sector
on
the
Post-‐2015
development
agenda
26-‐27
May
2015
[Thanks
and
introduction]
ATD
Fourth
World
grounds
its
work
in
the
will
of
communities
afflicted
by
poverty.
All
of
our
positions
come
from
research
carried
out
alongside
these
communities.
In
places
like
Madagascar,
we
work
with
families
that
have
no
legal
identity.
In
New
Orleans
we
work
with
families
that
have
been
excluded
from
the
workforce
for
years.
Yet,
working
with
them
to
evaluate
policies
was
more
than
an
exercise
in
social
inclusion
and
participation;
it
was
a
truly
professional
work.
We
learned
with
these
communities,
and
now
we
better
understand
the
impact
of
various
policies
on
them.
Beyond
that,
we
uncovered
many
“why’s”.
Why
are
anti-‐slum
policies
in
Manila
resisted
by
slum-‐dwellers?
Why
are
conditional
cash
transfers
problematic
for
marginalized
communities
in
Brazil?
Why
are
health
centers
not
decreasing
maternal
mortality
for
indigenous
communities
in
Bolivia?
This
is
knowledge
that
exists
but
is
ignored,
expressed
by
voices
that
are
unheard,
and
people
that
are
left
behind.
When
evaluating
policies
and
recommendations
ATD
Fourth
World
asks,
“What
might
this
mean
for
a
person
living
in
poverty?”
We
need
to
understand
how
a
follow-‐up
mechanism
for
the
post-‐2015
agenda
can
impact
communities
living
in
poverty,
whether
in
high
or
low-‐income
countries.
We
believe
that
for
these
groups,
a
review
and
follow-‐up
mechanism
can
do
two
critical
things:
provide
a
political
basis
for
accountability,
and
enhance
the
contribution
of
communities
to
the
review
process.
In
many
of
the
countries
where
we
work,
legislation
protecting
people
living
in
poverty
exists.
Yet
too
often
people
lack
the
resources
or
access
to
demand
accountability
before
the
law.
With
a
review
mechanism
that
commits
their
governments
to
leave
no
one
behind,
people
living
in
poverty
will
have
a
new
avenue—with
Contact:
Cristina
Diez
Cristina.Diez@atd-‐fourthworld.org
global
reach—by
which
they
can
work
to
secure
their
essential
services
and
protections
and,
challenge
social
exclusion
and
discrimination.
Language
from
the
Secretary
General’s
synthesis
report
grasps
this
idea:
If
we
are
to
succeed,
the
new
agenda
must
become
part
of
the
contract
between
people,
including
civil
society
and
responsible
business,
and
their
governments—national
and
local.
Yet
in
order
for
the
review
to
serve
this
purpose,
people
living
in
poverty
and
the
organizations
that
work
with
them
have
to
be
viewed
as
partners
in
development.
The
act
of
holding
government
accountable
should
not
be
viewed
as
a
shaming
exercise
but
rather
as
a
constructive
one.
If
a
government
is
falling
short
on
the
SDGs,
the
global
community
needs
to
come
together
to
support
–
not
oppose
–
that
government.
A
critical
step
for
that
change
in
paradigm
is
to
welcome
the
inputs
of
civil
society
organizations,
and
of
communities
themselves,
to
reporting
that
will
take
place
at
the
various
levels
of
this
review
mechanism,
including
the
global.
Furthermore
reports
like
national
reports,
the
global
sustainability
report,
and
additional
stakeholder
reports
should
include
data
produced
by
communities
affected
by
development
policies.
So,
we
propose
the
following
concrete
language:
Member
states
will
implement
national
mechanisms
for
participatory
monitoring
that
can
complement
standard
initiatives
for
national-‐level
review
And
A
national
stakeholder
report
with
contributions
from
national
non-‐governmental
actors
will
form
part
of
main
written
inputs
on
individual
country
progress
Now
that
we
understand
the
added-‐value
of
a
follow-‐up
and
review
mechanism,
and
some
of
its
vital
components,
we
are
worried
by
the
conversations
we
heard
at
last
week’s
intergovernmental
negotiations.
The
inclination
of
member
states
to
use
language
of
“principles”
in
the
September
Summit
Outcome
instead
of
concrete
“mechanisms”
or
“actions”
weakens
the
potential
review
framework.
In
this
regard,
we
propose
a
few
pieces
of
language
to
re-‐strengthen
the
follow-‐up
and
review
section
of
the
document,
especially
its
global
component:
Firstly,
we
encourage
member
states
to
borrow
from
resolution
67/290
and
use
language
orienting
the
global
review
towards
a
Contact:
Cristina
Diez
Cristina.Diez@atd-‐fourthworld.org
“dynamic
and
action-‐oriented
agenda,
ensuring
the
appropriate
consideration
of
new
and
emerging
sustainable
development
challenges”
Second,
in
an
effort
to
give
the
framework
definition,
we
hope
member
states
will
clearly
link
its
global
thematic
reviews
to
other
ongoing
review
“platforms”,
as
the
SG
synthesis
report
states:
While
such
thematic
reviews
could
be
carried
out
under
the
auspices
of
the
HLPF,
they
would
rely
on
relevant
coordination
and
review
“platforms.”
Finally
–
and
we
understand
that
this
is
our
most
ambitious
proposal—we
emphasize
that
this
global
component
of
the
review
mechanism
must
aim
to
implement
actions
and
commitments.
The
global
review’s
added
value
is
that
it
can
mobilize
resources
and
people
at
a
global
scale
for
a
universal,
ambitious
and
comprehensive
agenda.
This
is
the
one
thing
that
the
other
levels
cannot
accomplish,
and
it
must
be
highlighted
with
language
like:
“with
the
aim
of
enhancing
engagement
and
implementing
commitments”
which
come
from
resolution
67/290
Or,
“to
help
to
identify
challenges
and
bottlenecks,
and
to
mobilize
action
to
address
them.”
From
the
SG
report
We
hope
member
states
will
consider
delving
more
deeply
into
the
definition
of
this
mechanism
so
that
it
can
truly
serve
as
a
support
for
vulnerable
people
around
the
world.