Tackling inequality beyond 2020

Professor Tan Sri Dato' Dzulkifli Abdul Razak
My View - The Sun Daily
January 27, 2016

THE prime minister has given notice on the direction of Malaysia post-2020. In many ways, the discussion began internationally with the post-2015 development agenda that was announced recently such as the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

Malaysia is a signatory to this when it signed on during the SDGs launch in New York, September last year.

In July 2012, UN secretary-general Ban Ki-moon had set up a high-level panel of prominent individuals on the Post-2015 Development Agenda then co-chaired by President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono of Indonesia, President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf of Liberia, and Prime Minister David Cameron of the UK.

It also includes leaders from civil society, the private sector and government. The 27 members of the panel are to advise on the global development framework beyond 2015, the terminal date for the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs).

In other words, Malaysia already has the framework of what post-2020 would look like. Unlike Wawasan 2020 (Vison 2020) that was mooted a decade before the MDGs (2000 to 2015) was officiated, the SDGs in the context of the Post-2015 Development Agenda are timely with the discussion of post-2020 Malaysia.

In short, unlike Wawasan 2020 that has missed some of the substantial MDGs, especially those related to environmental sustainability, in the list of the nine major challenges, the post-2020 discussion will be better informed. This will include the 17 SDGs "to transform the world" over the next 15 years until 2030 at least.

It takes into account the MDGs and its "unfinished business" integrating and balancing the three indivisible and overlapping dimensions of sustainable development: the economic, social and environmental in the collective effort to end poverty, protect, and ensure prosperity for all as part of the SDGs.

The 17 SDGs are tied up to a total of 169 targets that "demonstrate the scale and ambition of this new universal agenda".

The high-level panel in "Envisioning the post-2015 future - Global Impact by 2030" summarises it as follows: "A world where extreme poverty has been eradicated and where the building blocks for sustained prosperity are in place.

A world where no one has been left behind, where economies are transformed, and where transparent and representative governments are in charge.

A world of peace where sustainable development is the overarching goal.

A world with a new spirit of cooperation and partnership."

Interestingly, it ended the paragraph by stating: "This is not a wishful thing." Period.

Go figure this out.

Hence those who seem to suggest that "the new Malaysia has to be about economics – economics of the people, economics of communities and economics of the nation", may have missed the triple aspects of SDGs.

Notably, economics, while necessary, is no longer sufficient as it alone will not constitute what the new world is about.

More so, given the many divisions and discrimination worldwide which contributed significantly to many "unfinished business" of the MDGs.

Indeed, as 2015 ends, the anti-poverty charity Oxfam warned that more than half of the world's wealth will be owned by just 1% of the population in 2016 as global inequality continues to soar.

The charity's executive director, Winnie Byanyima, said an explosion in inequality was holding back the fight against poverty.

Evidently, Oxfam reiterated that the top tier had seen their share of wealth increase from 44% in 2009 to 48% in 2014. And in 2016, it will exceed 50%. What will it be post-2020?

Currently, this phenomenon translates into the richest 80 individuals in the world having the same wealth as the poorest 50% of the entire population, some 3.5 billion people, according to Oxfam.

There was an even bigger concentration at the top compared with a year ago, when half the world's wealth was in the hands of 85 of the ultra rich.

Rightly Byanyima asked: "Do we really want to live in a world where the 1% own more than the rest of us combined?"

The response to this is obvious, and the new Malaysia agenda cannot but ask the same question if it wants to make a difference because our economic trend nationally is no different.

As highlighted by Oxfam: "Business as usual for the elite isn't a cost free option. Failure to tackle inequality will set the fight against poverty back decades.

The poor are hurt twice by rising inequality – they get a smaller share of the economic pie and because extreme inequality hurts growth, there is less of the pie to be shared around."

This cannot be more obvious now when the economic situation is worsening amid claims that the country's fundamentals are strong.

We can count Malaysia being among the 10 most competitive economies by 2030.

But if it is still crafted on the old ideas of "unsustainable" and "imbalanced" development that go astray from the spirit of SDGs nothing will fundamentally change to end poverty, protect, and ensure prosperity for all as part of the SDGs.

Especially with the wide-ranging uncertainties caused by human (economic) greed that are now rearing their ugly head in the many crises that are plaguing us nationally and globally.

To be sure, when the label of "developed (high-income) economies" is applied today, it is predicated on the fact that they are backed by the resources from more than one planet – between three to five – to be exact.

Just like the handful of ultra rich, who are "living" on resources of the billions, these handful of ultra rich economies are no better.

The same old rule applies. It is called "competition" – a very loaded word that works for one side but is stacked against the other.

It is therefore imperative to keep in mind the pledge made through the SDGs initiative, namely, "no one will be left behind.

Recognising that the dignity of the human person is fundamental, we wish to see the goals and targets met for all nations and people and for all segments of society. And we will endeavour to reach the furthest behind first".

For this to happen, indeed we need to return to "basics", the issue is "what" and "which" ones? Let the discourse begin.

With some four decades of experience in education locally and internationally, the writer believes that "another world is possible".