UNCLOS

The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), also called the Law of
the Sea Convention or the Law of the Sea treaty, is the international agreement that resulted from
the third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS III), which took place
between 1973 and 1982. The Law of the Sea Convention defines the rights and responsibilities of
nations with respect to their use of the world's oceans, establishing guidelines for businesses, the
environment, and the management of marine natural resources. The Convention, concluded in
1982, replaced four 1958 treaties. UNCLOS came into force in 1994, a year after Guyana
became the 60th nation to ratify the treaty. As of June 2016, 167 countries and the European
Union have joined in the Convention. It is uncertain as to what extent the Convention codifies
customary international law.
While the Secretary General of the United Nations receives instruments of ratification and
accession and the UN providesx support for meetings of states party to the Convention, the UN
has no direct operational role in the implementation of the Convention. There is, however, a role
played by organizations such as the International Maritime Organization, the International
Whaling Commission, and the International Seabed Authority (ISA). (The ISA was established
by the UN Convention.)
UNCLOS replaces the older 'freedom of the seas' concept, dating from the 17th century:
national rights were limited to a specified belt of water extending from a nation's coastlines,
usually 3 nautical miles (5.6 km) (Three-mile limit), according to the 'cannon shot' rule
developed by the Dutch jurist Cornelius van Bynkershoek. All waters beyond national
boundaries were considered international waters: free to all nations, but belonging to none of
them.
In the early 20th century, some nations expressed their desire to extend national claims: to
include mineral resources, to protect fish stocks, and to provide the means to enforce pollution
controls. (The League of Nations called a 1930 conference at The Hague, but no agreements
resulted.) Using the customary international law principle of a nation's right to protect its natural
resources, President Harry S. Truman in 1945 extended United States control to all the natural
resources of its continental shelf. Other nations were quick to follow suit. Between 1946 and
1950, Chile, Peru, and Ecuador extended their rights to a distance of 200 nautical miles (370 km)
to cover their Humboldt Current fishing grounds. Other nations extended their territorial seas to
12 nautical miles (22 km).
By 1967, only 25 nations still used the old 3-mile (4.8 km) limit,[citation needed] while 66
nations had set a 12-nautical-mile (22 km) territorial limit[citation needed] and eight had set a
200-nautical-mile (370 km) limit. As of 28 May 2008, only two countries still use the 3-mile (4.8
km) limit: Jordan and Palau.That limit is also used in certain Australian islands, an area of
Belize, some Japanese straits, certain areas of Papua New Guinea, and a few British Overseas
Territories, such as Anguilla.

UNCLOS I
In 1956, the United Nations held its first Conference on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS I) at
Geneva, Switzerland. UNCLOS I resulted in four treaties concluded in 1958:
Convention on the Territorial Sea and Contiguous Zone, entry into force: 10 September 1964
Convention on the Continental Shelf, entry into force: 10 June 1964
Convention on the High Seas, entry into force: 30 September 1962
Convention on Fishing and Conservation of Living Resources of the High Seas, entry into force:
20 March 1966
Although UNCLOS I was considered a success, it left open the important issue of breadth of
territorial waters.

UNCLOS II

In 1960, the United Nations held the second Conference on the Law of the Sea ("UNCLOS II");
however, the six-week Geneva conference did not result in any new agreements. Generally
speaking, developing nations and third world countries participated only as clients, allies, or
dependents of the United States or the Soviet Union, with no significant voice of their own.

UNCLOS III

The issue of varying claims of territorial waters was raised in the UN in 1967 by Arvid Pardo of
Malta, and in 1973 the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea was convened in
New York. In an attempt to reduce the possibility of groups of nation-states dominating the
negotiations, the conference used a consensus process rather than majority vote. With more than
160 nations participating, the conference lasted until 1982. The resulting convention came into
force on 16 November 1994, one year after the 60th state, Guyana, ratified the treaty.
The convention introduced a number of provisions. The most significant issues covered were
setting limits, navigation, archipelagic status and transit regimes, exclusive economic zones
(EEZs), continental shelf jurisdiction, deep seabed mining, the exploitation regime, protection of
the marine environment, scientific research, and settlement of disputes.
The convention set the limit of various areas, measured from a carefully defined baseline.
(Normally, a sea baseline follows the low-water line, but when the coastline is deeply indented,
has fringing islands or is highly unstable, straight baselines may be used.) The areas are as
follows:

Internal waters
Covers all water and waterways on the landward side of the baseline. The coastal state is free to
set laws, regulate use, and use any resource. Foreign vessels have no right of passage within
internal waters.

Territorial waters
Out to 12 nautical miles (22 kilometres; 14 miles) from the baseline, the coastal state is free to
set laws, regulate use, and use any resource. Vessels were given the right of innocent passage
through any territorial waters, with strategic straits allowing the passage of military craft as
transit passage, in that naval vessels are allowed to maintain postures that would be illegal in
territorial waters. "Innocent passage" is defined by the convention as passing through waters in
an expeditious and continuous manner, which is not "prejudicial to the peace, good order or the
security" of the coastal state. Fishing, polluting, weapons practice, and spying are not "innocent",
and submarines and other underwater vehicles are required to navigate on the surface and to
show their flag. Nations can also temporarily suspend innocent passage in specific areas of their
territorial seas, if doing so is essential for the protection of its security.

Archipelagic waters

The convention set the definition of Archipelagic States in Part IV, which also defines how the
state can draw its territorial borders. A baseline is drawn between the outermost points of the
outermost islands, subject to these points being sufficiently close to one another. All waters
inside this baseline are designated Archipelagic Waters. The state has sovereignty over these
waters (like internal waters), but subject to existing rights including traditional fishing rights of
immediately adjacent states. Foreign vessels have right of innocent passage through archipelagic
waters (like territorial waters).

Contiguous zone

Beyond the 12-nautical-mile (22 km) limit, there is a further 12 nautical miles (22 km) from the
territorial sea baseline limit, the contiguous zone, in which a state can continue to enforce laws in
four specific areas: customs, taxation, immigration and pollution, if the infringement started
within the state's territory or territorial waters, or if this infringement is about to occur within the
state's territory or territorial waters.This makes the contiguous zone a hot pursuit area.

Exclusive economic zones (EEZs)

These extend 200 nautical miles (370 kilometres; 230 miles) from the baseline. Within this area,
the coastal nation has sole exploitation rights over all natural resources. In casual use, the term
may include the territorial sea and even the continental shelf. The EEZs were introduced to halt
the increasingly heated clashes over fishing rights, although oil was also becoming important.
The success of an offshore oil platform in the Gulf of Mexico in 1947 was soon repeated
elsewhere in the world, and by 1970 it was technically feasible to operate in waters 4,000 meters
deep. Foreign nations have the freedom of navigation and overflight, subject to the regulation of
the coastal states. Foreign states may also lay submarine pipes and cables.

Continental shelf

The continental shelf is defined as the natural prolongation of the land territory to the continental
margin's outer edge, or 200 nautical miles (370 km) from the coastal state's baseline, whichever
is greater. A state's continental shelf may exceed 200 nautical miles (370 km) until the natural
prolongation ends. However, it may never exceed 350 nautical miles (650 kilometres; 400 miles)
from the baseline; or it may never exceed 100 nautical miles (190 kilometres; 120 miles) beyond
the 2,500-meter isobath (the line connecting the depth of 2,500 meters). Coastal states have the
right to harvest mineral and non-living material in the subsoil of its continental shelf, to the
exclusion of others. Coastal states also have exclusive control over living resources "attached" to
the continental shelf, but not to creatures living in the water column beyond the exclusive
economic zone.
Aside from its provisions defining ocean boundaries, the convention establishes general
obligations for safeguarding the marine environment and protecting freedom of scientific
research on the high seas, and also creates an innovative legal regime for controlling mineral
resource exploitation in deep seabed areas beyond national jurisdiction, through an International
Seabed Authority and the Common heritage of mankind principle.
Landlocked states are given a right of access to and from the sea, without taxation of traffic
through transit states.

LOST FILIPINO CULTURES

Bahay Kubo
There are still nipa huts in provinces but in urban areas, nah… don’t try to build it. It would just
easily catch fire or get swept by category 5 cyclones. People who can’t afford concrete houses
usually stay in tents like the Yolanda victims

Kalesa
Flickr | Joanna Lizares Co If we had kalesas (hansoms) instead of cars, we’d get less accidents
and air pollution but more horse poop on the streets.

Pagmamano
When’s the last time you’ve placed your elderly’s palm on your forehead? Me? Nah, my
grandma’s dead. Pagmamano is a sign of respect – just don’t do it on someone whose age is very
close to yours. But, yeah, pagmamano (blis in Cebuano) is out of style. What’s trending now is
#beso-beso. Trivia: Mano means hand in Spanish, so when you say, “Mano po”, you’re saying
“You’re hand, please”.

Traditional Games
Tago-tago, dakop-dakop, bato lata, takyan… most kids nowadays just play on their tablets that’s
why they’re sickly. But wait, you can download apps in your tablet and phone to play some
Filipino traditional games! Now your fingers can gain muscles!

Giving the seat to the elderly and women

Especially during rush hours. Just display your poker face ’cause how hard it is to ride a jeepney
when there are too many people waiting for one? I have no time to be a gentleman! And no
special treatment, equal rights for men and women! All jokes aside, it’s still practiced, but not
really inside crowded jeepneys.

Circumcision… by “pukpok”
Here are the steps: You lie down. Chew some guava leaves. Then the circumciser places the
knife on the foreskin then BANG, strikes it with a wood or stone. Then the guava leaves you just
chewed will be applied to your birdie-birdie to make it heal faster.

Marriage before getting pregnant

Heck, even kissing is discouraged in the past. Now it’s getting pregnant before marriage. Well,
how much would a church wedding cost nowadays? Every thing is no longer cheap especially if
you’re earning minimum wage so it’s not surprising that couples opt to just be live-in partners
instead of getting married.

Chopping wood for cooking

LPG is cheap but chopped wood is cheaper and some people don’t have gas stoves. Anyway, the
government now discourages chopping wood as a “panggatong” since our tree population is
dwindling.

Bayanihan (lifting a nipa hut)

Well, of course! Our houses are made of concrete and if you’re buddies would try to heave it (if
it’s even possible), the roof would just get hampered by dangling electric wires. Gotta say, it’s
still practiced in the provinces though.

Harana

Who’s got time to learn to play the guitar? A simple text saying “I love you” would suffice
nowadays. Seriously, I’m not joking, my neighbor got pregnant early because of that. Also, the
boyfriend no longer visits the girl’s house ’cause she would reply in a text message: Let’s meet at
Starbucks.

9 DASH LINE

At the heart of the South China Sea dispute is the “nine-dash line”, Beijing’s claim that encircles
as much as 90 per cent of the -contested waters. The line runs as far as 2,000 m from the Chinese
mainland to within a few hundred kilometers of the Philippines, Malaysia and Vietnam. Beijing
maintains it owns any land or features -contained within the line, which confers vaguely defined
“historical maritime rights”.

The Philippines is contesting the claims at the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague,
with a ruling expected to be delivered on Tuesday. In its submissions, Manila argues the line
exceeds the limits of maritime entitlements permitted under the UN Convention on the Law of
the Sea (Unclos).

The Philippines also asked the tribunal to classify whether a number of disputed areas are
islands, low-tide coral outcrops or submerged banks to determine the stretch of territorial waters
they are entitled to under the -convention. The convention does not deal with sovereignty
questions, which the Philippine government says it did not raise.

What is the origin of the line?

It appeared on a Chinese map as an 11-dash line in 1947 as the then Republic of China’s navy
took control of some islands in the South China Sea that had been -occupied by Japan during the
second world war. After the People’s Republic of China was founded in 1949 and Kuomintang
forces fled to Taiwan, the communist government declared itself the sole -legitimate
representative of China and inherited all the nation’s maritime claims in the region.
But two “dashes” were removed in the early 1950s to bypass the Gulf of Tonkin as a gesture to
communist comrades in North Vietnam.
Beijing intensified its hold in the northern part of the waters in the mid-1970s when it expelled
the South Vietnamese navy from the Paracel Islands after a clash that saw dozens killed.
Seven out of about 200 reefs in the Spratly Islands came under Chinese control in the 1980s and
1990s and Scarborough Shoal in 2012. Taiwan still maintains its maritime claims in the region
and has kept a military garrison on Pratas Islands and the largest natural feature in the Spratlys,
-Taiping.
Why is the line so important?
It serves as the basis of China’s claim to “historical rights” in the region, as neither Beijing nor
Taipei ever held effective control over the entire region encompassing more than 2 million sq
km. Other claimants such as the Philippines, Malaysia and Brunei root their claim in
geographical proximity, while Vietnam, which occupies the largest number of islands and reefs
in the Spratlys, at 29, stresses it actively administers the area. The Philippines is challenging the
legality of the line at the international tribunal under Unclos.

What is the "nine dash line" claim in South China sea?

China do not have any definition or explanation of the nine dash line in its law. The People’s
Republic of China government has not explain this line’s meaning as well. Therefore,we do not
know the exact and official meaning of the nine dash line.

China’s territorial claims in the South China Sea are mainly established on historical basis.For
hundreds of years,Chinese fishermen lived on the islands in the South China Sea and they caught
fish in the sea.

Chinese academia has four main explanations of the nine dash line.These explanations have one
common point:the islands within the nine dash line belong to China.These explanations are
different in the sovereignty of the water area within the nine dash line.

The first explanation is the ‘borderline theory’. It maintains that the nine dash line is the board
line of the PRC and the whole area within the nine dash line belongs to China.This theory is the
most shaky explanation for three reasons.First,PRC government has not claim that the nine dash
line is the board line of the PRC.Second,this nine dash line is not a solid line.This can prove that
the nine dash line is a ‘undefined board line’.Third,this theory is against the theory and practice
of international maritime law.According to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the
Sea,states have the rights to define a baseline of territorial sea.The territorial sea can be defined
based on this line.However,some parts of the nine dash line are too close to the coastline of such
nations as Vietnam and Philippine.Moreover,a large portion of international trade is through the
South China Sea.I don't think China is intend to and capable of restricting this huge amount of
trade.

The second explanation is the ‘islands ownership’ theory.This theory believe that all islands
within the nine dash line belong to China.According to the 1958 document The Statement on The
Territorial Sea by The PRC Government,China also own 12 maritime miles water area
surrounding these islands.But this theory do not match Chinese government’s land reclamation
activities since 2014.Some new islands in the land reclamation activities are originally
reefs,which are different from islands.

The third explanation is the ‘historical ownership line’ theory.This theory believe that the islands,
reefs and beaches within the nine dash line belong to China and the water area within the nine
dash line is the exclusive economic zone.This means other countries have the rights of freedom
of navigation and freedom of flight.This explanation also conflict with international maritime
laws.

The fourth explanation is the ‘historical water line’ theory. It has the same claim with the
‘historical ownership line’ theory. In addition,it maintains that the water area within the nine dash
line is the historical water area of the PRC.History water claim is not conflict with the
international maritime law.And I personally think this theory is the most reasonable explanation.
Again,there is no official explanation of the nine dash line.Experts have many explanations of
the nine dash line.And this involve many historical and legal issues,which I’m not capable of
giving a full explanation.

Form my personal experience,many foreign media and experts,especially western media and
experts,believe the nine dash line is the board line and think this claim is unreasonable.

And I think the core of the ongoing territorial disputes in the South China Sea is the valuable
natural resources in these area.Many Southeast Asia countries do not dispute China’s nine dash
line until valuable natural resources such as oil were discovered in this area in the 1970s.

The South China Sea dispute is one of the most complicated geopolitical issues in the world. It
involves indirect and direct conflicts between countries,dynamic corporations between
countries,stronger states vs weaker states,dynamic national policies and many more.The ‘China is
the bad guy’ story is too simple and unreasonable.

DIVORCE
A divorce is a legal action between married people to terminate their marriage relationship. It can
be referred to as dissolution of marriage and is basically, the legal action that ends the marriage
before the death of either spouse.

What is no-fault divorce?

No-fault laws took away the need to find fault. No-fault divorce law gives either party the
freedom to sue for divorce with only the claim of “irreconcilable differences.” Born of these laws
was the concept of unilateral divorce: either partner feeling the urge to end the marriage could do
so and was free to leave.

What is a legal separation?

A legal separation is a lot like a divorce. It involves the same process of filing papers with the
court to start a legal action and the court has to make the same decisions about children, debts
and assets as in a divorce. However, at the end of the process the parties are legally separated
instead of being divorced. That means they are still married but not responsible for each other.

What happens in a divorce?

The purpose of a divorce is to terminate the parties’ marriage. In order to do that the parties and
the court must decide how to handle the questions of custody and placement of the minor
children and how to divide the property and debts of the parties.

State laws presume each party is entitled to one half of the marital property and each party is
responsible for one half of the marital debts. Non-marital property would be property inherited
by one of the parties or given to just one of the parties by a third person and, if it has been kept
separate it will remain with that person after the divorce.

What is marital property?

All the property of the parties is marital unless shown otherwise. Such things as pensions, bank
accounts and stocks and bonds are marital property even if held in the name of only one of the
parties. Property brought in to the marriage is still marital although depending on the length of
the marriage and the nature of the property the court can decide to award it back to the party who
had it before the marriage. Courts try to be fair to both parties and each party is responsible for
making a full disclosure to the court and the other party of all assets and debts.

What about spousal support?

Depending on the length of the marriage, the age and health of the parties and each parties'
ability to earn an income and maintain the marital standard of living, the court may order spousal
support paid by one spouse to the other. This is a different question from child support. Alimony
can be for a limited period or for an indefinite period depending on the circumstances. It can be
reviewed if there is a significant change in the circumstances of either former spouse.

FORMAL AND INFORMAL SANCTION

What is an example of a formal sanction and an informal sanction?

In policy and sociology, sanctions are a reaction of approval or disapproval to the behavior or
actions of others. A formal sanction is generally observed and approved by rules or laws, and is
usually backed by documentation detailing the conditions of an entity's punishment or reward.
An informal sanction is often a spontaneous and unofficial reaction conducted either by an
individual or a group. The main difference is that formal sanctions are legally sanctioned
whereas informal sanctions are not. In policy, this means that formal sanctions are much more
pervasive in their effects on people and countries.

An example of a formal sanction would be the UN sanctions implemented against the Islamic
Republic of Iran, beginning in 2006 officially ending into 2016. In 2006, the United Nations
Security Council imposed sanctions on Iran with Resolution 1696 after the country refused to
suspend its uranium enrichment program. This sanction was backed by law, recognized by all
members of the Security Council except for Qatar.

An example of an informal sanction would be the Montgomery bus boycotts that took place in
1955/1956 in Montgomery, Alabama. The boycott was a spontaneous reaction against racial
segregation in the city's public transit system. The boycott was not recognized by any legal
entity, but is still considered a sanction due to the en masse disapproval of racial segregation
from the city's African American community.

MDG and SDG

Millennium Development Goals

In September 2000, leaders of 189 countries gathered at the United Nations headquarters and
signed the historic Millennium Declaration, in which they committed to achieving a set of eight
measurable goals that range from halving extreme poverty and hunger to promoting gender
equality and reducing child mortality, by the target date of 2015.

The Millennium Development Goals (MDGs)

Goal 1
Eradicate extreme poverty and hunger
Goal 2
Achieve universal primary education
Goal 3
Promote gender equality and empower women
Goal 4
Reduce child mortality
Goal 5
Improve maternal health
Goal 6
Combating HIV/AIDs, malaria, and other diseases
Goal 7
Ensure environmental sustainability
Goal 8
Develop a global partnership for development

The MDGs were revolutionary in providing a common language to reach global agreement. The
8 goals were realistic and easy to communicate, with a clear measurement/monitoring
mechanism.

Substantial progress has been made regarding the MDGs. The world has already realized the first
MDG of halving the extreme poverty rate by 2015. However, the achievements have been
uneven. The MDGs are set to expire in 2015 and the discussion of a post-2015 agenda continues.
The focus is now on building a sustainable world where environmental sustainability, social
inclusion, and economic development are equally valued.

The MDG Fund contributed directly and indirectly to the achievement of the MDGs. It adopted
an inclusive and comprehensive approach to the MDGs. The approach was guided by the
Millennium Declaration and its emphasis on development as a right, with targeted attention
directed towards traditionally marginalized groups such as ethnic minorities, indigenous groups,
and women.

The Global Consultation of Sustainable Development Goals

The Rio+20 conference (the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development) in Rio de
Janeiro, June 2012, galvanized a process to develop a new set of Sustainable Development Goals
(SDGs) which will carry on the momentum generated by the MDGs and fit into a global
development framework beyond 2015.

In the interest of creating a new, people-centered, development agenda, a global consultation was
conducted online and offline. Civil society organizations, citizens, scientists, academics, and the
private sector from around the world were all actively engaged in the process. Activities included
thematic and national consultations, and the My World survey led by the United Nations
Development Group. Specialized panels were also held and provided ground to facilitate
intergovernmental discussions. The UN Secretary General presented a synthesis of the results of
these consultation processes.

In July 2014, the UN General Assembly Open Working Group (OWG) proposed a document
containing 17 goals to be put forward for the General Assembly’s approval in September 2015.
This document set the ground for the new SDGs and the global development agenda spanning
from 2015-2030.

Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) as proposed by the OWG

Goal 1
End poverty in all its forms everywhere
Goal 2
End hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition, and promote sustainable agriculture
Goal 3
Ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages
Goal 4
Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote life-long learning opportunities for
all
Goal 5
Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls
Goal 6
Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all
Goal 7
Ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable, and modern energy for all
Goal 8
Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment,
and decent work for all
Goal 9
Build resilient infrastructure, promote inclusive and sustainable industrialization, and foster
innovation
Goal 10
Reduce inequality within and among countries
Goal 11
Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable
Goal 12
Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns
Goal 13
Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts
Goal 14
Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas, and marine resources for sustainable development
Goal 15
Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage
forests, combat desertification, halt and reverse land degradation, and halt biodiversity loss
Goal 16
Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice
for all, and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels
Goal 17
Strengthen the means of implementation and revitalize the global partnership for sustainable
development
The SDG Fund and the SDGs

The SDG Fund is the first cooperation mechanism specifically designed to achieve the future
SDGs. Building upon the experience and lessons learned of the previous MDG Achievement
Fund (2007-2013), the SDG Fund intends to act as a bridge in the transition from MDGs to
SDGs, providing concrete experiences on how to achieve a sustainable and inclusive world post-
2015 through its integrated and multidimensional joint programmes.

International development agenda has been actively led by the United Nations (UN) and its
technical agencies and funds from their inception in the late 1940s. Till 1990s, the approach
was fragmented and disjointed initiated by its specialized agencies or funds at various World
Summits and Conferences to address three dimensions of development — economic, social,
and environmental. The Millennium Declaration and Millennium Development Goals (MDGs)
saw the convergence of development agenda of United Nations Development Programme
(UNDP); United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP); World health organization (WHO);
United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF); United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural
Organization (UNESCO); and other development agencies.(1) Recently adopted Sustainable
Development Goals (SDGs) reflect further strengthening convergence of the development
agenda. The SDGs also strengthen equity, human rights, and nondiscrimination.

Difference Between SDGs and MDGs

SDGs benefit from the valuable lessons learned from MDGs. These also carry forward the
unfinished agenda of MDGs for continuity and sustain the momentum generated while
addressing the additional challenges of inclusiveness, equity, and urbanization and further
strengthening global partnership by including CSOs and private sector. They reflect continuity
and consolidation of MDGs while making these more sustainable by strengthening
environmental goals.

There are seven major differences in MDGs and SDGs;

MDGs were drawn up by a group of experts in the ‘basement of UN headquarters’ whereas SDGs
have evolved after a long and extensive consultative process including 70 Open Working
Groups, Civil Society Organizations, thematic consultations, country consultations, participation
of general public through face-to-face meetings and online mechanisms and door to door survey;
While MDGs were focused with only 8 goals, 21 targets and 63 indicators, SDGs include 17
goals with 169 targets. An expert analyses by noble laureates at Copenhagen consensus, suggest
that if the UN concentrates on 19 top targets, it can get $20 to $40 in social benefits per dollar
spent, while allocating it evenly across all 169 targets would reduce the figure to less than $10.
Being smart about spending could be better than doubling or quadrupling the aid budget;(7)
MDGs had a focus on developing countries with funding came from rich countries. All countries,
developed or developing, are expected to work towards achieving SDGs;
The pillars of human development, human rights and equity are deeply rooted in SDGs and
several targets seven explicitly refer to people with disabilities, six to people in vulnerable
situations, and two to non-discrimination. These were not even mentioned in the MDGs; (iv)
MDGs had 3 direct health goals, 4 targets and 15 indicators with emphasis on child, maternal
mortality and communicable diseases. SDGs have one comprehensive goal emphasizing well-
being and healthy living including NCDs;
MDGs had a time span of 25 years though adopted in 2002 baseline data for the year 1990 was
used and some of the baselines were revised subsequently which shifted ‘the goal post’. For the
SDGs, the baseline is from 2015 estimates. It may be revised as more recent data becomes
available;
SDGs include a vision of building vibrant and systematic partnerships with private sector to
achieve sustainable development. It builds on, UN Compact which was launched in year 2000
and IMPACT 2030;
MDGs had no concrete role for the Civil Society Organizations (CSOs), whereas SDGs have
paid attention to this right from the framing stage itself with significant engagement of civil
society actors.
The CSOs can play an important role to hold governments accountable at the local level.

Challenges

The four major challenges that need to be addressed for achieving the SDGs are as follows:

1. Some of the SDGs that have been costed show that the cost of the SDGs is huge. The rough
calculations have put the cost of providing a social safety net to eradicate extreme poverty at
about $66 bn a year,(8) while annual investments in improving infrastructure (water, agriculture,
transport, and power) could be up to a total of $7 tn globally. A major conference on financing
for the SDGs, held in the Ethiopian capital Addis Ababa in July, failed to ease concerns that
there will not be enough funds to meet the aspirational nature of the goals. It included a
recommitment to the UN target on aid spending 0.7% of gross national income (GNI) set more
than 40 years ago. Multilateral banks committed $400 bn;(9)
2. Maintaining peace is essential for development. A threat to international peace and stability by
nonstate actors is emerging as a major factor for both developed and developing countries. The
recent crisis in Syria has forced 12 million people to leave their homes and made them refuges.
3. Measuring progress: A number of targets in the SDGs are not quantified. The indicators for
measuring progress have not yet been identified. Even if they limit to two indicators per target
there will be 338 indicators to monitor and report. “Having 169 targets is like having no targets at
all.”(10) Measurability will depend on the availability of data and capacity to measure them.
4. Accountability: There was a lack of accountability for inputs into MDGs at all levels. This
challenge needs to be addressed in SDGs.
At the international level, most of the developed countries have not met the target of allocating
0.7% of GNI to international aid in the last 40 years. The lack of priority in funds allocation
within country budget has also been a problem during MDGs. Similar lack of accountability
exists at ministry, state, and local administration level. If we take SDGs seriously the
accountability needs to be strengthened at all levels.
Conclusion

MDGs helped in mobilizing international community, leaders, politicians, civil society and
sectoral ministries, and departments to focus on achieving these time-bound and measurably
goals. We may not have achieved all these goals but have made a substantial progress in saving
lives and improving quality of lives of millions of people within the country and globally. India
has not made progress commensurate with its economic and technological might and needs to do
more. MDGs have been easy to relate, understand, communicate, implement, and monitor,
whereas SDGs, though to some extent, are a continuation of MDGs, yet suffer from the
weakness of being too many and unwieldy to implement and monitor. This has probably resulted
from large consultative process where everyone wants to see their areas of interest included.
Providing required funding to these a reality remains a challenge. There is a need to improve
accountability from international level to local level. The next 15 years is likely to see
unprecedented mobilization of resources and efforts to make the world a better place to live for
“we the people”, especially the marginalized and disadvantaged groups.