Global Partnership Necessary to Achieve Sustainable Development Goals

The global community adopted 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) at the special session of the UN General Assembly. September 2015. These global goals are universal and call for action to end poverty, protect the planet and ensure that everyone benefits from peace and prosperity. The 17 goals included 169 targets and 227 indicators. At the heart of the 2030 Agenda are five critical dimensions: People, Prosperity, Planet, Partnership and Peace, also known as the Five P's, and are traditionally viewed as three key elements – social inclusion, growth economic and environmental protection. The new agenda explicitly focuses on means of implementation (MoI). The MoI is the operational tool through which the SDGs must be realized. Not only does each of the separately documented objectives refer to the MoI, but Goal 17 speaks explicitly of the MoI for the 17 goals of the SDGs. Four aspects are necessary to achieve the SDGs. These are issues related to finance, technology, capacity building and trade.

While Goal 17 refers to the national policy space, the global agenda for strengthening implementation means receives considerable attention. Under this new program, world leaders committed themselves to a meaningful global partnership to achieve all goals and targets, bringing together governments, the private sector, civil society, the United Nations system and the United Nations. Other actors. and mobilization of all available resources.

India has actively participated in the negotiations of Goal 17 (on means of implementation and global partnership) to defend a leading position among developing countries. He has strongly supported a program of progressive reforms of the global institutional architecture governing the economy, technology and the environment. The world is already experiencing a shift in the global center of gravity from North to South in several regions. In this article, we explore India's possible future strategy for achieving the SDGs and the challenges badociated with SDG indicators in general and Goal 17 in particular

The Global Partnership in the Program Addis Ababa Action Day is a way to strengthen international cooperation.

The commitments set out in the AAAA are as follows:

• Strengthening the Global Partnership for Sustainable Development
• Recognizes that the strengthened and revitalized global partnership for sustainable development, led by Governments, will be a vehicle for strengthening international cooperation for the implementation of the 2030 program; and that multi-stakeholder partnerships and the resources, knowledge and ingenuity of the private sector, civil society, the scientific community, academia, philanthropy and foundations, parliaments, local authorities, volunteers and other stakeholders stakeholders will be important. technological and financial resources, complement the efforts of governments and support the achievement of sustainable development goals, particularly in developing countries.
• Respect the political space and leadership of each country to implement policies for the eradication of poverty and sustainable development. in line with relevant international rules and commitments
• Encourages and encourages partnerships to support national priorities and strategies, drawing on lessons learned and available expertise

As noted above, Four dimensions of the MoI to achieve the SDGs are: technology, capacity building and trade. However, these four dimensions are highly contested in the global arena with a clear distinction between North and South.

The Third International Conference on Financing for Development (FfD3) in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia (13-16 July 2015) of the United Nations General Assembly gave priority to the most crucial issue, namely financing for development before the formal adoption of the 2030 Agenda and the SDGs. The decline in official development badistance (ODA) in relative terms (as a percentage of the gross national income (GNI) combined of member countries of the OECD Development Assistance Committee (DAC) since 2011 is very worrisome: official flows after the economic crisis in the last phase of the previous decade are discernible, current levels indicate stagnation well below 0.7% of GNI even though the world has taken measures to achieve the SDGs and climate change commitments ODA to developing and least developed countries (LDCs) is undergoing visible change from grants to loans that affect development of developing and least developed countries (LDCs), and resources must be mobilized by other means than ODA

Beyond these problems, developing countries suffer from evil financial transfers

• Illicit financial flows (wealth generated by money laundering, etc.)
• Transfer pricing practices of multinational enterprises
• Impossibility of imposing capital gains on cross-border badets

In a report According to the Finnish government-funded Global Financial Integrity group, between 2004 and 2013, the developing world as a whole lost $ 7.8 trillion and, in real terms, these flows have increased by 6.5% per year. While in the FfD3 process, proactive efforts have been made to address domestic resource mobilization issues in poor countries and strengthen their domestic revenue-generating capabilities to control illicit flows, the global community has been unaware of the leakage of resources. developing countries in the form of tax evasion under profit transfer practices. It has sometimes been developed as a manifestation of 21st century colonialism when resources are drawn out of developing countries in the absence of prudent international tax standards. The amount of development aid paid to the countries of the South is much lower than the transfer of benefits from developing and poor countries. This requires that southern countries get a share of the resources generated in their territory.

India has especially highlighted the magnitude of income losses in developing countries due to the profit transfer practices of multinationals (transfer pricing) and inability. to adequately impose capital gains under existing global standards. These are above all forms of illicit financial flows that keep substantial revenues out of reach of developing countries. According to the simulation of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, the profits of developing enterprises would rise to about $ 450 billion, a weighted average effective tax rate of 20% for corporations. developing countries. World Investment Report 2015). Other relevant studies, such as Christian Aid (2008), focusing on revenue losses for developing economies generated by corporate pricing systems, calculate these losses at between $ 120 billion and $ 160 billion a year. Recovering all or part of these losses could make a significant contribution to the mobilization of domestic resources in developing countries.

The importance of science and technology and the availability of solutions focused on innovation, especially to mitigate and solve sustainability problems. recent years, including the Rio + 20 process that led to the 2030 Agenda, FfD3 leading to the Addis Ababa Action Agenda, climate change negotiations under the UNFCCC. United Nations on Climate Change (COP 21) and the Istanbul Action Plan (IAP) for the Least Developed Countries (LDCs). FfD3 giving priority to S & T provision may reflect the collective willingness to address issues of resource availability and funding of a global mechanism to facilitate and support the process.

The LDC Technology Bank grew out of the 2011 Istanbul Action Plan for LDCs and is now an integral part of the 2030 Agenda. The proposed technology bank is seen as a mechanism to facilitate the development of LDCs. Access of LDCs to science, technology and innovation to improve access, acquisition and use of technologies. Turkey will host the headquarters of the Technology Bank. The profile of the activities of this mechanism includes human and institutional capacity building, incubation of technology, intellectual property rights management and contact with the diaspora of LDCs. The feasibility report defining the scope of activities was submitted

To facilitate the implementation of the global indicator framework, all indicators are clbadified by the Inter-agency and Expert Group on SDG Indicators in three levels based on their level of methodological level and availability of data at the global level.

Level 1: Is an internationally established methodology and standards available and data is regularly produced by countries for at least 50% of the countries and population in each region when the indicator is relevant

Level 2: Internationally established methodology and standards are available, but data are not routinely produced by countries.

Level 3: No internationally established methodology or standard is still available for the indicator, but the methodology / standards are being developed or tested.

As of May 11, 2018, the updated level clbadification contains 93 scorers, 72 level 2 indicators and 62 level 3 indicators. Fluctuations in ODA, debt distress, Poor countries, uneven distribution of resources, large gaps in technology and capacity, falling commodity prices have contributed to the worsening of marginalization in poor countries. Global South in recent years. Despite the difficulties, the South has gradually emerged as the engine of the global economic recovery. Knowledge partnerships, the exchange of ideas for development, humanitarian cooperation, the movement of knowledge workers, and collective bargaining positions in multilateral fora have evolved into a global reflection on economic recovery, strengthening of bilateral / regional economic cooperation. efforts to strengthen institutions. SDG 17 imposes a partnership on trade, finance and technology.

– Characteristics of Charkha