Back to basics

SRI Lanka is facing a mixed scorecard with regard to its progress in achieving Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), according to the latest Asian Development Bank (ADB) report. This brings into focus new aspects of the development debate and serious questions as to whether the country’s economic growth is happening in an equitable and sustainable manner.

The ADB report has found that out of 21 broader goals, Sri Lanka has progressed to an “early achiever” on 11 of those whilst being on track on four goals. On the two aspects of forest cover and CO2 emissions, Sri Lanka is regressing and on four goals Sri Lanka’s progress is slow.

The report points out that ADB’s direct support for MDGs in Sri Lanka, which generally comes out more favourably on human development indicators than its sub-region, was more toward MDG 7 (sustainable economic policies), and its support for the education sector went to higher levels of education, assisting MDG 1 (full employment) and MDG 3 (gender parity in all levels of education).

From the total amount of funds approved, 21% has been assigned for water supply and sanitation in Sri Lanka while the progress on this front has also been on-track.

The Sri Lankan Government often uses the MDG as a measure for putting the island ahead of its neighbours and to show sustainable and equitable development. However, poor education, better nutrition among children under five years of age and environmental conservation has placed fresh challenges in recent years.

Adoption of the MDGs, which the United Nations announced in 2001, by governments in Asia and the Pacific offered great promise for focusing attention on the poor and accelerating socioeconomic development. Among the eight MDGs are targets to halve the number of people living in extreme poverty, attain universal primary education, and promote environmental sustainability. Despite the importance of these worthy goals, critics insist that the measures are too little and they only focus on the lowest possible steps that could be taken by respective governments.

In the case of Sri Lanka, massive subsidies, free healthcare and education as well as programmes such as Samurdhi show that handouts are not only popular but necessary. Recent estimates by the Samurdhi Authority showed that as many as 15,000 families were recipients, though the Government defended the numbers by saying that they included loans for self-employment.

Inadequate monitoring and assessment of programs such as Divi Neguma, disregard for corruption and politicisation within the poverty alleviation system along with unclear policies, red tape and overlapping of programs have all been highlighted as reasons for Sri Lanka’s sustainability agenda becoming semi-derailed. Environmental degradation from impractical projects and illegal activities has also risen during the last few years, which has increased conservation challenges.

To top it all off, the Government’s lopsided taxation policies, which give massive tax concessions to foreign investments such as casinos but still implement high taxes on essentials, also place pressure on poorer members of the public, making matters worse. As the Opposition recently pointed out, losses at State-Owned Enterprises, uncontrolled public expenditure, loan dependent growth and non-transparent policies have all increased income disparity in the country.

Turning back attention to the MDGs is a great way to get back to basics but it is unlikely to happen.