Time to rethink the Human Development Index – HDI2.0

The Human Development concept and Index have become staple definitions some 20 years ago. They respond to the need to quantify and analyse situations and progress and have proved tremendously useful in progress assessments. The world has changed significantly over the last two decades and both concept and Index have kept pace with the times, informing not least the MDGs. However, few of us cling to items 20 years old, at a time when consumers/users are expecting to tailor and shape the products they use through social media and networks. In addition new challenges have come into focus, which will determine human development on a global scale either directly or indirectly. For example, greenhouse gas or carbon emissions are highest in the most industrialised nations, but their effect will be felt all over the world – particularly in countries that are less ready to deal with the climate impacts.
This short proposal outlines research to revisit the concept of human development as well as the Human Development Index to shift towards more dynamic, proactive and causal indicators of development.

The current HDI metrics are weighed against the poor and highlight the shortcomings or failings of development instead of focussing on the relative responsibility to achieve it. For example, it is well known that under five mortality is negligible in advanced economies, while it represents a major development challenge in low income countries; monitoring progress is vital in this area but can lead to fatigue, lack of interest and the sense of “the same old story”. Although some countries achieve significant improvements over the years, the HDI under some aspects is well and truly a ranking with the bottom performers frequently feeling “named and shamed”. Furthermore, while the HDI could be employed by activists and citizens to demand more from their governments, often the voices in the poorest performing countries are drowned, not considered or not sufficiently articulate/networked to effect any real impact.

Revisiting the HDI offers an opportunity for “inclusive” development in an age of globalisation. Climate change is a powerful example of the nexus between globalisation and development: emissions in one specific geographic location has global reach. Emissions from the most advanced economies undermine development progress in the least developed countries, which will consequently continue to perform badly on the annual HDI ranking. It may be useful to also rank countries by their pro capita carbon emissions in an effort to shift the development discourse towards apportioning responsibility. This could also engender new policy and funding strategies. An HDI that ranks “Carbon offenders” may enliven national debates and pressure within the worst ranking countries, where civil society are often vocal and at times effect change.

Similarly, the current health financing discussions taking place in the US and Europe may well have implications for future aid availability and the future of preferential trade or tariff agreements as resources need to be spent at home. Hence, in order to front-load the information, it may be of use for example to list the % of children underweight next to the %under weight children. The HDI could be supplemented with an “overweight” measure and this may indicate future health implications and costs – both in advanced economies as well as in developing countries where health concerns like obesity are growing concerns.

The above paragraphs highlights two examples of updating the HDI in a more equitable, contemporary and dynamic way. There are plenty more that are perhaps “softer” and more difficult to quantify. These may include governance, inclusion and other measures which represent the causes rather than the effects of development challenges.

A final area to explore in devising a version 2.0 of the HDI, and this has emerged in conversation with some colleagues, is to corroborate definitions and measures for- and about the people, but also which may be a important to determine UNDP’s effective involvement in development.

Briefs (4): Iran and Nukes – relevant for AIDS?

The global press has documented amply and continuously the antics of Iran and its nuclear programme. A recent blast in Iran which has allegedly killed senior élite Revolutionary Guards and others, was met, in Iran, with accusations of UK, US and Pakistani secret services meddling. Retaliation would be imminent. Strong rhetoric from the re-elected Iranian President is not unknown. However, the latest accusations move the debate to new levels. A focus on military action (proxy or direct) in the Middle East will mean myopia on other “priorities” such as international development or AIDS. Iran’s nuclear stance matters to the US, the UK and the EU – some of the main donors and strategic partners. Re-alignment of priorities and funding may follow. This is not a mathematical certainty but a likely course of action, particularly during years of diminished government revenue and other military expenditures.

Driver: Focus on HIV and AIDS, and development.
Significance: requirement to find alternative funding sources, move towards donor independence
Urgency: Medium to high. Negotiations are ongoing and Iran dishes out threats regularly. Meanwhile the nuclear programme progresses.
Also: consider this as a primer – are there other international political events that are likely to remove attention?

Rwanda joins Commonwealth

On Nov 29, 2009, during the Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting in Trinidad, Rwanda was admitted to the Commonwealth. It is only the second country that has no colonial links to Great Britain to have joined (the other is Mozambique).

Fresh after joining the East African Community in 2007, Rwanda now is part of a nations club that wields some influence and which recognises the great strides made by Rwanda since the 1994 genocide. Once again the personal charisma of President Paul Kagame played no small part in positioning the country on this inclusive path.

Rwanda has a vision and it is setting out to achieving it at almost breakneck speed. Its vision is forward looking and has a “can do” attitude that is the envy of much larger nations. Rwanda aims to become the most advanced country on the continent, wean itself off aid and, in essence, gain true independence and ownership.

It is perhaps surprising that, while Rwanda looks ahead, there is an inkling that the “big four” of the Commonwealth – Britain, Australia, Canada and India – were looking back as they supported Rwanda’s bid. How so? Well, a bit like the beginning of this post, most of this tiny country’s actions are related to its past, to the genocide, and how well it has fared in resuscitating and developing. There is, hence, a feeling that the international community has failed by not intervening in 1994, so now it’s redemption time. And this is fine: there is a strong case for assisting countries on the path to development.

So, Rwanda looks forward to the future; the Commonwealth (and other countries, i.e. the US) are looking to the horrors of the past. With these views the important decisions are made. This leaves a potentially murky and unexplored area: the present. What does this mean? What are we saying? There is overwhelming evidence that Rwanda is doing well and all it can to be inclusive, pro-growth, democratic, fighting corruption, preventing repeats of 1994, and being all-round proactive to achieve development. Some, however would argue that the leadership is strong-handed, top posts are reserved to a select minority, there is limited freedom of speech and that there is a land- and resource-grab in eastern Congo, sponsored by Rwanda. On the eve of Rwanda’s Commonwealth application, the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative reviewed Rwanda’s activities (Rwanda’s Application for Membership of the Commonwealth: Report and Recommendations of the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative. August, 2009), and recommended: “Rwanda does not satisfy the test of Commonwealth values. There are considerable doubts about the commitment of the current regime to human rights and democracy. It has not hesitated to use violence at home or abroad when it has suited it.” This is a scathing summary, and one that should not draw ire from Rwanda supporters but start an important debate about this country. The debate should also examine the past and present role of foreign nations and their role in national and regional politics.

If the present is not explored and understood, in terms of its contribution to the future, the existing visions may have limited scope because they could be obsolete. The present should not remain murky and definitely not taboo. It is as important as the future and the past.

See our previous Rwanda post

Briefs (3): climate change and AIDS?

When climate change mitigation costs hit…
Climate change (CC) awareness has been a long time coming. For years and decades have scientists and pressure groups warned of impending doom. Now, since 2006, the world and its leaders have taken heed and everyone is “going green”. What does CC and the recent shift towards it mean for AIDS and UNAIDS? There has been a technical meeting on the linkages between AIDS and CC (UNAIDS, July 2008), but not an in-depth analysis of the implications for HIV/AIDS and the future climate focus. The costs sustained from CC impact and its impact mitigation will dwarf international development assistance. It is time to think about this now, not when the we realise that the recovery for health and HIV investments takes much longer than expected.

Driver: Focus on HIV and AIDS, and development.
Significance: Though apparent, climate change will take precedence for years to come.
Urgency: High. Act now to prevent future funding and support shortages.
Tasks: Link climate change and HIV and AIDS in a credible manner.
Challenge: funds are diverted to CC interventions.

Briefs (2): The long crisis – impact on AIDS?

The long crisis.
Various agencies have been responsive to the economic crisis and have analysed the possible financial implications for HIV and AIDS programming. Though, most have limited themselves to noting that there is an impact, especially fewer funds for treatment and other interventions.

The crisis appears slowly to be coming to an end (in macro terms and in the most advanced economies), which is good news. Yet, the meaningful translation of the closing crisis to the finances of the average person will take longer. The re-establishment of some sort of financial equilibrium to the average person in low income countries will take even longer. Plus, in times of funding insecurity there will be a major lag time before short-changed AIDS programmes resume full activity. It is important to anticipate the extent of the impact and the nature of the impact, above and beyond the obvious shortages caused by diminished credit and funds.

What does this mean? Well, for example there might be heightened resistance creation among HIV viruses: when drugs are taken intermittently or the full regimen is not followed, then the strains become resistant.

Driver: Impact of economic crisis.
Significance: need to consider the long term implications
Urgency: High. Prevent loss of years of investments – understand that economic recovery is not the same as resolution of health/HIV investment shortages.
Tasks: Identify long term implications of the economic crisis beyond the funding reductions.
Opportunity: focus on cheaper interventions, i.e. proven prevention strategies with long-term benefits.

Briefs (1): Security and long term relevance for HIV/AIDS

Bear all for security – giving up rights for public (or one’s own) security?
Consider this: Manchester Airport is trialling a novel X-ray machine which displays the naked body of travellers, as well as to any concealed items. Travellers preferring not to be subjected to this new technology will be hand-searched by airport staff.
We are increasingly ready to accept intrusions into our privacy and handing over liberties in the interest of promoting our safety and security. This is not new and we have seen it applied to health issues before. For example with SARS and quarantines in the case of swine flu. It is conceivable that the public safety/public health nexus will overlap and the very particular human rights focus that HIV/AIDS benefits from, will be undermined.
As technology progresses and as acceptance of privacy intrusion grows, we will also witness real-time and continuous diagnosis of infections. Speed and accuracy of detection will further promote the apparent need of a “nude “person”, one that is constantly exposed to scrutiny and detection – even for health issues. People preferring privacy and anonymity of their HIV status may be viewed as suspicious.
Driver: Application of rights
Significance:challenge to privacy, boosts to discrimination
Urgency: ongoing concern but growing subtle acceptance of relinquished civil liberty.
Message: slow creep of unintended consequences.
Challenge to human rights and confidentiality leading to state-sponsored discrimination and segregation.
Tasks: identify legislative changes facilitating such directions.

What’s the outlook for Rwanda?

Rwanda is a unique country. Beyond the tragic months of the genocide in 1994, it has witnessed a veritable Phoenix effect; it is now one of the most business-oriented and development savvy countries on the continent. Paul Kagame, Rwanda’s President carries great personal charisma and is credited, by some, as having single-handedly ended the genocide in 1994, to have made the transition from soldier to politician and to be responsible for setting the country on the path towards development, economic progress and integration – by law, at least one third of Parliamentarians must be female. Rwanda heads the African Development Bank and the country’s politicians and dignitaries (not least Paul Kagame) adorn a range of international events, projects and roles. The country has taken on the role of a diplomatic mediator, has become a “donor darling” and had expressed a desire to become the “Singapore of Africa” – a technology hub for the continent¹. Are institutions strong enough to withstand the test of time and leadership changes to continue on this path?

Rwanda is the most densely populated African country, it is land-locked and much of its current revenue derives from agriculture and exports of minerals to Belgium, Germany and China; tourism represents a growing industry both in terms of revenue and employment, and coffee is an increasingly central export. The country’s long term objective is to derive two thirds of its economic growth from industry and services, and one third from agriculture². Plus, the private sector is increasingly able to function as Rwanda implements effective reforms³.

President Kagame has strong personal relationships with world leaders, including the main donor governments as well as the World Bank, despite remaining a strong critic of the UN and its inaction during the genocide. The country relies substantially on foreign aid and manages to attract significant amounts every year. However, President Kagame bets more on investment and trade than on international aid as a means of lifting its citizenry out of poverty. The President is seen by many as a hero who has turned around the country: Time Magazine pits him at number 13 of the 100 most influential people in 2009. He is characterised as “the face of emerging African leadership”.

The fact that Paul Kagame exemplifies the new African leadership – he beats every other African president on the Times 100 list – implies that what happens in Rwanda matters not just to the country and the region, but also to the African continent. It is therefore of importance to assess the country’s future with an eye both to its achievements, but also towards its difficulties. Any leader faces criticisms, and Kagame’s record is tarnished by his repression of a free and independent media, by the erosion of civil liberties, by involvement in regional conflicts (notably with the Democratic Republic of Congo) and by financing proxy rebel groups, to name but the headlines ⁴.

Why does all this matter in the wider context, beyond the confines of Rwanda? Rwanda has been involved for decades in proxy wars, skirmishes and land-grabs with the DRC, for both political and resource reasons. These conflicts have involved several neighbouring countries and have cost scores of lives over the years. Rwanda joined the East African Community in 2007 (originally formed by Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda, and now chaired by President Kagame). Hence what happens in Rwanda affects the EAC by proxy and because the EAC is Rwanda’s gateway to the sea. Ultimately, if Paul Kagame is the face of African leadership, it matters to Sub-Saharan Africa how he runs his country and what means he deploys to achieve his objectives.

1 See for example: “Rwanda Rising”. Jeff Chu, Fast Company March 18, 2009.

2 In 2000, agriculture made up nearly half of Rwanda’s revenues. See for example: “Rwanda Vision 2020” Republic of Rwanda. Ministry of finance and economic planning. July 2000.

3 See for example: “Doing business 2010” International Finance Corporation, September, 2009.

4 See for example: “Rwanda’s Application for Membership of the Commonwealth: Report and Recommendations of the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative” Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative. 2009.

Old ideas (1): AIDS in the City

Some time ago, in the spring of 2007, we were discussing with a client the topic of a scenarios workshop. We had thrown around some ideas and came up with a workable and relevant list of AIDS-related topics to discuss with a diversity of participants. The most interesting concept, however, was to think about HIV and AIDS in inner cities. This was a topic that had been followed by researcher for some time, but had not permeated into the mainstream of analysis and policy.

Why is this important and interesting? For several reasons. Firstly it shows that the notions we hold about the progression of the epidemic can be outdated quickly. We are dealing with a mutable virus and so the strains we are looking at are no the same of 20 years ago. We have to update our thinking about this as well. Second our perceptions of “at risk” populations also needs to change: we always thought of drug users and sex workers, for example, as making up the bulk of the risk groups – a it turns out, social status, race and geography matter, too.

At the time we had proposed to focus on these inner cities the proposal was rejected. Now, life is different and priorities have changed for some agencies, hence it’s again a hot topic.

The key to working on HIV and AIDS effectively on inner cities is to take a comparative approach: woes and concerns in Mumbai may find a solution in Chicago or in Manchester. The experience of one activist group or mayor from Sao Paulo may be relevant to programmes in Abuja. One city is different from another but may share some problems – and solutions.