Working with faith groups: What can donor agencies learn from Germany?

Graham Gordon is Head of CAFOD’s Policy Team. Here, he reflects on what development agencies can learn from a new strategy published by the German Development Ministry for working with faith groups in development.

Graham Gordon is Head of Policy at CAFOD

Religious beliefs and practices are complex and often intertwined with culture. Faced with this complexity, many international donors tend to underplay religion’s role in development, or to use faith groups as instruments for advancing their agendas or reaching the most remote groups.

BMZ, the German Development Ministry, seems to be making a genuine attempt to do things differently and to engage with the complexity and tensions. Earlier in 2016, it published a strategy on working with religious communities as partners for development.

Find out more about CAFOD’s Policy work

The political drivers of the strategy are clear: the worldwide rise in religiously-motivated violence; increased migration to Europe and new migrant communities with strong religious beliefs and practices; and the rise of anti-immigrant political rhetoric across Europe and countries such as Australia and the US.

However, the strategy cannot simply be seen in the political context of migration and extremism, but also as a genuine attempt to think more deeply about the role of religion in development.

What can other donor agencies learn from Germany’s approach? 

World Humanitarian Summit: CAFOD analysis of outcomes and next steps

By Anne Street, Head of Humanitarian Policy at CAFOD

Earlier this week, the first-ever World Humanitarian Summit took place in Istanbul. Representatives from the across the aid sector – donors, UN agencies, the Red Cross, NGOs, private sector, academics and high-profile aid bodies – were all in attendance, alongside faith-based organisations including CAFOD and other Caritas agencies.

One of the real positive outcomes of the World Humanitarian Summit was the success of the localisation agenda. This is something CAFOD have been working on for a number of years, advocating for local actors – who are first on the scene when there is a natural disaster or emergency – to receive a much greater share of worldwide humanitarian spending.

How can investors support the Sustainable Development Goals?

A guest blog by Jo Mountford, Responsible Investment Officer at ShareAction

The Sustainable Development Goals, ratified by 193 countries at the UN Sustainable Development Summit in September 2015, lay out an undeniably ambitious plan for human development to be achieved by 2030. Although it was governments who signed up to deliver the Sustainable Development Goals, the UN recognises that it will be impossible to achieve these Goals without action by many stakeholders, working in partnership with each other. Of these stakeholders, the role of the private sector is vital. Many corporates have already begun making plans to contribute to the achievement of the Goals; indeed, some of them will rely on the strategies of major corporations. The achievement of Goal 8, for example (‘Promote inclusive and sustainable economic growth, employment and decent work for all’) will require the private sector to create opportunities for employment, and making sure that their employees are well-treated and able to earn a decent living.

The Sustainable Development Goals and Laudato Si’

Next week, world leaders at the UN will formally adopt 17 new Sustainable Development Goals. The SDGs build on the Millennium Development Goals with the aim of eradicating extreme poverty, tackling inequality and taking action on climate change as part of wide-ranging commitments to sustainable development.

Earlier this year, Pope Francis released Laudato Si’, an encyclical on integral human development which adds to the Catholic Church’s body of teaching. Laudato Si’ is unique in its intention to influence international politics and the multilateral agreements they produce. As a major UN outcome, how do the SDGs meet the challenge set by Laudato Si’?

What if? Scenario planning for post-2015

CAFOD has written a discussion paper on potential scenarios for 2015. Download it here and share your thinking in the comments section below >> What if Scenario Planning discussion paper

Negotiations across three processes at the UN are now in full swing. 2015 was always going to be a busy year for multilateralism, with the Financing for Development conference in July, the Post-2015 Summit in September, and the UNFCCC COP 21 in December. Big outstanding questions remain on how this year is going to deliver ambition across multiple fronts.

Which scenario do you think is most likely?

Digesting ‘Food for thought’ – the post-2015 roadmap

Following informal discussions on modalities for the final phase of negotiations on the post-2015 agenda, the Kenyan and Irish co-facilitators have released a ‘food for thought’ paper which outlines the shape of the year ahead. It’s framed as a think-piece and so open to change, but holds some important jigsaw pieces. While outstanding questions are still to be answered, it nonetheless allows us to start to piece together the puzzle of 2015. January to June is the final window to influence, before a series of high level summits decide our global development trajectory for the coming decades. Below is an analysis of the key points.

Updated roadmap with confirmed dates – 09/12/2014

Accountability in the post-2015 agenda: from the known to the unknown

A common mantra in educational theory is ‘moving from the known to the unknown’. Popularised by psychologist Herbert Spencer it posits that, in approaching a complex subject, individuals are largely influenced by what is already known to them from experience of their immediate environment. Effective learning starts with the concrete, moving to the abstract.

Could this simple principle be applied to the accountability framework for the post-2015 development agenda?

There has been a concerted call for the monitoring and accountability framework to be an integral part of the Post-2015 development agenda and not an after-thought.  But the debate is still polarised on what sort of accountability framework will deliver for people in poverty. Should there be a totally new accountability framework, or should we start from the known and move to the unknown?

Comment on the DCED Proposal of a Business Environment Indicator for the Post-2015 Framework

Should an indicator that measures improvements in national business environments be included in the post-2015 framework? This is a question that the Donor Committee for Enterprise Development (DCED) has recently posed. They have proposed 4 options for such an indicator.

The world is currently waiting to see whether the Open Working Group (OWG) proposed set of global goals and targets will be reopened for negotiation. The indicators, on the other hand, should not be agreed through a process of intergovernmental negotiation. Indicators need specific technical expertise and are too complex to become political footballs. The UN Statistical Commission have indicated through their briefing note that they will have a role to play in convening this process, and will include relevant input from member states and other stakeholders.

In this blog I specifically comment on the DCED proposal drawing on CAFOD’s experience and research on what a pro-poor business environment looks like.

How [not] to run a consultation: lessons from the Data Revolution

This is a joint blog by Neva Frecheville, Lead Analyst on Post-2015 Development at CAFOD and Savio Carvalho, Senior Advisor, Campaigning on International Development & Human Rights at Amnesty International

The groundswell of interest and support for a new post-2015 agenda has been dependent on the global conversation that informs and influences governments and the United Nations (UN) in its endeavour to come up with goals to replace the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs).

Time after time, civil society voices have added new ideas, reminded government of their existing obligations, such as human rights, and pushed the boundaries of ambition. Most governments around the world now accept that the new Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) should be universal, address inequality both within and between countries, and adopt an integrated approach to environment, society and economy, leaving no one behind.

From the High Level Panel’s whirlwind global tour, to the UN’s thematic and national consultations, from the MyWorld survey to the World We Want platform, to civil society briefings with the OWG co-chairs, outreach webinars and roundtables you would have thought that enough cumulative experience has been built by the UN to know what makes for an effective, inclusive and participatory process of consultation.

Apparently not.

Same story, different process.

The IPCC publishes its synthesis report – but what does it mean for development?

“Climate change impacts are projected to slow down economic growth, make poverty reduction more difficult, further erode food security, and prolong existing and create new poverty traps, the latter particularly in urban areas and emerging hotspots of hunger.”

That was the grim message today from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) – considered the world’s leading authority on the subject – as it published its synthesis report, pulling together the findings of the three reports it’s published since September 2013.

Join CAFOD in taking action on climate change