By Javier Surasky
Before
delving into specific matters, the first thing that has caught my attention is
a change in language observed between both documents: while the AAAA
expresses itself through predominantly multilateral and technical logic, the
Commitment does so by orienting itself toward the production of a geopolitical
and normative agenda. This reflects how the Financing for Development (FfD)
conferences adapt to contexts: the Addis Ababa one was guided by the technical
spirit derived from the construction of the SDGs, while the Sevilla one is
being impacted by the Pact for the Future, the UN80 initiative, and the current
processes of reconfiguring international power.
This
general language change can be seen in different elements:
- In the AAAA, we have a
marked predominance of technocratic/neutral language, with a focus on
implementation instruments such as financing, cooperation, and development
of statistics oriented toward increasing the effectiveness of the
financial system without deeply questioning its foundations.
- The Commitment shows the
use of much more political and evaluative language oriented toward
promoting fiscal justice, structural reforms and financial architecture,
incorporating actors and open disputes over power as part of the problems
facing Development financing, ultimately adopting rules and principles on
matters such as equity, AI governance, and creation of new Development
indicators.
In
sum, Addis prioritizes the efficiency and coherence of the means, while
Sevilla questions the ends and structures. Addis focuses on increasing aid
effectiveness, whereas Sevilla is built upon the current crisis of legitimacy
in the multilateral order.
As a
result of this change, while the AAAA appears to identify the resource deficit
as the primary problem to address, the Commitment takes a step closer to the
political by identifying multiple systemic crises, including governance and
trust in multilateralism, as the root of the failures.
However,
this change should not lead to confusion. There is no "rupture"
between the AAAA and the Commitment, but rather a shift in the center of
attention of debate, which moves from good practices and effectiveness
toward the dispute over the fair distribution of financial resources for
promoting Development.
Having
clarified this crucial point, we can create a preliminary list of themes that
appear in both the AAAA and the Commitment: those that were in the AAAA but
were left out of the document adopted in Sevilla, and those that this new
document includes but were not included in the Addis Ababa one. A comparative
table offers us a simplified entry point to the result of this exercise
(paragraph references where each topic is considered are in parentheses):
|
Topic |
Addis |
Sevilla |
Included in |
|
2030 Agenda and
SDGs |
✔️ (2, 11, 19) |
✔️ (2, 5, 6, 13, 26, 34) |
Both |
|
Sustainable development |
✔️ (1-3, 11, 19) |
✔️ (2, 4, 5, 13) |
Both |
|
Taxation |
⚠️ (22-24) |
✔️ (27c-j, 28.a-h) |
Both (broader in Sevilla) |
|
Resource mobilization |
✔️ (20-21) |
✔️ (26-27) |
Both |
|
Fiscal governance |
⚠️ (18) |
✔️ (3, 27.a-b.) |
Both (broader in Sevilla) |
|
Environment |
✔️ (17, 62-63) |
✔️ (9-10, 27.h,
47-48) |
Both |
|
Private sector
(partnerships) |
✔️ (35-39) |
✔️ (31-33) |
Both |
|
SMEs |
✔️ (38) |
✔️ (31.h-m) |
Both |
|
Remittances (goal to reduce cost to
<3%) |
✔️ (40) |
✔️ (33.o) |
Both |
|
Peace
and post-conflict consolidation |
✔️ (18-19) |
⚠️ (Preamble) |
Both (broader in Addis) |
|
Gender equality |
✔️ (6, 21, 41) |
✔️ (11, 27.g) |
Both |
|
International trade / WTO |
✔️ (80-83) |
✔️ (42-43.) |
Both |
|
Access to science and technology |
✔️ (123-124) |
✔️ (58-59) |
Both |
|
ODA critique and "0.7 commitment" |
✔️ (50-55) |
✔️ (35-36) |
Both |
|
Development of development measurement
beyond GDP |
✔️ (55) |
✔️ (36.d, 40.c) |
Both |
|
Tax
cooperation and the fight against illicit flows |
✔️ (23-27) |
✔️ (28-29) |
Both |
|
South-South and Triangular cooperation |
✔️ (56-57) |
✔️ (35, 36.e-h) |
Both |
|
Intergovernmental follow-up |
✔️ (127-131: With schedule and forums) |
⚠️ (61: Proposes
ECOSOC forum) |
Both (broader in Addis) |
|
Debt relief and
sustainability |
✔️ (94-102) |
✔️ (47-51) |
Both |
|
Digital currencies/payments |
⚠️ (39) |
✔️ (33.o, 44.b, 59j) |
Both (broader in Sevilla) |
|
Philanthropy |
✔️ (121-122) |
❌ (33.o:
Only one mention in a list) |
Addis only |
|
Fossil fuel subsidies |
✔️ (31) |
❌ |
Addis only |
|
Global financial
reform |
❌ (105-106, 109) |
✔️ (52-56) |
Sevilla only |
|
Artificial Intelligence |
❌ |
✔️ (59.i-k, 61.e-f) |
Sevilla only |
|
UN Reform |
❌ |
✔️ (7, 40.b, 52) |
Sevilla only |
|
Pact for the Future |
❌ |
✔️ (6, 10, 59.k) |
Sevilla only |
Source: author's elaboration
Following this first
approach, in a forthcoming entry we will analyze in greater detail the
treatment given to some of the topics included in the table, bringing our
magnifying glass a bit closer to both compared documents to determine whether
countries are fulfilling the first promise they made at the First Conference on
Financing for Development in 2002: “We, the Heads of State and Government (...)
have resolved to address the challenges of financing for development around the
world, particularly in developing countries. Our goal is to eradicate poverty,
achieve sustained economic growth and promote sustainable development as we
advance to a fully inclusive and equitable global economic system" (Monterrey
Consensus, paragraph 1).