The Mdgs Are Norms Or National Economic Planning Targets?

980 WordsApr 29, 20164 Pages
There has been debate among scholars on whether the MDGs are norms or national economic planning targets. Weiss (2013) argues that “norms can be defined quantitatively to mean the pattern of behavior that is commonplace” as well as “a pattern of behavior that is not but should be followed in accordance with values” (p.48). Finnemore and Sikkink (1998) claim that “norms are clear and specific, rather than ambiguous or complex, and those that have been around for a while are more likely to be effective” (p.907). In addition, norms that are “widely accepted in diplomatic discussions and treaties” are more likely to be effective. The MDGs are considered an anti-poverty and a vehicle to communicate and promote the objective of ending global poverty since they refer directly to concrete human conditions which people can empathize with, they have quantified time-bound targets that can be monitored, and comprised of a short list of only eight goals (Fukuda-Parr & Hulme, 2011). Furthermore, Fukuda-Parr and Greenstein (2011) argue that MDGs are norms since they were adopted through a norm-setting process agreed upon by the 189 nations as well as numerical targets that make the objectives actionable. On the other hand, the MDGs have been greatly criticized for lagging behind in human rights priorities which in include the following: “omission of principles of equality and participation that is a cross-cutting principle of all human rights, scope that does not reflect the full scope of
Open Document