Africa's development indicators are a worrying sign that progress towards the MDGs is lagging. Unconditional cancellation of all debt, the commitment of greater resources to the continent by rich countries, a reformed international trading system and the voices of African people at the centre of the process will all be essential to reinvigorating progress towards the MDGs, says Charles Mutasa.

It is no secret that many developing countries, donors and non-governmental organizations have made reaching the MDGs their top priority, but as the world reaches the 2005 MDGs review there are worrying signs of stagnation and reversal. Although rapid advances by some countries do show that the MDGs are achievable, Sub-Saharan Africa is yet to mobilise resources, political and financial support to meet specific global challenges, especially the fight against HIV/AIDS.

A 2003 UNDP review of sub-Saharan Africa's social development indicators provides a bleak picture of the region's progress towards the MDGs. The number of Africa's population living on less that $1 a day is increasing. It is also true that while most of the world made significant progress in the fight against hunger during the 1990s, the prevalence of underweight children remained at nearly 50% in South-central Asia and Sub-Saharan Africa.

The debt crisis, unfair international trading practices, tied aid interwoven with endless conditionalities, HIV/AIDS, conflicts, problems associated with economic indiscipline, lack of sustainable democracies and poor governance are among the host of stumbling problems to Africa's ability to attain the MDGs. Nowhere are the signs more ominous than in Sub-Saharan Africa, the world's poorest and least developed region. Africa entered the new millennium with the highest poverty and child mortality rates, and the lowest school enrolment figures in the world.

Looking at Uganda as a case in point, the debt stock soared from US$800million to US$4.3billion in 2003, continuing to be a heavy burden for a population of approximately 26 million. 75% of Uganda's debt is owed to the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. Most African countries, more so Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPCs) graduates, continue to spend more on debt servicing than on health and education.

A number of African countries still need to customize the MDG targets to reflect national circumstances and priorities, which will increase the sense of national ownership and adapt development objectives to the socioeconomic and political realities of each country. For example, countries facing an acute HIV pandemic cannot be expected to achieve the same levels of progress as those not confronting one. In Southern Africa, for instance, there is a severe health crisis, with nine of its member states featuring in the ten African countries with the highest HIV/Aids prevalence rates. Malaria and tuberculosis also continue to wreak havoc in the region, leading to reduced economic productivity, high infant mortality rates and plummeting life expectancy. The problem of insufficient funding and red tape in the release of much-needed donor funds continues to hamstring progress in fighting health and social problems.

One of the problems with the goals is the inconsistency in reporting whether countries are on track to meet the MDGs. UNDP and national MDG reports have shown considerable differences, raising concerns about the reliability and credibility of indicators being used. Global, regional and national frameworks, strategies and processes must be harmonized so that accurate predictions and evidence-based policy decisions can be made.

The outcomes of the G8 on debt, aid and trade have been minimal indeed, failing to meet the desired expectations of many economic justice activists and governments in the South. The UN Millennium Campaign points out that many developing countries are saddled with such high levels of debt that paying off just the annual interest costs more than what is spent on health care and education combined.

While the Scotland G-8 debt deal is a step forward and sets an important precedent in terms of granting a 100% cancellation of debt to all severely indebted poor countries, which is what civic activists have long advocated for over years, the deal only represents one eighth of what Africa needs in terms of debt cancellation, as this means canceling only US $40 billion out of Africa's burgeoning debt stock of over US$330 billion. The $40 billion to be cancelled represents less than 10% of debt cancellation required for poor nations to meet the MDGs in 2015. The plan does not include middle-income countries that are heavily indebted and impoverished. Globally, the 18 countries that qualify immediately represent less than a third of countries (at least 62) that need full cancellation to meet the internationally agreed MDGs.

The G-8 debt agreement does not address the real global power imbalances. The question of creditor-debtor co-responsibility of the South's debt remains unresolved, as issues of odious and illegitimate debts continue to be swept under the carpet. It is not a lasting solution in which all stakeholders - debtors and creditors - have a say. It is just a piecemeal measure that seems to deal with the symptoms of the problems and not the causes.

It is important to note that the MDGs reinforce each other; progress on one front has positive spill-over effects on other variables. For instance, a breakthrough on Goal 8's debt question will definitely lower income poverty and increase household income in Africa which will then facilitate higher school enrolment levels, while better access to clean water reduces the toll of disease, and affects school drop-out rates.

The desire to attain the MDGs among development partners in a given country has had its positive impacts in Africa. In Uganda, for example, bilateral donors are now channeling about half of the country's aid into budgetary support, instead of funding individual projects. This reform gives governments more flexibility in spending decisions, reduces time and paperwork, and helps to align donor programmes with national development priorities. Uganda has in recent years recorded high school enrolment rates, though the quality of education is something still debatable.

In Tanzania, with the MDGs came the concept of donor harmonization, alignment and result based development planning which seems to be yielding results by reducing transaction costs, donor missions per year, corruption and procurement hick-ups.

As global targets the MDGs are as much applicable to countries in conflict or emerging from conflict as they are to countries that are not in the throes of civil unrest. Responses to conflict in Ivory Coast and Sudan's Darfur region demonstrate that the international community has the ability to unite against conflict and its associated ills as long as the political will to fostering a world free of civil unrest is there.

If Africa and other developing regions are to make significant and sustainable progress, far greater resources will have to be generated from all sources - debt relief, overseas development assistance, foreign direct investment, trade, and domestic investment and savings. As the UN Secretary General, Kofi Annan, rightly noted, apart from developing countries setting national strategies for the attainment of MDGs, "we will also need more convincing action from the developed countries to support those strategies by phasing out harmful trade practices, by providing technical assistance, and by increasing both the volume and quality of aid to levels consistent with the goals."

There is need for total unconditional debt cancellation from both multilateral and bilateral donors in order to give Africa a new start and a chance to attain the MDGs. Debt service in Africa continues to tear down schools and clinics without which MDGs will not be attainable.

Creditors and donors need to commit themselves to a timeline on which to fulfil the long overdue 0.7% of their GNP promised at Monterey's Financing for Development Conference. One of the most important challenges regarding the achievement of the MDGs is that co-operation between rich and poor countries must not turn into a recital of broken promises. The need for increased co-operation among donor governments, NGOs, pharmaceutical companies and African states to increase drug accessibility and strengthen health infrastructure cannot be over-emphasized.

Aid needs to have no strings attached; untied aid will help build local capacities in African countries which are a prerequisite to attaining the MDGs. Many a times local human resource capacity remains undeveloped as donors insist on their countrymen coming to work in the name of technical assistance without necessarily building local capacities.

MDGs will only become reality when those living in poverty have their voices heard. A human rights based development approach in which local grassroots people in Africa are the claim holders, holding their governments and donors accountable for their actions and obligations will foster development. In a nutshell, it is crucial for development practitioners to realise and acknowledge that people are not developed but they develop themselves.

The international trade regime needs to be democratized if Africa is to attain the MDGs. The failure of the World Trade Organization meeting in Cancun in September 2003 was a further setback to Africa's development prospects. This has been worsened by the Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) that the European Union is promoting. Trade that removes subsides to European farmers and opens markets for African products is a great stride towards the MDGs in Africa.

There is urgent need to end all World Bank and IMF policies that hinder people's access to food, clean water, shelter, health care, education, and the right to organize. Pursuit of the MDGs could well be undermined in the future, as it has been in the past, if there is no change in structural adjustment policies. These policies include user fees, privatization and economic austerity programs forced upon recipient countries in the south, Africa being the chief victim.

Last but not least, political will, social action and the ability to galvanise resources for the MDGs is key. Partnership between the North and the South must be genuine, local participation and ownership of development at grassroots levels should not be cosmetic but real and meaningful. Attaining the MDGs require radical structural, institutional and policy changes at national, regional and global levels. Half baked solutions and measures will only leave Africa in deeper poverty.

* Charles Mutasa is a research and policy analyst and currently the acting coordinator of the African Forum and Network on Debt and Development (Afrodad).

* Please send comments to