|
| ||||
| ||||
| ||||
Showing posts with label FBOs. Show all posts
Showing posts with label FBOs. Show all posts
Thursday, 30 July 2020
Humanity Care: UPGs and SDGs 8
Wednesday, 15 January 2020
Humanity Care: UPGs and SDGs 7
|
| ||
|
Wednesday, 16 December 2015
Global Integrators--23
GI Partnership:
At the Global Tables and in the Global Trenches
At the Global Tables and in the Global Trenches
Image from the UN's Partnership for SDGs website
We think that the time is coming for a diversity of colleagues to join together intentionally, visibly, and practically on behalf of global integration (GI). GI put simply is how we skillfully integrate our lives and values on behalf of the issues facing humanity. Likewise we think that the time is coming for colleagues to carefully reflect and act on what it means to be good global learners-practitioners--to seriously consider what it means to be what we are calling global integrators (GI-People).
*****
the MC Updates and the GI Updates.
.....
You can make comments at the end of this entry.
See also our GI Facebook page to
comment onthe MC Updates and the GI Updates.
.....
The material below is from Staying Current-Navigating the News
(Global Integration Update, December 2015, Personal Reflections).
*****
(Global Integration Update, December 2015, Personal Reflections).
*****
To
say “Your side of the boat is sinking” makes no sense in view of the fact that
we are all passengers on the same precarious global boat. We must all do our
part to make sure that the Sustainable Development Goals do not lapse into the
Fatigue-able Development Goals or worse, morph into a set of Sustainable
Survival Goals.
.
We believe that a variety of people must be at the “global tables” in
order to help shape and influence agendas, policies, and action in the “global
trenches.” That includes people from all countries, sectors, and faith
backgrounds, who are informed and skilled, and dedicated to the common good.
The UN’s 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (Transforming
Our World) explicitly encourages such diverse and competent involvement and
encapsulates it in Sustainable Development Goal 17: “Strengthen the means of
implementation and revitalize the global partnership for sustainable
development.” (see also the partnership examples and updates at Partnerships
Engagement for the Sustainable Development Goals)
.
One of the main challenges in working internationally [in GI] is how
best to convey important perspectives and arrive at consensus given the
diversity of people/organizations around the world who are involved or want to
be involved in global affairs. This challenge includes how to make room at the
global table and in the global trenches for perspectives/agendas that are
influenced by one’s own national, sectoral, institutional, and/or personal
interests as well as one’s world view (and which may or may not contribute
towards the common good).
It is often pointed out by people of faith that the Agenda is highly secularized and does not include God and dependence on God in the picture. While this is true, it can be argued that this “omission” is a necessary reality given humanity’s diversity and the need to find common ground (vs it being humanistic arrogance or anti-religious). We believe it is important to understand, apply, and critique the Agenda (just like other global efforts/affairs) according to one’s own world view and beliefs-values. Our CORE Member Care weblog is currently dealing with these issues, as part of the “Global Integrators” series. Two of the main assertions are the importance of personal transformation for social transformation and the importance of moral development for sustainable development.
The Agenda in our view is a crucial rallying point for the world community to truly make a difference on the horrific conditions in which so many fellow humans live. Two stats in particular come to our minds: one billion urban slum dwellers; 1.5 billion people living in settings exposed to violence and conflict that threaten their physical and mental integrity. There are many more stats like these of course that shine light on conditions of great need, vulnerability, and exploitation in our world, including forced migration, human trafficking, gender-based violence, gender inequality, maternal health and safety, education, corruption, and many other areas addressed by the Agenda.
Is the Agenda part of some conspiracy to weaken national sovereignty, undermine one’s freedom or faith, or usher in an authoritarian world order? Not in our view. Which is not to say however that this Agenda, like similar global efforts, should not be carefully monitored and critiqued, including the extent that it goes after the systemic influences/structures that prop up global injustices and inequities. And which is not to say that the Agenda, like any good thing, could not be somehow high-jacked for ill-intentions. Keep in mind that the Agenda is NOT a legally binding document or treaty, or something being forced on people or governments. It certainly has moral weight and major influence (and so it should) but it is fundamentally a voluntary set of consensually derived aspirational goals in light of the serious issues facing humanity-planet.
Having just come back from a trip that included connecting with urban refuges in the Middle East and the poor in Africa—people in desperate situations—we frankly do not have much patience for armchair criticisms that trivialize or denigrate the work of the humanitarian-development sector. We appreciate and affirm the combined efforts of the UN, governmental, and civil society sectors and its dedicated personnel who take risks and make sacrifices often at great personal cost. We do however appreciate informed critiques (including our own!) and know that there is much room for improvement and at times for confrontation within the humanitarian-development sector. (see the World Humanitarian Summit website for many examples, including the September 2015 synthesis report Restoring Humanity: Global Voices Calling for Action)
It is often pointed out by people of faith that the Agenda is highly secularized and does not include God and dependence on God in the picture. While this is true, it can be argued that this “omission” is a necessary reality given humanity’s diversity and the need to find common ground (vs it being humanistic arrogance or anti-religious). We believe it is important to understand, apply, and critique the Agenda (just like other global efforts/affairs) according to one’s own world view and beliefs-values. Our CORE Member Care weblog is currently dealing with these issues, as part of the “Global Integrators” series. Two of the main assertions are the importance of personal transformation for social transformation and the importance of moral development for sustainable development.
The Agenda in our view is a crucial rallying point for the world community to truly make a difference on the horrific conditions in which so many fellow humans live. Two stats in particular come to our minds: one billion urban slum dwellers; 1.5 billion people living in settings exposed to violence and conflict that threaten their physical and mental integrity. There are many more stats like these of course that shine light on conditions of great need, vulnerability, and exploitation in our world, including forced migration, human trafficking, gender-based violence, gender inequality, maternal health and safety, education, corruption, and many other areas addressed by the Agenda.
Is the Agenda part of some conspiracy to weaken national sovereignty, undermine one’s freedom or faith, or usher in an authoritarian world order? Not in our view. Which is not to say however that this Agenda, like similar global efforts, should not be carefully monitored and critiqued, including the extent that it goes after the systemic influences/structures that prop up global injustices and inequities. And which is not to say that the Agenda, like any good thing, could not be somehow high-jacked for ill-intentions. Keep in mind that the Agenda is NOT a legally binding document or treaty, or something being forced on people or governments. It certainly has moral weight and major influence (and so it should) but it is fundamentally a voluntary set of consensually derived aspirational goals in light of the serious issues facing humanity-planet.
Having just come back from a trip that included connecting with urban refuges in the Middle East and the poor in Africa—people in desperate situations—we frankly do not have much patience for armchair criticisms that trivialize or denigrate the work of the humanitarian-development sector. We appreciate and affirm the combined efforts of the UN, governmental, and civil society sectors and its dedicated personnel who take risks and make sacrifices often at great personal cost. We do however appreciate informed critiques (including our own!) and know that there is much room for improvement and at times for confrontation within the humanitarian-development sector. (see the World Humanitarian Summit website for many examples, including the September 2015 synthesis report Restoring Humanity: Global Voices Calling for Action)
Excerpts from Transforming Our World (September 2015)
We finish with some core quotes from the Agenda that relate to
partnership—to encourage us all as we seek to work together in GI at the global
tables and in the global trenches.
.
.
“We are determined to mobilize the means required to implement
this Agenda through a revitalised Global Partnership for Sustainable
Development, based on a spirit of strengthened global solidarity, focussed in
particular on the needs of the poorest and most vulnerable and with the
participation of all countries, all stakeholders and all people.” (Preamble)
“The scale and ambition of the new Agenda requires a revitalized Global Partnership to ensure its implementation. We fully commit to this. This Partnership will work in a spirit of global solidarity, in particular solidarity with the poorest and with people in vulnerable situations. It will facilitate an intensive global engagement in support of implementation of all the Goals and targets, bringing together Governments, the private sector, civil society, the United Nations system and other actors and mobilizing all available resources.” (paragraph 39)
"We the Peoples" are the celebrated opening words of the UN Charter. It is "We the Peoples" who are embarking today on the road to 2030. Our journey will involve Governments as well as Parliaments, the UN system and other international institutions, local authorities, indigenous peoples, civil society, business and the private sector, the scientific and academic community – and all people. Millions have already engaged with, and will own, this Agenda. It is an Agenda of the people, by the people, and for the people – and this, we believe, will ensure its success.” (paragraph 52)
“The scale and ambition of the new Agenda requires a revitalized Global Partnership to ensure its implementation. We fully commit to this. This Partnership will work in a spirit of global solidarity, in particular solidarity with the poorest and with people in vulnerable situations. It will facilitate an intensive global engagement in support of implementation of all the Goals and targets, bringing together Governments, the private sector, civil society, the United Nations system and other actors and mobilizing all available resources.” (paragraph 39)
"We the Peoples" are the celebrated opening words of the UN Charter. It is "We the Peoples" who are embarking today on the road to 2030. Our journey will involve Governments as well as Parliaments, the UN system and other international institutions, local authorities, indigenous peoples, civil society, business and the private sector, the scientific and academic community – and all people. Millions have already engaged with, and will own, this Agenda. It is an Agenda of the people, by the people, and for the people – and this, we believe, will ensure its success.” (paragraph 52)
*****
Note for this weblog entry:
We also want to mention the need to address global injustices and global inequities related to the current global governance systems--a central issue which relates to but is not sufficiently addressed by SDG 10: "Reduce inequality within and between countries." For example with regards to health, consider this perspective: "Power asymmetry and global social norms limit the range of choice and constrain action on health inequity; these limitations are reinforced by systemic global governance dysfunctions and require vigilance across all policy arenas....Global governance for health must be rooted in commitments to global solidarity and shared responsibility; sustainable and healthy development for all requires a global economic and political system that serves a global community of healthy people on a healthy planet. " (The Lancet-University of Oslo Commission on Global Governance for Health, The Lancet, Feb. 2014, p. 5)
We also want to mention the need to address global injustices and global inequities related to the current global governance systems--a central issue which relates to but is not sufficiently addressed by SDG 10: "Reduce inequality within and between countries." For example with regards to health, consider this perspective: "Power asymmetry and global social norms limit the range of choice and constrain action on health inequity; these limitations are reinforced by systemic global governance dysfunctions and require vigilance across all policy arenas....Global governance for health must be rooted in commitments to global solidarity and shared responsibility; sustainable and healthy development for all requires a global economic and political system that serves a global community of healthy people on a healthy planet. " (The Lancet-University of Oslo Commission on Global Governance for Health, The Lancet, Feb. 2014, p. 5)
Thursday, 29 October 2015
Global Integrators--20
Globe-Bael and Globe-Babel
New Concepts and Old Cautions
for Global Integrators
for Global Integrators
Note: Want to add comments and resources?
You can do so at the end of this entry and on our new Facebook page
for the Member Care Updates and the Global Integration Updates.
You can do so at the end of this entry and on our new Facebook page
for the Member Care Updates and the Global Integration Updates.
Toren van Babel, Joost de Momper, circa 1600
We think that the time is coming for a diversity of colleagues to join
together intentionally, visibly, and practically on behalf of global integration (GI).
GI put simply is how we skillfully integrate our lives and values on behalf of
the issues facing humanity. Likewise we think that the time is coming for
colleagues to carefully reflect and act on what it means to
be good global learners-practitioners--to seriously consider
what it means to be what we are calling global integrators (GI-People).
*****
I want to begin with a brief acknowledgment about some new GI concepts, encapsulated in new terms. I have tried to craft several global-related terms in recent months to describe some of the key processes, issues, and directions we are facing
in the world community and as global integrators. (hopefully not global-ish gibberish)
I am with the world community in its sincere efforts to resolutely go globable (globe-able) on behalf of the
world’s growing globeails (globe-ails). We yearn to be able
to address all ails—to act on the moral imperative to skillfully scale up our
global efforts for wellbeing for all people and our planet. So I am in, and I encourage all global integrators to be in too.
Nonetheless I have two cautions, which I share from my perspective as
a practicing Christian and a clinical psychologist. They are the Bael and the
Babel dimensions (metaphors-realities both reflecting selfishness) that affect global progress. Please note
that my thoughts are still in formation as I try to connect my world view with
involvement in areas like global mental health and sustainable development.
1. Going Globael (Globe-Bael). Bael is a metaphor I am using that is derived from a major god/idol
mentioned frequently In the Old Testament, Bael. Among other monstrosities, Bael
“required” child sacrifice in order to be placated. Bael was a stumbling block for the Jewish
nation (and other nations) and the Bael cult/religion led to some severe
consequences (such as Divine judgment and exile) according to Old Testament
accounts.
Bael for me represents evil. Globael represents global evil. It is the
ubiquitous spread of evil that undermines even our best efforts to help humanity.
Evil, like virtue, is resilient too. It
does not just go away by well-meaning people working on wellbeing for all
people. Some examples, broadly speaking, which reflect our globails
(globe-ails) and which ultimately exploit people and our planet include 7 C's: Crime
(including disregard for the rule of law and human dignity), Corruption (the
abuse of power for personal gain), Consumerism (including its devastating effects
on poverty and planetary boundaries), Conflict (including its massive negative impact of human security, state-building, and livelihoods), Calamity (natural disasters), Conscience-rationalization
(including complacency and self-justification), and last but not least, binding it all together: Çelfishness (that is, selfishness--with some linguistic license). Bael
is alive and wael.
2. Going Globabel (Globe-Babel). Babel refers to a city and its tower in the Book of Genesis. The
account tells of many people coming together in one place whose ambition
was “to build for ourselves a city, and
make a tower whose top will reach into heaven, and let us make for ourselves a
name; lest we be scattered abroad over the face of the whole earth” (Gen. 11:
4). God intervenes (v. 6) because “they are one people, and they all have the
same language…and now nothing which they purpose to do will be impossible for
them.” I am frankly not clear what this is all about and the connection between
what seems to be an incredibly ambitious (creative?) human effort and its
propensity to bring harm/evil on humanity and to greatly displease God/be at
odds with God’s purposes for humanity. So I may be wrong, but it would seem to me that the main issue was that they were seeking
their own welfare apart from the welfare of others and God’s purposes. And ultimately, leaving God out of the picture. So once again, perhaps binding it all together, is selfishness.
Babel is thus a metaphor for me of humanity, well-intentioned or
otherwise, seeking its own welfare (perhaps arrogantly?) to the exclusion of others and God. That is not how life is intended to work, from a Christian perspective.
Rather connecting with others and cultivating a relationship with God is central as is a humble acknowledgement of one’s
need for God—at all levels of society. Perhaps Babel could also be
metaphorically understood as disciplinary or national towers that grow more
vertically than horizontally--self-serving silos at the expense of
multi-disciplinary and international efforts on behalf of humanity and the
planet. Either way, Babel is thus a mixed
term at best for me and a reality to avoid. Don’t dabble with Babel.
Going Doxological
So are we missing something essential by not explicitly acknowledging the undermining reality of evil and the underlying
reality of God, as we are “going globable on behalf of our growing globails”? Sure! I am all for supporting human efforts to do good. I see it
as the imago Dei at work within the missio
Dei, regardless of whether one believes in these things or not. Humans
do good. Yet I think humans do better when they include and honor God in the
process. And more specifically I think we can do much better at “transforming
our world” (e.g. the United Nations 2030
Agenda for Sustainable Development, Sept. 2015) and “restoring humanity”
(e.g. the World Humanitarian Summit’s Global
Voices Calling for Action, Sept. 2015) if God is included and honored in
our efforts and if we started with transformation and restoration in our own hearts. The world will not be a better place unless "better people" make it so.
What in fact would it mean to “include and honor God” especially given
the diversity of worldviews and faith/non-faith perspectives in the world
community? Let me answer this query in terms of three "levels: the collective heart level, the collective pragmatic level, and the personal level for me.
At the heart level it would mean this: People respectfully appreciate others’ perspectives/worldviews, while also having the freedom to sensitively share their own, and to include/integrate their beliefs/values into the efforts for transformation and restoration. At the pragmatic level it would mean acknowledging and including faith-based organizations intentionally in UN efforts for wellbeing—and vice versa. This is not easy--getting everyone together (within the diverse faith-based sector itself, not to mention civil society, the academy, the private sector, and the UN system) to work cooperatively.
For some more perspectives and current examples related to the heart and pragmatic levels, see the article on the United Nations Interagency Task Force for Engaging with Faith-Based Organizations for Sustainable Development (aka UN Task Force on Religion and Development, 6 July 2015, Inter Press Service).” See also the training/interactive event to be held in Turin, Italy in November 2015, “Engaging with Faith-Based Organizations and Communities in Development and Humanitarian Work” (UN Strategic Learning Exchange). See also our special Global Integration Update from August 2015 on Faith-Based Partners in Transformation.
At the heart level it would mean this: People respectfully appreciate others’ perspectives/worldviews, while also having the freedom to sensitively share their own, and to include/integrate their beliefs/values into the efforts for transformation and restoration. At the pragmatic level it would mean acknowledging and including faith-based organizations intentionally in UN efforts for wellbeing—and vice versa. This is not easy--getting everyone together (within the diverse faith-based sector itself, not to mention civil society, the academy, the private sector, and the UN system) to work cooperatively.
For some more perspectives and current examples related to the heart and pragmatic levels, see the article on the United Nations Interagency Task Force for Engaging with Faith-Based Organizations for Sustainable Development (aka UN Task Force on Religion and Development, 6 July 2015, Inter Press Service).” See also the training/interactive event to be held in Turin, Italy in November 2015, “Engaging with Faith-Based Organizations and Communities in Development and Humanitarian Work” (UN Strategic Learning Exchange). See also our special Global Integration Update from August 2015 on Faith-Based Partners in Transformation.
On a personal level there
is another term that points me, a developing global integrator practicing Christian spirituality, in a helpful direction: globalleluia (globe-Alleluia). This is yet another new term and it refers to having an underlying doxological motive and goal in one's global life. It is knowing,
praising, honouring, and depending on God as we work globally. It’s ad majorem Dei gloriam. It’s, well, one of my favorite words that rolled off my tongue from my heart not to long ago: alleluYahweh. Praise to the One whom no greater being can be conceived (to paraphrase Anselm). “For from Him and through
Him and to Him are all things. To Him be the glory forever.” (Romans 11:36). GloballeluYahweh
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)