Benchmarking and Blame Games: Exploring the Contestation of the Millennium Development Goals

Liam Simon Clegg

doi:10.1017/S0260210515000406

Benchmarking and Blame Games: Exploring the Contestation of the Millennium Development Goals

Liam Simon Clegg

Politics

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Abstract

Benchmarking has long been a central component of the global development industry, with the most prominent recent initiative being the Millennium Development Goal (MDG) framework. However, within existing scholarship, the agent-level interactions surrounding the MDG framework remain under-explored. Here, on the back of an analysis of interactions that took place within and around key MDG review summits, I develop a typology to clarify the intersection of benchmarking and blame games. Overall, I demonstrate that despite the efforts of the MDG architects to insulate the initiative, blame games have permeated policymakers’ engagements with the framework. Moreover, the content of these blame games have been carried over into the recently outlined Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). A pattern of strategic clarification has seen the emergence within this follow-on SDG framework of more precise responsibilities on higher-income states to meet aid targets, and on lower-income states to meet governance reform targets. Given the deeply-embedded cleavages that were evident in UN review summits, similar blame games seem likely to follow the periodic evaluations within the SDGs’ lifespan.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	947-967
Number of pages	20
Journal	REVIEW OF INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
Volume	41
Issue number	5
Early online date	25 Nov 2015
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1017/S0260210515000406
Publication status	Published - Dec 2015

Bibliographical note

© 2015, British International Studies Association. This is an author-produced version of the published paper. Uploaded in accordance with the publisher’s self-archiving policy. Further copying may not be permitted; contact the publisher for details.

Access to Document

10.1017/S0260210515000406

Benchmarking and Blame Games_RIS_LC
© 2015, British International Studies Association. This is an author-produced version of the published paper. Uploaded in accordance with the publisher’s self-archiving policy. Further copying may not be permitted; contact the publisher for details.
Submitted manuscript, 370 KB

Cite this

@article{1f4ab008bea140e4999b494a4f061c55,

title = "Benchmarking and Blame Games: Exploring the Contestation of the Millennium Development Goals",

abstract = "Benchmarking has long been a central component of the global development industry, with the most prominent recent initiative being the Millennium Development Goal (MDG) framework. However, within existing scholarship, the agent-level interactions surrounding the MDG framework remain under-explored. Here, on the back of an analysis of interactions that took place within and around key MDG review summits, I develop a typology to clarify the intersection of benchmarking and blame games. Overall, I demonstrate that despite the efforts of the MDG architects to insulate the initiative, blame games have permeated policymakers{\textquoteright} engagements with the framework. Moreover, the content of these blame games have been carried over into the recently outlined Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). A pattern of strategic clarification has seen the emergence within this follow-on SDG framework of more precise responsibilities on higher-income states to meet aid targets, and on lower-income states to meet governance reform targets. Given the deeply-embedded cleavages that were evident in UN review summits, similar blame games seem likely to follow the periodic evaluations within the SDGs{\textquoteright} lifespan.",

author = "Clegg, {Liam Simon}",

note = "{\textcopyright} 2015, British International Studies Association. This is an author-produced version of the published paper. Uploaded in accordance with the publisher{\textquoteright}s self-archiving policy. Further copying may not be permitted; contact the publisher for details.",

year = "2015",

month = dec,

doi = "10.1017/S0260210515000406",

language = "English",

volume = "41",

pages = "947--967",

journal = "REVIEW OF INTERNATIONAL STUDIES",

issn = "0260-2105",

publisher = "Cambridge University Press",

number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Benchmarking and Blame Games

T2 - Exploring the Contestation of the Millennium Development Goals

AU - Clegg, Liam Simon

N1 - © 2015, British International Studies Association. This is an author-produced version of the published paper. Uploaded in accordance with the publisher’s self-archiving policy. Further copying may not be permitted; contact the publisher for details.

PY - 2015/12

Y1 - 2015/12

N2 - Benchmarking has long been a central component of the global development industry, with the most prominent recent initiative being the Millennium Development Goal (MDG) framework. However, within existing scholarship, the agent-level interactions surrounding the MDG framework remain under-explored. Here, on the back of an analysis of interactions that took place within and around key MDG review summits, I develop a typology to clarify the intersection of benchmarking and blame games. Overall, I demonstrate that despite the efforts of the MDG architects to insulate the initiative, blame games have permeated policymakers’ engagements with the framework. Moreover, the content of these blame games have been carried over into the recently outlined Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). A pattern of strategic clarification has seen the emergence within this follow-on SDG framework of more precise responsibilities on higher-income states to meet aid targets, and on lower-income states to meet governance reform targets. Given the deeply-embedded cleavages that were evident in UN review summits, similar blame games seem likely to follow the periodic evaluations within the SDGs’ lifespan.

AB - Benchmarking has long been a central component of the global development industry, with the most prominent recent initiative being the Millennium Development Goal (MDG) framework. However, within existing scholarship, the agent-level interactions surrounding the MDG framework remain under-explored. Here, on the back of an analysis of interactions that took place within and around key MDG review summits, I develop a typology to clarify the intersection of benchmarking and blame games. Overall, I demonstrate that despite the efforts of the MDG architects to insulate the initiative, blame games have permeated policymakers’ engagements with the framework. Moreover, the content of these blame games have been carried over into the recently outlined Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). A pattern of strategic clarification has seen the emergence within this follow-on SDG framework of more precise responsibilities on higher-income states to meet aid targets, and on lower-income states to meet governance reform targets. Given the deeply-embedded cleavages that were evident in UN review summits, similar blame games seem likely to follow the periodic evaluations within the SDGs’ lifespan.

U2 - 10.1017/S0260210515000406

DO - 10.1017/S0260210515000406

M3 - Article

SN - 0260-2105

VL - 41

SP - 947

EP - 967

JO - REVIEW OF INTERNATIONAL STUDIES

JF - REVIEW OF INTERNATIONAL STUDIES

IS - 5

ER -