The Millennium Development Goals Report 2006 (3)
In a paper I am currently writing, I ask:
"what is the meaning of a global progress report when there really is no
systematic global program of action toward the goal? The Millennium Development
Program has been misleading because there never has been any real global
program of action. This is not the story of a failed strategy; it is about the
absence of strategy. Despite the lofty rhetoric of the Millennium Development
Program and all the summits and agreements on hunger that preceded it, there
never has been a truly global program of action to address the problem. It has
always been treated as a collection of national problems."
And a few paragraphs later:
"Serious strategies for addressing malnutrition would offer more than a few
scattered recommendations. They would describe stepwise plans of action
designed to reach the goal. There should be clear incentives for the actors to
do what needs to be done, and there should be institutional mechanisms in place
to assure that all actors are held accountable for doing their jobs. Just as
the construction of a building or a bridge is only possible with detailed
planning and periodic course corrections during the process of working toward
the goal, the human right to adequate food can only be fully realized through
carefully designed and implemented programs of action."
Is it any different for malaria?