|
Abstract:
|
While progress in developing countries as a whole, in terms of growth, poverty reduction, and several
MDGs, has been quite good in recent years, fragile states lag behind in levels of MDG achievement.
To understand the link between fragility and MDG progress, and also to identify the most effective
policy interventions to achieve the MDGs, it is essential that fragile states are appropriately defined
and classified. While the amount of literature on how to engage with fragile states is rapidly
accumulating, only very limited analysis exists that investigates to what extent the levels and trends in
the MDGs differ significantly between different definitions of fragile and non-fragile states. The
purpose of this paper is to investigate the usefulness of the fragile state concept in tracking the levels
and progress of the MDGs. In doing so, this paper applies several definitions of fragility in order to
study the MDG progress between 1990 and 2006. It compares aver-age performance in levels and
trends of MDG progress between fragile and non-fragile countries and also compares within-group
heterogeneity. The paper shows that fragile countries are, indeed, performing worse in terms of MDG
levels. In terms of MDG progress, progress is not necessarily slower in fragile states. Only a rather
small number of countries suffering from compound disadvantages are doing significantly worse in
terms of MDG progress. Lastly, the heterogeneity of MDG performance among fragile states is so
large that it is not very useful to treat them as a group; the problems they face, as well as the solutions
required, differ greatly and have to be developed and treated sui generis. |