 So this panel is on the SDGs. So we're going to have perspectives from Asia as well as perspectives from Australia We had an excellent introduction to the SDGs, particularly around environmental concerns this morning a really illuminating presentation really showing us some of the stark reality of what's to come and 2015 was a pivotal year as we transitioned from the MDGs to the SDGs there are lots of criticisms of both sets of Goals fans of the MDGs love them because you know there was only a few They were measurable and they really focused attention and resources on critical issues However, there were a lot of critics and critics argued including Mark Malik Brown argued that you know the MDGs were written by a very small group of DAC donors in the basement of the UN and That they avoided discussion of human rights And that they really only applied to develop developing countries and not really to all countries so now we have the SDGs and Advocates of them love that they're inclusive their rights-based and they really involved a global participatory process to develop Critics say they're immeasurable. They're utopian and to quote William Easterly who's particularly scathing He said the SDGs are a mushy collection of platitudes that will fail on every dimension They make me feel quite nostalgic for the MDGs So my first set of questions for our panel Do you think the SDGs are better or worse than the MDGs from your perspective? You know, what are their strengths and weaknesses and how influential with the will the SDGs be compared to the MDGs? When me would you like to start? Why not? Yes Are they better or worse? I think they're different. I think they're different and some of the things that you said were the strengths of MDGs flip side are SDG weaknesses and vice versa So MDs SDGs talk about new issues There are not as significant when MDGs were announced like climate change Terrorism peace issues and so on so I think there are definite strengths that it includes some of the newer issues that have become very very critical in this century also The MDGs were criticized for dealing only with social development or human development and not enough once you educate people once you Cure of their illnesses. They need a place to go to work But the MDGs did not do enough in terms of economic growth or economic development So they were educated but no place to go to work So the SDGs I think made a very important jump in including economic development Issues, so I think that's a that's an improvement a Very difficult topic peace Was not going to be at the table for a long time But I believe that the insistence of Secretary General Ban Ki-moon Peace was included because although it's very difficult to Untangle the difficult relationship between poverty and peace or war and conflict We must deal with that issue and we must at least deal with how Getting rid of poverty can also be a remedy or a small help toward improving the security of a region or countries as we see boats and boats filled with refugees from various countries. We know that conflict internal Strife like this have a critical Impact on poverty and we need to deal with this and so for those reasons I think the SDGs are clearly an improvement My students and I say this is not going to be easy for us to memorize in Korea And in China our education is based on wrote memory Memorization and it's going to be a heart heart cell for our students. I we already talked about easy ways to memorize the 17 But it's not easy We do talk about the five piece the people planet and so on that makes it a little bit easier to see the group Things but at the end of the day, I think we must recognize this was the voice of people from around the world I was part of the process at Rio plus 20 and it was really quite amazing sitting in a tent with about 2,000 people we had these little buttons that we were saying oh, we we think that's an important goal We must include that and we had a poll going on Around the world for a couple of years trying to gather all the voices as much as they were willing to be heard Even though it's messy. That's the state of the affairs and if we at least Identify these as critical issues that we must work for together. I think it's it's it's very meaningful Thank you. So more on the positive. Okay more on the positive from the Korean perspective and your personal perspective Yes, young. What do you what do you think from the Chinese perspective? Do you share it with you perspective or at least from my personal perspective? I think SDGs is better than MDGs because you know SDGs, you know, it's universal it's comprehensive and also it's integrated and It's transformative. That's quite important for us because you know We can just compare the MDGs and SDGs during the period when we formulated MDGs according to some Indian practitioners he said MDGs was just like more than 10 commandment That's means the North from the heaven Just point at the North. We should do this do that do that But SDGs actually we know we experienced a long time from 2010 the United Nations initiated Not only negotiation that the civil societies and not only the North but of course the South so for example Chinese government issued to government people To clarify to Mention that the Chinese government support in new post 2015 agenda although we have maybe have different views But that means the Chinese government involved in formulating the SDGs That's one thing and the second thing is that of course we all know that China Complimented quite well in poverty reduction But during that period actually we mainly focus on poverty regression to self now because the integrated economic growth Social development as well as environment protection So now nowadays in this period when we talk about Poverty elimination we have to think about at the same time so we call the the the green growth and also we will think about how can we Feel the gap between the rich and poor because also in the SDGs we call to reduce the inequality within and The between countries so so it's a comprehensive one So I do think it's better than the previous one, but of course on the other hand. There are some weakness in MDGs Of course first for Chinese students is difficult to memorize all these 17s and then 169 Targets and then how many indicators it's difficult even as a professor I don't think I can memorize all those indicators That's also difficult because it's quite difficult for us to create those indicators and even for those 17 Goals one of it for example, I think it's go 12 that Ensure the Sustainable consumption and the production patterns How can imagine how can we implement such kind of goal? I think it's quite difficult so So it's difficult for us to focus So that's why I think Chinese government at this moment We think we try to translate all these 17s into Chinese national policy But we should pick up some thing as the initiate as the priority in Implementing SDGs. That's my my personal view. I once again, I cannot represent my government I can just explain our government's policy to all of you. Thank you. Thank you Julia, do you want to comment from the Australian side? Sure, but I won't even you know, I'm not representing Australian government I'm not sure I can explain the government's policy, but I do know confidently that Australian students won't even try and memorize the 17s Undoubtedly, like my fellow panelists have said, I think the SDGs are a big improvement on the Millennium Development Goals The SDGs were important, but we knew from the very beginning that they were only a very partial View of development and so to go to this much broader view I think it's being very exciting and I think you know, I think many of us are very skeptical about this complex process whereby the SDGs were developed and really would the UN be able to bring this all together at the end of just starting all these consultations And they did and I'm still quite amazed. I'm quite amazed at the things the whole world pretty much agreed to because it's a really you know, it's a very Encouraging agenda, so I think it's a much better agenda. It's much more difficult to accomplish those so I think we you know, we need to just think about the fact that You know, we're less likely to succeed than we were with the MDGs and clearly we didn't succeed everywhere with the MDGs You know, I would also say really strongly that the huge expansion of environmental goals and this morning did a terrific job at Talking about that is a really really important aspect of the SDGs, but also from a perspective of someone who lives in a developed country, the fact that the SDGs are universal and you know is actually a huge kind of culture shift and I think a good expression of the fact that you know Our problems are interconnected. Your problems are our problems. Our problems are your problems and we need to fix them together So I'm a fan of the SDGs. Okay, so I think we have three thumbs up Thumbs down for William Easterly perhaps on his view, but definitely hard to memorize and a challenge perhaps to implement Julie, I'd like to stay with you for just a second You you mentioned something about how the SDGs really are universal and they've been seen as a catalyst for wealthier countries to be more introspective About their own challenges and also to examine their impact on the world world around them So is Australia being introspective about about the SDGs and what are they doing about that? so I understand that just before the The UN meeting in September that was a whole day cabinet meeting on the SDGs and you know now this has been you being set up in PM&C and You know the Australian Bureau of Statistics is right at the heart of grappling with what the indicators are going to look like and we've got a group there really focused on the SDGs So no, I am at the weekend when I knew I was going to speak on the side Google SDG on DFAT's website and the only thing that comes up is a little description but there are two paragraphs and on the Australian Bureau of Statistics there's nothing yet about the SDGs that I could find on their search engine so But you know, you know my excuse for this is you know these early days and I think the NDGs you know actually took a little bit of time to Really get behind the NDGs to integrate them into our thinking and so forth but there is a risk it won't happen so Feel free to write to your MP, write to the Prime Minister, tell them how important these SDGs are and how you're looking forward to a cabinet meeting to debate them I'm going to stay with you for one more second So I want to push you because yesterday you were saying how you really felt at the SDGs, you know They provide some leverage for how Australia and China, we'll talk about China in a minute, can really address Domestic issues, domestic inequalities, and I wanted you to talk a bit about that. Thank you. You know today the Prime Minister Delivered the closing gap statement in our Parliament House and the non-Australianians Indigenous and non-indigenous People within Australia and you know, this has been a 10-year effort and we're failing on most of the indicators So, you know that that has to be you know and really You know when you look at our You know the you look at our environment for record and things there are whole range of areas in which Australia is not Not leading despite our enormous wealth So I do think you know and I will I will believe my government is taking the SDGs seriously When I see them really considering them in the domestic policy sphere, it's not okay But this remains defects agenda. It really does need to be something that we internalize much more I Want to talk about China a little bit because we know that China has one of the highest rates of inequality and Trying to deal with that kind of rural urban divide in China is that is a pressing challenge for the government? And how do the SDGs? Bring some momentum to the domestic programs First of all, maybe you have already know actually our president the president is in pain. He attended the last September summit and not only just attended post-2015 SDG Summit, but also he attended south-south corporation Event as well as the record women summit and the so-and-so for that we call the serious events that means keep pay a great attention to the development issue very much and after that with the SDGs in mind we can see not long ago in the fifth fifth plenary of the CPC's Committee essential committee in this planning meeting we issued a very important document and once again focused on the Elimination of poverty as well as to promote the environment Protection policy as well as coping with the climate change and so on so forth and also the particular bureau also issued very important documents that means to 20 20 China will eliminate according to China's standard the poverty extreme poverty and I think in 2030 China will try our best That's our priority. That's our policy. That's eliminating all the Extreme poverty according to the World Bank standard and this time it's quite important for us. That's not only we just like implemented the MDGs to half the poverty extreme poverty, but also we want to eliminate and also we try to integrate it the Poverty elimination into the three dimensions. That means environment protection social development as well as the economic growth and We now change our policy to promote economic growth from the traditional one to we call the the green growth that's quite important for for China and also When we talk about SDGs the SDGs go to not only said that we should try to end the Hungary but try to achieve the Food security and in China I think during the period of MDGs although we eliminate more than 500 million less than but more than 400 million Poor population extreme poor poor population, but on the other hand We sacrifice the food security for example This morning Katie said that Australian people and the Dutch people Has lots of have lots of the similarity for Chinese people You are the same why because the baby formula is so well known all over the world But the Chinese people that's very important because You know I'm so sad to say that lots of those Chinese tourists when they travel to Europe specifically to Netherlands they purchase lots of those baby formula as well as they purchase a lot of things in Australian and of course it even to some extent we cause some trouble between Chinese people and Dutch people and Chinese people and and Australian people I think maybe in 2020 or 2030 People in China because we are paying more attention about the SDG to Achieve the food security then we not only eliminate our poverty But also we try to protect our people with the Food security so in the future Maybe you won't be so lucky to sell all those to be formula in Australia and the Chinese people can consume our own baby formula That's also I think part of the Implementing for us for implementing the SDGs and then also very important thing that During the period of MDGs China is a recipient in the international development of cooperation, but nowadays I think China has already become a Assistant donor or Aid the developing countries But the thing that how can we balance the domestic development as well as international Development cooperation is quite important even that's the issue in Australian indigenous people and then not in indigenous people you have the gap and in China We have a very big gap between the rich and the poor and when those poor said when you cannot even up to now we have Almost 200 million extreme poverty people and then why we should support The other people they have less Poor population than us. So how can we keep the balance between these two? It's all also our duty our government. How can we? persuade Our people public opinion to know that China have to be more responsible in the international In the arena of international development of cooperation. So that's also the challenge. So I think SDGs that our domestic Development becomes more integrated more comprehensive and to some it can even more transformative and At the same time so it also challenged Chinese government as well as Chinese people How can we accept those new? challenge like from the recipient to a Doner country so we have still have a long way to go and at the same time so we need to learn our neighbor South Korea because you have already become a member of the OECD You know the experience how to provide the aids when you still not very Rich during that period. Thank you very much. That's that's a perfect segue into my my next question So we looked a little bit at internal policies in the application of the STG So when you raise the issue of China becoming a provider country or being a much more prominent provider country and the MDGs they evolved at a time when the Traditional donor world paid very little attention to the decades of South-Southland development cooperation that's been Implemented and executed by Asian countries like China like Korea like India for example Whereas the SDGs have emerged in a new era where as you say Korea has joined the DAC and China if you measure it in ODA like terms is now the sixth largest donor in the world and As you said at the UN Development Summit Chinese president committed two billion with the promises of up to 12 billion US dollars in support of developing countries Implementation of the 2030 development agenda and as well the Republic of Korea has announced 200 million dollar program better life for girls initiative, which will support vulnerable girls in developing countries over the next five years So I'd like to ask when me first are the SDGs Are they playing a role in in Korea's development cooperation strategies and how? Maybe with your permission Switch the X and the Y variable around in the question because when I received Looked at that question. I thought maybe I will start with how the development experience of South Korea China and Japan have colored our own experiences as a donor Professor Barbara Starlings from Brown University in the United States, and I have conducted research. We first started out In about 2008 when Korea was about to join the OACD DAC and so on trying to understand the traditional Versus emerging donors such as South Korea India Brazil and so on The more we did field research We realized that the demarcation was not between traditional and so-called emerging Different groups of emerging donors, but it was really the Western donors Australia is sort of on the Western side the UK the northern European donors Versus Asian donors including Japan Japan was very different from the other traditional Western donors So to try to lump traditional and include Japan just didn't make any sense So once we started Once we gave up that idea and said who are the ones in this other side who look different and those were Japan Korea China we were very similar. There are some ways that we were similar But different but definitely very different from the traditional Western donors our research Interviewing various Practitioners in development cooperation government officials in the three countries and some of our development partner countries Recognized that Japan Korea China were using their own development experience and how we used aid as With economic development for example when Korea was a recipient a large recipient of USAID The current government officials had very interesting Negotiations with USAID officials USAID officials first wanted to just give food aid so that we can alleviate Poverty first, but the Korean government officials were arguing and saying that okay We need food aid to eliminate To deal with poverty, but we also need the funds to go on for long-term Economic development projects So they had discussions going back and forth and finally the US government after about a year's negotiation Decided to let us use part of the aid for our economic industrial planning Economic development via industrial policies. So in such a way our use of aid has been different We use aid not just for poverty alleviation, but for economic development long-term development Second we talked about a different mix of Development assistance development cooperation when China or South Korea or Japan go to developing countries trying to assist We think more broadly with ODA or official development Assistance is only one component. We often think with foreign FDI foreign direct investment via companies Export lessons for trade and so on as a complimentary larger package of Economic support so we tend to think much broadly about the comprehensive package of economic assistance We go to and in and so Japan at first was criticized heavily for doing too much for economic infrastructure that Western donors have Have stopped doing China is very heavy on infrastructure Korea somewhere in between but we we do about have about half in our infrastructure half through concessional loans and half in grantees so our aid modality looks very different from Western aid We you can look at the bottom line that says close relationship between public and private sector. So when we Provide assistance to developing countries We're often looking and seeking public private partnership government working with the private sector of our donor countries to assist developing countries Some of these points have been criticized heavily Within the OECD DAC and I've criticized some of these points myself for Focusing too much on infrastructure and so on but the fact is these are some of the common characteristics and the three countries at least find very important when we Decide to help other countries. So The experiences of our own development Ten have colored our experience as a donor and and Finally, let me go to the previous slide Okay, and I might I must also say that I talked about stage approach to development And also the role of government unlike the Western donors that tend to Not tend to shy away from government led development The three countries have had a lot of experience and have successful experience with government led development At least in the early stage of development. So we think that in the cases where the private sector is not yet fully Mature enough or not capable yet that government leadership is is is critical at times So we do talk about the institutions in particular about the developmental state and how to assist the state to do proper Industrial planning and so on so these come from our own experience of development and our own experience of using it So this has been a very important characteristics of of the three donors in in Asia So I just wanted to point that out and some some some of us have argued that our Formula for our own development was against the wash the consensus that didn't really bring about Poverty alleviation of growth in sub-Saharan Africa in particular So we think this is alternative modus operandi for development also perhaps for development cooperation So I start with that and then maybe later. I'll talk about the better life of girls and the new rule development scheme Okay, I'll come right back to you then I'm going to ask Jiang to to reflect a little bit on you know how the SDGs are really shaping China's Development cooperation and South-South cooperation, which is long-standing But has it has this has the strategies changed as changed as a result of the SDGs? Yes I think actually SDGs has already to some extent they change China's China's policy towards the policy of the international cooperation and of course There's something has already changed and some not changed because we still think that China's although just now I mentioned from a recipient to a donor country and but we still think that China Try to help the other developing country with through the we call the channel of South-South cooperation and we still think that North-South cooperation should the main channel in terms of international Development cooperation, but actually because the situation has already changed a lot and China has already become the Second largest economy in the world. So it's our responsibility to help the other developing country and also we think that With the SDG in our mind that we need when we talk about the aid Assistant usually it's also something to do with the national interest Why you aid the others because it fits your national interest so interest and the for other things is justice you just have people for for helping and Nowadays we think that when we talk about international Development cooperation when we try to aid the others We also know that there's something we call the national interest But we think we should put the justice before interest It doesn't mean there's no interest at all for us to help the others But the the most important thing is that so we have to let the world to be justice to let the people Have a better life in the future That's all the first change and also just not just now you mentioned that presidency he also initiated the two billion US dollars to help developing country to implement SDGs, but at the same times also we have diversified our health for example, we Will establish an international development and knowledge center. That's something to do just like clearance We try to share our experience to our developing countries To the other developing countries and also we will raise the investment to lease the developer countries until 2030 there will be 12 billion US dollar directly invests to lease the development country to help them to To lift the property as well as according to a Chinese saying that Through the invest through the investments not only we just give them fish, but let them to know how to fish So that's why we think the investment is so important to those least in developing country and also Because of the SDGs and the China has its commitment to implementing SDGs So we think that we should try to integrate our aid to the development country into the three dimensions so a presidency issued the we we called the 6100 initiatives and that's 6100 initiatives includes the poverty reduction program the aid and trade program Environmental and the climate change coping with environmental and and the climate change program as well as 100 Program for setting up clinic and hospital and the 100 schools So and 100 agriculture project in developing country mainly in Africa country So now you see previously. Maybe we we want to support the developing country in terms of coping with climate change But now we think it's quite important that we have to Support them through the 100 project in Terms of coping with climate change as well as environmental Protection that's the also the change and the third one just now you mentioned the security issue and peace and security of course I don't think that Chinese government Don't think that we need to set a goal We call it peace and security, but we agree with that inclusive this the goal SDG go 16 peace peaceful and Not security inclusive and peaceful society and we support this But we do not think that we Have to interfere the other countries In the affairs, but we can try to support the peace and security through the international organizations or regional organizations like a you like United Nations So that's why actually China Will stress on the importance of peace and development in implementing goal 16 for example China I just give you some examples to 20 China will train 2000 peacekeepers from other countries mainly from African countries and also China will provide 100 million dollars to the African Union and We'll provide the free military aid through the 100 million to the African Union and also China will build a peacekeeping Stand by force of 8,000 troops and actually up to now China is the largest the country provide the peacekeeping troops in the Permanent five but not in all those member states of the United Nations So that's why we link the peace and security With the development issue. So that's that's why I think China has already changed a lot our international Development cooperation strategy because of the SDGs That's very interesting actually to hear about that shift which seems quite quite substantial as a result of the FGD's both in terms of Kind of philosophy and also in terms of the projects. It's a real diversification From the past I think for China and me if you wouldn't mind I'd like to introduce the audience a little bit to the Better life for for girls initiative. We're having a bit of problem with graphics there Oh Yeah, do you need the graphic can you do it without I can do without Not sure how to fix it Yeah There is a partner was very proud to be at the UN Leading last year September 2015 There she went through quite a few panels and was an important figure in giving One session the Korean government organized a new role development paradigm. So there are two Programs among many that she introduced that were very significant One is the new role development paradigm but the other one was the better life for girls initiative and Maybe I will start with the better life for girls initiative because this is Something that I had been working on and providing the research findings from my For my research. I was very happy when the president took the initiative. Wow, she she took this And I was really flabbergasted very pleasantly surprised The better life for girls initiative started with a grant that I received from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation asking us to find something that the Korean government can do in global public health because our You know develop cooperation isn't very big and we weren't really doing much Spending quite a bit of our ODA funds in public health issues, but not really You know didn't have any specific distinct or important Initiatives so they asked us if we can do something about it after looking at what Korea had done. Well in our public health like we is We're probably number one in the world in terms of family planning and we did so well there were now below replacement and Rapidly aging societies in the world where when we do something we do quicker than anybody else We did development in one generation Eliminated poverty in one generation, but we also you know our babies are not coming so And we're the fastest Aging population in the world So we look through various things that we were doing and then we looked through what Korea was doing in the global public health area The most of the the largest amount of money we were spending was building hospitals and and health centers health clinics We were doing wash projects in in sub-Saharan Africa and so on but nothing really That stood out nothing that really reflected our own experience and whatnot and then we started looking at Through the MGD's report to see what was missing in the global public health field and Among the eight goals goal number four Infamotality and goal number five maternal health were The most problematic in terms of reaching their goals Throughout the eight goals. They were all very problematic in sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia But four and five were universally pretty Much in jeopardy so we started looking at that and when we did more research about how to improve maternal and child Health we realized that the intervention From the United Nations and all the donor countries were happening too late there were young girls at the age of nine who are getting Pregnant and giving birth and it's horrible that these young Children are giving birth and there are a lot of repercussions on these young girls who are so become Mothers at such a young age for their own health as well as the health of the infant and the babies and and the reasons why These young girls were getting pregnant as you know is not just for medical For their own consent it could sometimes be by religion culture Social norms poverty is a big role to play Sexual violence and so on so we looked at this mix of Packages affecting young girls whose needs were not being addressed So we decided to look into what are the health risks for young girls And what can we do to help remedy those young girls from getting pregnant at such a young age and having all these health risks But as was social and educational risks So at the end we decided to focus on young girls from the age of nine. This is the WHO guideline From nine to before 18 as a critical vulnerable years for young girls in developing countries And in order to assist them with their Comprehensive health issues. It was really about education as well as health. So that's why the Better Life for Girls initiatives talks about Educating these girls so they know more about their rights and responsibilities But can really protect themselves and perhaps be become a major actor in changing their own lives as well And some research in sub-Saharan Africa showed that for young boys to reduce HIV-AIDS infection is by providing them with condoms and good sex education But for girls in high gender gap societies that doesn't work So for girls it's just sending them to secondary schools was the best remedy to help with HIV-AIDS So the more research we're doing we're finding that education in and of itself can be a cure For illnesses as well as for empowering them So the Better Life for Girls initiative became a very comprehensive initiative to assist young girls Who are sort of becoming a Lacuna in terms of development assistance in MCH in particular So the Better Life for Girls initiative was born and we presented to the government But really wasn't thinking that the government really actually Take the note of our research. We were flabbergasted. I mean very pleasantly mind you But we were very pleased when the government announced that they were going to put 200 million from 2016 to 2020 for this initiative and announced 15 countries that we see That they were going to be target countries for this age So this is a new initiative and along with the Better Life for Girls They've created much more comprehensive Better Life for All initiatives of the various sectors We have the Better Life initiative and I look forward to working with my government to do the right thing on this and hoping that many other Governments countries will join in this initiative Julia I don't know if you want to add anything from the Australia perspective I'm going to segue into the last question so you can have a double barrel question and answer both together if you like Reflect a bit on Australia and what the what the SDGs will mean in terms of Australia's development cooperation But then also will will they provide opportunities for countries like Australia to work more with China and Korea and the non-traditional providers often people say there's a lack of convergence between The non-traditional providers and the traditional providers when we struggle to find areas of convergence Will the SDGs provide a platform for more convergence and working together You know that So I think it's not surprising that it's difficult to see you know You know at the first point of that You know as the age we've entered the fact there's a whole process of developing a investment plans and then the second round of cuts came and so you know I think I think that's had an impact on the ability of the official aid program to really respond to To the SDGs, but you know, I would say it's still very early days in this 15 years and it sounds You know from the rhetoric from the department and from the minister that there is an attention that this this you know this does Influence the directions of the aid program I have sort of listened to a few podcasts from people from USAID and so forth and you know Sort of there is the sense of which I would be doing relates to the SDGs, so it's okay But I hope that particularly as the indicators get agreed in March this year that that will give As we start to get the data globally on those Some impetus to think about which areas we want to see most changing But I would also say that for Australia this is a particular challenge because you know The minister's being very clear that the area of critical importance for Australia's Pacific and this is the area You know the Pacific has done with that in terms of achievements against the SDGs so So, you know, I think High levels of Australian aid have not actually Resulted in Pacific Island countries meeting the NDG targets and I think you know there has been a big rethinking of our aid program clearly and so How will that Set it up to be able to deliver the SDGs You know, I do think it's interesting when you say and is this a platform for greater Cooperation, you know for decades Australia has dabbled with trilateral cooperation with Korea with China and I don't know sure any of it's been terribly big or terribly successful, but These global platforms do offer that opportunity, but I would also point some OECD donors rhetoric on Aid has actually become much more aligned with the Korean and Chinese rhetoric I was interested. I'm pretty sure it was the Dutch government saying, you know, our aid program is going to help And then there's an economy from now on, you know, that was the most recent government and I think, you know, Julie Bishop's Commitment to economic diplomacy is clearly about Australia's economy as as part of the region so I actually think that that's an interesting shift in terms of Changing But you know We all have fairly complex bureaucracies with particular culture and It's one thing to do with two of those bureaucracies together in a bilateral relationship When you make it a trilateral relationship, you have to start, you know I mean, there can be bigger overheads in that. It is worth having fora like the DAC which enable us and other fora to really exchange views and ideas And I think it's a terrific idea to explore, but we do run the risk of making things more complicated Jiang, what do you think? Do you think China with the SGGs will see more triangular cooperation that has meaning? Or will we see China participate more in global policy fora? Yes, I Can just give you an example Last year our Prime Minister, our Premier, Li Keqiang visited OECD DAC and delivered a speech over there and Another story that's in 2014 in a International symposium organized by South South Corporation in Washington, DC, organized by the United Nations. We have a panel and With some scholars from India and when I delivered that I said that China should try to say cooperate with OECD and we We should try to promote the triangle Cooperation and so on and so forth and the India scholar directly asked me Do you think China's government will at last try to bid for the membership of OECD? My response is that no, we will never ever be a member of OECD not like Korea But but it's quite important. We need to cooperate and We have a dialogue and then the next year that means last year in 2015 our Premier visited OECD and delivered a speech. So I don't think that During the period from the 2015 to 2030 China's position in the international Development cooperation That's my personal view. We can play the role as a bridge between the group SM7 and OECD country and of course, that's that's one thing And why because I think China has already China still a largest European country in the world, but at the same time so we have to be very responsible in the international development cooperation and The China can play this role as a bridge But not as a member of the so-called the richest countries club That's my personal view towards this That's the first thing and the second is that China still think that's not only in the climate change In environmental protection as well as in international development cooperation. We should try to still Abide by this principle we call CVDR common but differentiated responsibility China is a developing country So we can provide our help to our development country through the South South Corporation all to some of the candidate the triangle Corporation, but we still think that the Western country the North country They should try to commit it to the point seven of GNI in the ODA and on the other hand China is also very responsible in terms of the development aid According to our white paper issued by our government in 2014 if I Have not memorized the wrong according to my memorize that from 2010 to 2012 the increase rate of the China's foreign aid The rate is 20% and According to my personal calculate up to now we provide maybe 0.07 percentage of our GNI in the foreign aid and According to this increased rate. I think to 20 30 maybe China's Foreign aid official foreign aid to their own country through the South South Corporation I think maybe we'll reach to 0.1 But not 0.7. We never ever committed to that number, but even 0.1 This number you just keep in mind according to he is This morning's presentation. Maybe China's GDP will Supposed the UN GDP then just imagine how huge the foreign Foreign aid from China would be and The certain that Because China has already been a donor's country, but China still have 200 million extreme poverty Population how can we persuade people to understand that? The first thing first is that we have to eliminate our domestic extreme poverty and to achieve food security and provide Health for all in our own country So I think While we try to help the others our government will think about how can we try to solve our own problem first and then we have the Solid base to help the others So I think these two the international development cooperation as well as domestic Development in the terms of the three dimensions integrated the environment society social and as well as economic growth together then we can Provide a help to the world first if China at last to 2030 can really eliminate 200 million Extreme poverty in our country then that's the most Important the contribution to that to implementing SDG in the world at the same times if we can provide maybe point one percentage of our and GNI in the Foreign aid then it will also be a great contribution and I'm looking forward to 2030 maybe at that time. I don't know where I will be, but I hope it will be Become the truth. It will become the truth. Thank you very much. Thank you. My name is Helen Hill from Victoria University in Melbourne and also the National University of Timor-Laura Si in Dilly I'd like to thank the speakers I mean I'm very interested in the argument about the experience of development of those new donors Influencing the the way that their aid program operates, but it seems to me Both China and Korea are huge countries They followed an export-led model of industrialization Most of the country is still in the aid program with the exception of Africa I realize Africa is different But they're mostly small island states in the Pacific now which are never going to adopt an export-led model of Industrialization in fact, you know when I used to teach this to my students the percent. Oh, no, no We're never going to be able to do that and I just like to make it a quick example there's another non-traditional donor which has been active in the Pacific and that is Cuba and Ironically Cuba received aid from Australia under the Howard government the Cubans asked Australia to fund a permaculture project and that was extraordinarily successful when the Cubans were facing an agricultural crisis and Just a few a month ago The Cubans have brought that agriculture they learned from Australia to Timor-Lesh and it's being Implemented in a cushy because Australia would never put permaculture in the aid program to Timor for some reason But put industrial agriculture in the program to Timor So I'm just sort of wanting to point out the sort of the different types of experience of development that different countries have I was no linear believe all from diverse voices in action for equality and dawn from Fiji My question I was in all of the open working group meetings around the SDGs and thank you. It was a really Useful session One of the questions that I have is in that whole process where we did have so much civil society and government Engagement trying to move to what is quite a complex set of SDGs The the I'd like to hear your thoughts about the fact that while we have this you know focus on Accountability and how we are accountable in terms of the social contract Between states and their citizens, but also states and states The question also is how do we reconcile that with the fact of things like the Trans-Pacific? Partnership agreement and the Tefter agreement that's on so as you get a widening of free trade Agreements, how are we going to reconcile that with human rights within states and between states? Thank you. Thank you Just a really quick question for the whole panel, but potentially most particularly for mr. Jiang I'm wondering how you see the Asian infrastructure investment bank as sort of feeding into these SDGs in Asia Is this something that? Potentially represents that new model or is this for the time being something a little bit off to the side. Thank you Thank you. Thank you for those questions So first let's look at the the relevance of China career development model with small island states Let me start with that question. I mean if you see Korea now we seem like such Fairly affluent nation that it's not our lessons are not applicable and we're such an unusual case But let me point Take you back to the early 1960s when we began our development experience Our GMP per capita at the time was $81 So poor then many of the subsan poorest countries in the world. We just Were Coming out of war that has officially not in this it's a war torn country We had no natural resources or a gas or any other sort of mineral resources that we could really count on We are very low levels of technology So we didn't have any of the ingredients that was necessary for development capital technology land or Whatever Our land is the size of a Minnesota Our population is now about 50 million. So it's not a very big big country that you might think of so the The obstacles or challenges that we face as an impoverished country is not very different from The developing or the least developed being least developed countries face poverty extreme poverty war and conflict Lack of democracy all those things Packaged into a nice bundle or South Korea the World Bank officials were saying that we were a basket case so And now I you know Jim Kim the Korean national born is now the head of the World Bank's iron anyway, so The point that I want to make is Korea's lessons should be valid and When I was at the UN last year at the 70th anniversary It really struck me and others that Korea was one of the very few countries that made from extreme Poverty and prosperity within a generation so developing countries still come to us to ask us So what did you do? What did you do that was different? What did you do that you didn't listen to your donors and so on and my lesson? My story is not about exploring to the industrialization. That was a strategy that we could use at the time the strategy for us was We had a government That was able to bring all of the talent in the country to work on a Development strategy that was best suited for us at the time We wouldn't say that export is the only way. I don't think that's the only way these days It's not a good way because the the market is is too crowded But when Korea without resources without capital the only thing we had going was a lot of people were fairly well Educated so our level of education was much higher than countries at our level of poverty So that's what we had smart relatively smart people who are educated not, you know smarter, but Well educated people so what we did is We couldn't just focus on our domestic economy because we are so little So the only way that we thought we could earn money is through exporting light Manufactured products so in the throughout the 60s the most the high on our export items were wigs we were the Global capital of wigs because our dark hair And we we didn't have money to have perms and stuff like that. So it was untreated course hair that was Could be made into very good wigs. So we were the wick capital of the world We were the capital of of stuff toys before China So we were the global capital of cheap Clothing textile so that's where we started because that's the only thing that we could do So the lesson from Korea is not exports. It's really about working through the government having government leadership and and Channeling all the the resources into what we could do Given our challenges and given what we had so I wouldn't say export is the answer, but I would really say Working with the sound government. So I think that formula would be different But but the fact that we struggle through war to an economy Political strife and poverty. These are issues that are not very different from developing countries Who struggle these days? There are of course some lessons that we hope countries would not follow us. We had a long Authoritarian rule we would not say oh go. Hey, go ahead. Go Get a military dictator too. I wouldn't I would not recommend that I would say to the contrary. These are things that you should not try to replicate That's why we are very much into being transparent about both our Successes but also our trials and errors so that other country will not Repeat some of the mistakes that we we had done But we hope that we can provide an alternative to what the Washington consensus says and so that's that's the message That's the lesson that I would rather like to share. Thank you John, could you comment on the relevance of the China model and then maybe also jump straight into the link between the AII B and the SDGs First of all, I Don't think I will promote Also telling an Government to all day seems as clear, but I will say that actually if we really want to promote Development and the lift poverty. I think the strong government is very important Not only me, but also Fukuyama also says so without the strong government. How can you really? Do something to help people to lift their poverty at all? so of course according to China's Former leader Deng Xiaoping's saying that no matter it's a white cat or That one if you can catch the mice it will be the good one So no matter what kind of government if those government is accountable one If this those government can help people to lift the poverty then we just follow this Maybe I cannot say China model China People always say Beijing consensus or China model, but according to my personal experience actually I don't think China can be a so-called Washington consensus as a Beijing consensus But one thing is quite important every country has their own Situation they have to select their own road to their own development and Up till now I can say through the 30 more than 30 years Opening up and the reformation in China. We have found a right away for China to develop from a very How to say even we can say least developing country or less developing country to a We call the middle-income country and even in the future and from recipient to a donor country So through this way, I think maybe that's if we can say China's model That means you should try to find the the best way for your own country. Maybe that's the answer for your question and for AII be and in SDGs we know the SDG Go 9 said that the built resilient infrastructures So you can find the Asia infrastructure investment bank So that means infrastructure is so important than just now we mentioned and even in the morning Talked about China's aid to Africa We ate a lot in those infrastructure construction and In China saying if you want your country I mean the countryside be rich the first way is try to Construct the road towards your village and your village will be rich The infrastructure is so important, but in the Asia Pacific region Of course, we have World Bank. We have the Asia developing bank, but they have no enough fun And the China has not found and then we have the capability to do that and why not that's why we initiate the Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank AII be there's a first reason and the second I do think that this bank is a very Open towards the world of China government join this and also UK Except I'm so sorry United States and Japan our good neighbor Japan, but anyway, I think in the future. Maybe I'm not sure But this bank is still very open and the thirdly I do think that AII be It is a Magnetism by the International Development Corporation Magnetism it is the mechanism to implement the traditional one like World Bank like Asia Development Bank I Don't think that that's China or even like all share government will think that we join in turn We want to replace issue development bank or World Bank So that's why I think all the world should support AII be let it be successful and help the international Corporation in the future especially to complete the goal 9 built resilient infrastructure. Thank you very much. Thank you Yes question number 2 on Julia Do you want to tackle that one on and then I'll turn me like to say something as well Accessibility accountability human rights and the TPP SDGs have a You know important aspirations towards good government good governance and participation but There's there are some unfortunate trends in the world even you know within our own government where we see freedom of information requests are You know becoming more difficult and Not always the level of transparency on desires. I think Citizens will need to demand Transparency and need to keep arguing for it. It's not something that governments will automatically Provide but again Things like the SDG provide another lever another way in which we need to claim the rights You have a I think you raise a very important issue about accountability and Right-spaced approach to these topics. I think in each of our governments, there is some balance and there's some attention between development cooperation and our And our practices of free trade and so on Within the Korean government the Ministry of strategy of finance is very much interested in promoting further trade and for further economic growth of Korea on the other hand the Ministry of Foreign Affairs want to do more in terms of Providing more granted in line with SDGs and so on Ministry of finance and strategy Although they're the one providing the funds not always short So you can see in the real day-to-day life that there is this this tension between different ministries and their different mandates and Broadly speaking the global arena tension between these goals. I hope because the SDGs were to be Inclusive and we were supposed to look at not just to assist developing countries But to find pockets of poverty and develop developed countries to assist They may be developed countries will find a way to incorporate the principles of rights-based approach to development cooperation in their other Policy areas such as free trade and TPP and whatnot. So I hope SDGs can be that conduit for it for that, but Realistically speaking, I'm not That optimistic I'll take two short questions as a question for the whole panel Alongside all of the stakeholder consultation globally around the SDGs has also been Yeah, yeah being the conversation about reform of the UN and reform of the UN agencies and so I just been sitting in the panel's comments on How you see the effect of the SDGs on the reform of the you know One of the key global systems for actually implementing them And whether that reform process will whether you see it's actually happening and carrying on. Thank you Okay. Thank you I'm Simon Pollock working for the Department of Environment, but this is very much my own question Just when talking about a alternative to the Washington consensus in providing aid and focusing on infrastructure, could that then be seen as a way of Furthering tide aid in a way that is favoring Maybe advantages for the your own country's Infrastructure providers and providing in a way unfair leg up for national Industrial companies to get gains in developing countries Okay Who'd like to take the UN reform question? No Think about it start with the second question The alternative to the watch the consensus doesn't mean just about Giving more aid for infrastructure. I think that's one of the things but I was stressed that it's really about Government leadership rather than letting the private sector lead the the process of development in a country Especially in an early stage of development when the other institutions are not well Developed I think it's really critical for a sound government to have good policies for its nation's development So I would say The when I mentioned alternative to watching the consensus I was more focused on the government versus the market Divide rather than the infrastructure Tide aid no, I don't think that's such a good idea. I think Looking at how aid projects are Being provided in developing countries from the Korean government. Sometimes it's much more economical to use Vendors from neighboring countries than to use Korean companies or Korean products and we have certainly done that so Untied aid. I think it's not really the the tide aid is not the answer that I would say is part of the Alternative to the watch no consensus. So but I thank you for that question to give me a chance to to To clarify reform of UN agencies, I think that has been a very important goal for the pangimun Secretary general From his first and the second the only day the one thing that I noticed is is minor But maybe not minor, but he has been rather successful in bringing more women to the leadership And I think that's making some changes not that all men are bad, but He is of course a man But he has really included more women in the leadership, and I think that's making some changes within Creating UN women as a comprehensive women's initiative agency within the UN I think is a step in that direction, but I I don't know To what extent the reform within the UN has been successful I know there has been a lot of effort and trying to reform But I don't know how far they've gone and whether they've been really successful We'll talk about Consensus but actually MDG based on post-Washington consensus So that means Now maybe we are experienced the period of post-Washington DC But it doesn't mean that we return to Washington consensus and At this moment, I think the most important thing that the whole world because SDG is a universal one It's a comprehensive one and is also a transformative one. That means According to China's experience that we are reaching the stage that we have to transform our economic Structures and so on so forth. I think even in a world large in this world We are now experiencing how can we transform the traditional economic growth to the three dimensions? That means that we promote economic growth sustainably sustained and but also we should protect the environment and To promote social development and then it will be not only Beyond the Washington Consensus but also beyond the post Washington consensus then we can really implement SDGs in 15 years, but I doubt we can really fully implement all those go because just now I mentioned There's too many targets and then indicators in March I can really difficult to imagine How many indicators it's difficult and for us my personal job, maybe we try to to to suggest maybe every country should try to find Some something which we can really implement quite well and then we can At the same time try to implement of all of those goals and so on so forth targets and so on so forth about the UN reform I can just Maybe use China's experience just now I mentioned why China Can develop so fast because we experienced the more than 30 years Reformation as well as opening up the world so for us Reformation or reform. It's a continuous process That means even in the the largest international Organization I do think that it should Experience a long long time reformation that means first We need to reform the structure. We need to reform the mechanism and all those Systems in nations, but the second just like China Chinese experience we cannot change The system overnight We have to be very patient Maybe just because of Chinese history is so long so we are very patient and American history and maybe also history is so short. You always want to change everything Overnight, so I think the best way is try to go to the middle We can try to find the third way try to reform it at the same time be patient. Thank you. Thank you That brings us to the close of the session. Thank you for excellent questions I'm sorry for those of you didn't get to answer your ask your questions I just like to sum up saying I think we can see from the session that the SGGs really have been a catalyst for change in The realm of development cooperation both for northern and southern providers or Asian or Western providers Both as a catalyst for change and as an area of potential Convergence both in the present and going forward So I think some hope