Proposal for UN to expand Gini measurement

Comments on UN “2014 AMR Part II (17 February - 2 March): Sustaining development gains through inclusive development”, 22/02/2014, https://www.unteamworks.org/node/423746#comment-63704

I address the last question listed above first. I think that a set of necessary and widely applicable conditions or strategies for fostering social inclusion and citizen engagement can be identified. 

If I can talk about social inclusion and citizen engagement in terms of economic ones because it is an important area and without this any benefits will not be sustainable in the long term.

Let's define economic growth as average growth of the economy of a country or a region. Then one can also calculate the economic growth by a set of classification of population based on their income levels, say percentiles. Inclusion can mean a number of concepts, say the lowest 10 percent, 20 percent, or 30 percent have also achieved growth that is not appreciably below the average growth.

Many people are used to using Gini index for equality purposes. Gini index is very useful in measuring income or wealth distribution for a country or region and indeed the whole world if one wishes to do so.

I do mind using that but have some concerns on indiscriminately using it to every occasion particularly to situations where changes are rapid and large in some of the underlying indicators like GDP growth. This is because Gini is a static indicator of relativity of income distribution for a particular point of time and can indicate very little about the level. As such, it may mask significant improvement in, say, poverty reduction when economic growth is rapid with the poor benefiting from it but at the same time Gini may show inequality has increased.

China is a case for this where poverty has been reduced significantly but its Gini measure may have worsened.

I think the UN should undertake some studies to develop some measures which can improve the shortcomings of Gini in that regard. This work may have important applications in managing expectations and contributing to a better and happier society by showing a true picture.

Problems created by Resolution 1973

Comments on Donald R. Rothwell and Hitoshi Nasu “UN Security Council resolutions on Libya and the significance of ‘R2P’”, 8/04/2011, http://www.eastasiaforum.org/2011/04/08/un-security-council-resolutions-on-libya-and-the-significance-of-r2p/

While the intent of "R2P" is undoubtedly good, the outcome of passing Resolution 1973 as that form was not necessarily as good.

It has had too much ambiguity and created opportunities for abuse the "R2P" intent.

Instead of protection, it could be used to kill, albeit in the empty name of protecting.

For example, an independent person would ask the following: were many of the air strike bombings completely necessary for the imposition of no fly zone? Have any of the bombers and fight jets from the enforcers encountered any threats?

Let's be honest, were the bomb and killing of Libyan government military personnel when they didn't engage in killing civilians or when they were in some sort of military facilities that were not engaged in killing civilians justified and justifiable? Just ask for an innocent Libyan soldier why should they be killed while they are not in actions of killing civilians or in fighting with the enforcers, just because they are Libyan government soldiers?

How could anyone say that killing and bombing are humanitarian actions?

Some of the actions have clearly gone significantly beyond the “R2P” as a consequence of the loose and ill-defined (quite deliberately I’d say by some of its authors) Resolution 1973.

If that is international law, it is a dangerous law.

PS: as the authors mentioned the regime change was clearly beyond Resolution 1973. So far it has been clear that some of the leaders involved in the military actions against Libyan government forces simply used it as a cover and excuse to achieve their quite different objectives than the ‘R2P’.

Any arming of the rebels, including external military ground involvement to assist the rebels, would go beyond that. It would not be protecting people, it would magnify and prolong military conflicts and result in more killings and deaths including civilians.

G20 and other world and international institutions

Comments on Thom Woodroofe “The G20: More development needed”, 10/10/2010, http://www.eastasiaforum.org/2010/10/10/the-g20-more-development-needed-2/
The G20 should consolidate on its role in world economic and financial affairs first to make it both effective and efficient to steer the world economy and ensure financial stability.

In that role, the G20 should gradually play a leading role in coordinating the agendas of main international economic and financial institutions like the world trade organisation, IMF and the World Bank.

It is possible and indeed desirable for G20 to play a leading role in negotiating a world climate change agreement. The UN should mandate G20 such a role, perhaps as its effective climate change secretariat.

At this stage, it appears more difficult for the G20 to play the role for world security, given the complexity of security issue. Just imagine, if the five UN security permanent members could not reach agreement on some issues, how could the G20 which include all those five to reach agreement on the same issues?

So, the best strategy for the G20 is to play a role in areas it can be successful and gradually to establish itself to be an effective world body, and then to broaden its agenda and influences, including possibly the reforms of UN governing mechanisms

UN officials's sensitional talking unhelpful to climate change cause

Comments on Ben Webster and Murad Ahmed “Hackers probably paid to help undermine Copenhagen climate summit: UN”, 7/12/2009, http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/hackers-probably-paid-to-help-undermine-copenhagen-climate-summit-un/story-e6frg6xf-1225807575795

No matter what purposes the hackers may have had, the disclosure of the information from those emails, presumably true, provide the public with a voice of a different view present by official channels.

The world should not spend resources on investigating how the hackers got in but on investigating what the email really mean and whether they are reliable and which side of the story is likely to be more correct.

A question is that why the official channel has not allowed some decent views from some of the equally qualified climate scientists choose by the official to be published at all.

It is unhelpful to simply brand people having or asking questions of climate changes and the likely causes.

Potentially, so much is at stake on possible actions or inactions to tackle climate changes if the true causes of the current climate change are not understood correctly.

Security Council member for Australia - both privilege and obligation

Comments on Michael Fullilove “Rudd right to press for UN seat”, 23/09/2009, http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,26111671-7583,00.html

Australia should seek to join and make a contribution to the UN Security Council.

It is not a privilege but an obligation.

Now that nearly three quarters support the government's initiative, the government needs to take concrete steps to do so.

A new voting mechanism

Comments on Joel Rathus’ “The Chiang Mai Initiative: China, Japan and financial regionalism”, 11/05/2009, http://www.eastasiaforum.org/2009/05/11/the-chiang-mai-initiative-china-japan-and-financial-regionalism/comment-page-1/#comment-27065

I'd like to propose a new voting mechanism. I work for the Australia federation and there are eight state level governments in Australia. In our work, we often are faced with the question: what is the average policy of the states in a particular area? The following thought has benefited from that work.

The agreement between China and Japan is helpful in progressing the CMI cause and should be congratulated. It is, however, still in the confine of the traditional “power” representation of politics and governance. There is no “breakthrough” in thinking to combine the “representative style” of the IMF voting mechanism and the somewhat more “senate style” voting mechanism of the United Nations. The latter is more reflective of equal rights for every nation, irrespective they are big or small, although it can suffer its own shortcomings.

An alternative to either of those mechanisms is to have a voting mechanism combined both. Half of the votes will be decided by the representative style votes based on economic contributions and the other half by an equal vote of every member. This will give the community more humanitarian flavour and also recognise the economic reality and accountability.

In fact this voting mechanism, if adopted, could be better than or superior to the current parliamentary system of two separate chambers, with the requirement that both have to pass in majority. Indeed, some of the parliamentary dramas in the Australian system where a minority senator can hold the whole parliament and the nation as “hostage” have shown some of the serious shortcomings with that system. Maybe one day they will be reformed.