Grandstand. More and more voices are being raised calling for a profound reform of the multilateral system, i.e. of the structures and tools that the States have given themselves to better manage their common interests as stakeholders. of planet Earth. To these voices are added those of the defenders of a model of multilateral governance which would put at the heart of its action the improvement of the daily life of the populations.

Often conceived in the 20th century, the institutions in place are inevitably challenged by the amplification of global upheavals caused, in particular, by global warming and technological acceleration. The construction site is gigantic. But I want to point here to a relatively simple element whose improvement could lead to cascading benefits for all of humanity.

For several decades, financial solidarity between the richest and poorest countries has been organized on the basis of a single indicator, the average level of income per capita. The aim was laudable: it was to combat inequalities in development by ranking countries according to their monetary resources to take appropriate measures. But let’s face it! This approach does not work, at least not as hoped. Admittedly, some countries have emerged from the most precarious category, that of the least developed countries (LDCs), but they have not, however, emerged from the difficulties.

Despite the massive aid allocated according to this nomenclature, it appears that all the LDCs, but also other countries with higher incomes such as the small island developing States (SIDS), are becoming increasingly extremely vulnerable. to exogenous shocks.

A more powerful dashboard

This phenomenon has been particularly highlighted by the Covid-19 pandemic. In 2020, this led to a sharp decline in the GDP of these States (on average – 7.8% for SIDS and – 2.3% for LDCs) which canceled out the efforts made during the previous period. It is estimated that it will take at least another half-decade before these countries return to their pre-Covid-19 trajectory. And again, that’s counting without the new headwinds generated by the war in Ukraine and high inflation. This same delayed recovery effect had already been observed after the “subprime” financial crisis in 2008.

It is high time to admit that the model is inadequate. And for good reason: how could we get the right time with a single hand? Especially if it delays since, by definition, the measurement of wealth at time T cannot make it possible to anticipate the most predictable systemic changes.

So what about the most unexpected or the ones that we know will happen but are hard to trace? In short, it is imperative to equip ourselves with a more efficient dashboard, making it possible to accurately and completely measure the effective vulnerabilities of States so that they can build their resilience.

Qualifying them according to a multidimensional vulnerability index is not a new idea. Numerous studies have been carried out on this type of mechanism, in particular by the Foundation for the study and research in international development (Ferdi). A group of experts has been set up around this issue within the United Nations, the conclusions of which are expected in the coming months.

The urgency is palpable

But it is crucial to move up a gear now and, not only, to quickly adopt this common multidimensional index reflecting the specific vulnerabilities of developing countries, but above all to put it into practice. Making it the new lever of our development policies presupposes, on the one hand, its recognition by all the multilateral, regional and national development financing institutions and, on the other hand, its effective use to guide the allocation of financial resources, including concessional ones, to the countries most in need.

The urgency is palpable. The exogenous shocks that relentlessly affect the most fragile countries produce dramatic consequences. In West Africa, the effects of the Covid-19 crisis combined with those of the war in Ukraine – whose impact on the import of foodstuffs and the increase in the cost of energy are known – are result in acute food insecurity for more than 38 million people, while around ten million others are directly threatened in the sub-region.

Even more systemically, the expenditure committed to respond to the accumulation of crises has largely contributed to a return to levels of public debt in LDCs and SIDS similar to those which prevailed before the debt relief initiatives carried out in the early 2000s and they weakened many States in their relations with rating agencies.

According to the UN, 80% of countries in debt distress or at high risk of becoming so are LDCs or SIDS. Without sufficient fiscal space, these countries will not be able to respond to crises, nor carry out the investments and policies necessary to reduce their vulnerabilities in terms of social protection, economic diversification, fight against the digital divide which affect them proportionally. much more than developed countries.

save the planet

The same goes for the challenges of climate change. Although their CO2 emissions are up to four times lower than the global average, the most vulnerable countries are also unfairly the most exposed. In particular, they face natural disasters and extreme weather events that are accelerating and intensifying. In less than a year, there has been a succession of hurricanes, droughts and even floods – particularly intense in Central and West Africa – which have led to the proclamation of a state of emergency in several Member States and governments of Francophonie.

Quite recently, Cyclone Freddy, breaking a sad longevity record, hit Madagascar and Mozambique several times, causing hundreds of deaths, countless destructions, unprecedented population displacements and threatening future harvests. Between 2000 and 2015, costs and losses accounted for 17% of GDP in SIDS and LDCs. Between 2010 and 2020, human losses due to floods, droughts and storms were fifteen times greater in highly vulnerable regions than in weakly vulnerable regions.

It is clear that the adoption of a multidimensional index to measure the vulnerability of developing countries is a priority for the international community. It is not only a question of solidarity but of safeguarding the planet, which belongs to us and which is the only one we have.