{"title":"Birth Registration for Every Child by 2030: Are we on track? Review and Annotated Version of an Unhelpful UNICEF Publication","authors":"J. van der Straaten","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3657062","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Over the past two decades UNICEF has been the most visible advocate of birth registration globally. In 2015 the world community launched the Sustainable Development Agenda, which includes targets to achieve a legal identity for all, including birth registration, and targets to achieve universal birth registration (targets 16.9, and 17.19.2(b) which also includes a target for death registration). In December 2019 UNICEF issued a brochure meant to provide the status of birth registration ‘today’, and the prospect for change along the journey to 2030. In this technical report we review the publication. We identify quite a number of problems with the brochure, as UNICEF coins it. We are disappointed by the veracity of the data used, and find its recommendations lacking an evidence-base. The global birth registration coverage estimate in the publication is imprecise, but also pertains to years ago. But the publication is also a blow to the collaboration that is expected from UN organisations and the World Bank Group. The Deputy Secretary General has corralled them together into the United Nations Legal Identity Taskforce, but that does not appear to work. This review includes an impression of how various important actors in the identity management field pull in different directions, while their track records do not reveal much if any success. This is tragic. The people pay for the United Nations (including the Bretton Woods organisations), to deliver results for the people. Resources are wasted while staff produces bland reports, travel, meet and talk. The identity management field shows that it is better left to the people.<br>","PeriodicalId":332923,"journal":{"name":"GeographyRN: Social Geography (Topic)","volume":"16 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"11","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"GeographyRN: Social Geography (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3657062","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11
Abstract
Over the past two decades UNICEF has been the most visible advocate of birth registration globally. In 2015 the world community launched the Sustainable Development Agenda, which includes targets to achieve a legal identity for all, including birth registration, and targets to achieve universal birth registration (targets 16.9, and 17.19.2(b) which also includes a target for death registration). In December 2019 UNICEF issued a brochure meant to provide the status of birth registration ‘today’, and the prospect for change along the journey to 2030. In this technical report we review the publication. We identify quite a number of problems with the brochure, as UNICEF coins it. We are disappointed by the veracity of the data used, and find its recommendations lacking an evidence-base. The global birth registration coverage estimate in the publication is imprecise, but also pertains to years ago. But the publication is also a blow to the collaboration that is expected from UN organisations and the World Bank Group. The Deputy Secretary General has corralled them together into the United Nations Legal Identity Taskforce, but that does not appear to work. This review includes an impression of how various important actors in the identity management field pull in different directions, while their track records do not reveal much if any success. This is tragic. The people pay for the United Nations (including the Bretton Woods organisations), to deliver results for the people. Resources are wasted while staff produces bland reports, travel, meet and talk. The identity management field shows that it is better left to the people.