Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
BMJ 2004;329:742 (25 September), doi:10.1136/bmj.329.7468.742-b
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
EDITORMillennium development goals are the most recent statement of commitment towards narrowing gaps between the developed and developing regions of the world.1 But how realistic are these goals?
Although goals help in making assessments of progress, they should not be blind to existing potentials for progress, which is conditioned by the existing status as well as the motivation of nations and states towards realising them. Unfortunately, millennium development goals are considered to be a tool for assessing accountability and highlight a need for urgency that could violate the autonomy of nations and states. This raises the question of whose goals they are.
Often such initiatives are seen as global priorities, overriding local concerns. The best example is the vaccination initiative, which has consistently reflected failures by countries without the required infrastructure. In other circumstances, such externally aided initiatives are never integrated into the local health system to make
Udaya S Mishra, Takemi fellow
Department of Population and International Health, Harvard School of Public Health, 665, Huntington Avenue, Boston MA 02115, USA umishra@hsph.harvard.edu