Global Strategies and Frameworks

In this blog post, I discuss the benefits and limitations of global strategies and frameworks. I also discuss the limitations and shortcomings of the MDGs, the SDGs, and what global frameworks exist for the inclusive recreation.


Global strategies and frameworks are beneficial because it creates international order and provides consensus for development. Global action and cooperation on social, economic, and environmental issues shifts the global agenda altogether. It also offers a platform for countries a way to share ideas and find potential allies or partners to achieve local, regional, and international goals, at meetings and conferences. There are limitations to global strategies, however, including barriers for representation, enforcement mechanisms, and funding. Global strategies also lack a local context since no objectives can universally be implemented since all countries have different social, cultural, political, economic, geographic, and environmental circumstances.

The Millennium Development Goals are a prime example of global strategies and frameworks. However, the MDGs resulted in several shortcomings and did not accomplish the goals it set out to pursue. In terms of the MDGs, success was not felt equally around the globe, it lacked accountability and enforcement mechanisms, and the goals were shortsighted, as it did not provide specific targets, a time frame, or ways to achieve the majority of the goals. The MDGs also lacked representation for the groups of people it set out to help. The MDGs were successful for only some parts of the world, and in some cases, actually had more detrimental impacts than beneficial impacts.

The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) replaced the MDGs. The SDGs build on the MDGS, while pursuing a more comprehensive approach to economic, social, and environmental issues, showing us that these topics are all interrelated. There are several differences between the SDGs and the MDGs: 1) The SDGs provide clear goals, targets, and indicators, while the MDGs were seen as vague and 2) The SDGs are more universally applicable, removing the “developing” and “developed” dichotomy of the MDGs.

In terms of my project, I think global frameworks are beneficial for inclusive recreation. For countries that ratified by the CRPD (Article 30 in particular), there are specific measures countries must implement to ensure inclusivity and accessibility in recreational facilities, services, and opportunities. The CRPD is impartial and vague enough to let countries have some freedom when choosing how to actually implement the objectives of the CRPD, which is good because it lets countries adapt the CRPD to their own local contexts.