Efficacy of Global and Regional Frameworks

Frameworks are an important step to any project or goal that one is trying to accomplish. I have always found issue with international frameworks being effective. The problem with global frameworks is that the international order is in a state of anarchy. The United Nations is a great organization that tries to guide countries to do the right thing, but it has limited ability to hold a foreign government accountable for developmental goals.  While countries may sign onto or agree to follow a global or even regional framework, they could be doing it just to avoid falling under a bad light on the world stage.

The UNCRPD is a framework and convention that lays out what countries should do to ensure the successful inclusion of persons with disabilities. This something that countries can voluntarily sign onto. The United States, one of the greatest world powers, has not signed it. The efficacy of the framework is then called into question if a large power does not sign. My capstone project looks at the access to education for children with disabilities in Haiti. The country ratified the CRPD and the optional protocol in 2009 which allows the UNCRPD Committee in Geneva to make comments on their progress. The committee can make comments and suggestions, but they can not hold the Haitian Government accountable to the CRPD. Haiti may have signed the convention with every intention of fulfilling the commitments that they signed up for, but they have not made much progress in providing and inclusive environment for persons with disabilities. This could be because of changes in government, cultural friction,  lack of financial resources or technical ability to implement the new policies. No matter the reason, there is not a system international system in place that can truly hold the country accountable with any consequences or penalties if they do not implement policies related to the CRPD. Therefore, a global framework such as this can never been considered extremely effective.