Global SDGs Assessments: Helping or Confusing Indicators?

Abstract

On 1 January 2016, the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development-adopted by world leaders in 2015-came into force. They build on the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and call for action by all countries to promote prosperity while protecting the planet. Since the SDGs are not legally binding, governments are expected to take ownership and establish national frameworks for the achievement of the 17 Goals. Countries thus have the primary responsibility for follow-up and review of the progress made in implementing the Goals, which will require quality, accessible and timely data collection. This will be instrumental for both regional and global follow-up analyses and assessments-several such major global assessments have already appeared. It might be supposed that the SDGs framework, including indicators, is conceptually and methodologically well-designed and tested in order to function reliably and provide guidance for such assessments. However, while it seems that the current structure of the SDGs has provided a firm policy framework, the Goals and targets have been mostly operationalized by indicators. We demonstrate and argue that without a procedurally well-designed, conceptual indicator framework for selecting and/or designing indicators, the results of SDGs assessments may be ambiguous and confusing.

Making Regional Sense of Global Sustainable Development Indicators for the Arctic

“…Since the United Nations adopted the global Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in 2015 [1], major efforts have been launched to monitor progress with the help of indicators [2][3][4], which in turn has inspired critical assessments of indicator frameworks [5,6]. The SDGs are explicitly global in scope and meant to apply to all countries, where the indicators are the major tool for following up on the national implementation of this global policy framework.…”

Teaching Down to Earth—Service-Learning Methodology for Science Education and Sustainability at the University Level: A Practical Approach

“…Sustainability 2020, 12, 542 5 of 23 In the evolution of sustainability as a key concept, the global environmental policies are involved from the beginning [66], but it is not until the appearance of the Millenium Development Goals (MDG) [67], when an integral paradigm of sustainability, human development, and citizenship implications was built up, although with many inconsistencies [68][69][70]. The standard evolution of MDG drove us to the SDG, which is characterized as a feasible framework to teach sustainability at University [17].…”

Is Foreign Aid Responsive to Environmental Needs and Performance of Developing Countries? Case Study of the Czech Republic.

“…Sustainable management of natural resources is another overreaching objective which reflects current development paradigm [77][78][79] and which is mirrored within objectives of the Czech development cooperation [23,24]. Sustainable use of natural resources is approximated in our paper by ecological footprint, an indicator which attempts to determine the biologically productive area needed to support the consumption of a given population indefinitely [80].…”