Indicators for monitoring sustainable development goals: An application to oceanic development in the European Union

Rickels, Wilfried; Dovern, Jonas; Hoffmann, Júlia; Quaas, Martin F.; Schmidt, Jörn O.; Visbeck, Martin

doi:10.1002/2016ef000353

Cited by 67 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 45 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The conceptual nonsubstitutability of the SDGs and the ideal of a strong sustainability rather disapprove this assumption (Rickels et al, ; UN, ). However, Rickels et al () note that strictly applying the nonsubstitutability might hinder the application of effective policies. They argue that the specification of substitution possibility cannot solely be based on scientific reasoning but requires normative judgment and decision (Rickels et al, , p. 265).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, Rickels et al () note that strictly applying the nonsubstitutability might hinder the application of effective policies. They argue that the specification of substitution possibility cannot solely be based on scientific reasoning but requires normative judgment and decision (Rickels et al, , p. 265). The findings of this research support this statement, recommending that trade‐offs from bioeconomy activities need to be ferret out and evaluated on an individual basis.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Bioeconomy and SDGs: Does the Bioeconomy Support the Achievement of the SDGs?

Heimann

2019

Earth's Future

140

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper evaluates how bioeconomy activities, stated in the concepts of the European Union, Organisation for Economic Co‐operation and Development, and the German government, potentially affect the targets of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The aim of the bioeconomy is to substitute the use of fossil resources by renewable resources, while the SDGs set targets for a holistic sustainable global development. A literature‐based influence analysis on empirical studies is employed to derive three bioeconomy scenarios (business as usual, bioeconomy, and sustainable bioeconomy) and to quantify their effects on the individual SDG targets. It is shown that the bioeconomy scenario has positive as well as negative effects on the SDG targets. While targets for cleaner industrial production are strongly supported, socioeconomic targets are subject to mixed effects and environmental targets significantly hurt. This paper outlines which SDGs need special attention when implementing a bioeconomy according to the above‐mentioned concepts. The results add to the debate on SDG trade‐offs and on the substitutability of SDG targets. Without regulations, policies, and investments ensuring sustainability, or in case the substitutability of SDG targets is not allowed, the bioeconomy concepts have the potential to jeopardize the achievement of several SDGs. In contrast, the sustainable bioeconomy scenario assumes strong sustainability measures that reveal the extensive potential of the bioeconomy to support the achievement of the SDGs.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bioeconomy and SDGs: Does the Bioeconomy Support the Achievement of the SDGs?

Heimann

2019

Earth's Future

140

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In addition, the MDG Inter-Agency Expert Group (IAEG-MDG) emphasizes coherence, consistency and complementarity, a limited number of indicators, focusing on outcomes and the need to complement the list by process indicators (UN, 2013). While these lists also include more complex criteria such as coherence and the need to be forward-looking, in the proposed indicator sets the simplicity and measurability criteria tend to dominate over the more complex ones (Rickels et al, 2016).…”

Section: Design Of the Sdgsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Failure to do so runs the risk of reproducing negative effects of the MDGs in the shape of incoherent policies, adverse impact on other sectors and outcomes that diverge from the intended goals (Le Blanc, 2015). Criticism of the lack of integration among the very large number of SDG indicators and the consequent lack of policy guidance have already emerged, while additional composite indicators have been proposed (Loewe & Rippin, 2015;Rickels et al, 2016).…”

Section: Design Of the Sdgsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Governance for sustainable urban development: the double function of SDG indicators

Hansson

Arfvidsson

Simon

2019

Area Development and Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

At the core of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development is the imperative of monitoring progress and holding policy-makers accountable. For this purpose, 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and 230 global indicators were established with the double function of being a report card and a management tool. In the light of a pilot study about the experiences of local planning officials in the City of Gothenburg, Sweden, in relation to the suggested indicators for SDG 11, 'Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable', and a comparison with findings in four other cities, the paper argues for a need to reprioritize indicator criteria to serve better governance for sustainable development in diverse urban contexts worldwide.

show abstract

“…Especially since the introduction of the SDGs, there is a growing body of literature that deals with various aspects, either regarding the evolution of the SDGs, historically but also forwardlooking [27,31,32], as to the degree to which the SDGs themselves, or the way they are structured, can facilitate the progression to a more sustainable development [27,28,[33][34][35][36], or aspects concerning the applicability of the SDGs and their associated indicators, on different levels.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Applying the SDGs to cities: business as usual or new dawn?

Zinkernagel¹,

Evans²,

Neij³

2018

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

With growing urbanisation the sustainability of cities has become increasingly important. Although cities have been using indicators for a long time it is only in the last decades that attempts have been made to collate indicators into indicator sets with the aim of reflecting the many different aspects that need to be covered to assess the sustainability of a city. The aim of this paper is to review how indicators for monitoring sustainable urban development have evolved over time and compare them to the indicators suggested by the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The review reveals that previous indicator sets emphasised environmental sustainability, health and economic growth. It is also shown that indicator sets that pre-date the SDGs lacked dimensions such as gender equality and reduced inequalities. In all, the SDG indicators provide the possibility of a more balanced and integrated approach to urban sustainability monitoring. At the same time, a methodology is needed to facilitate the adaptation process of localising the SDGS, targets and indicators. Challenges of local application include their large number, their generic characteristics and the need to complement them with specific indicators that are more relevant at the city level.

show abstract

Indicators for monitoring sustainable development goals: An application to oceanic development in the European Union

Cited by 67 publications

References 45 publications

Bioeconomy and SDGs: Does the Bioeconomy Support the Achievement of the SDGs?

Bioeconomy and SDGs: Does the Bioeconomy Support the Achievement of the SDGs?

Governance for sustainable urban development: the double function of SDG indicators

Applying the SDGs to cities: business as usual or new dawn?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About