Diversity of culture of the world bears its own dispersion or multilateralism. Under such diverse condition, what direction life should orient oneself ? Being the key to the post-2015 development agenda, how could it result in economics benefit ? How to connect one region to another and what does the connectivity look like ?

To sustainably advance human development and political stability, Arab Spring countries should decentralize to sub-national levels the resources necessary to catalyze and implement community development. Increasingly, Morocco is suggested as a model for the successful progress in the Arab Spring because of its stability, opportunities and cultural diversity. At the same time, however, there are also extremely difficult internal challenges that could undermine Morocco’s future: rural poverty, youth despondency, severe economic disparity and the commonplace of exploited labor.

If Morocco could effectively implement participatory development and build democratic systems through decentralization, the model could be informative for the people of other Arab Spring countries to achieve the kind of future they seek. Morocco’s development experiences and lessons are, therefore, relevant regionally and globally.

1111_2919_Arab Spring and Human Development - Dr. Yossef Ben-Meir - Oct 2014.pdf

Effective governance, at whatever geographical or political level, cannot be brought about while extreme poverty exists. All thought and discussion on governance must begin by examining how to reintegrate all people, without exception, into the social dialogues which take place within communities, as well as both nationally and internationally.

Extreme poverty, above and beyond social needs or deprivations, equates to the negation of all social existence due to the impossibility of full enjoyment of fundamental human rights – social, economic and cultural rights, as well as civil and political rights. Its endurance is testament that respect of human rights is an obligation that is not applied to all people, since some are seen as "hopeless cases". The fact that extreme poverty is first and foremost a human rights violation means that any attempt to build effective governance, based on respect for humans and the ethics of responsibility, must first seek its eradication.

In the position paper, International Movement ATD Fourth World addresses the challenges of effective governance from a human rights perspective, and promotes participatory good governance in the post-2015 development framework.

1111_920_Good Governance Proposals - ATD Fourth World.pdf

Advancing sustainable human development requires democracy. It is only in a democracy that people can be empowered to demand and shape better policies, express grievances, seek justice and hold leaders and the private sector to account. Societies with strong, democratic institutions empower people to influence their government to prioritise national development that is equitable and sustainable. In a true democracy, people can demand better policies, express grievances, hold leaders to account and seek justice from abuse.

However, governance has been distorted and abused by elites who have captured public institutions to advance their narrow interests. Globalization has created conditions for corruption both in its broad and narrow senses to flourish. At the same time, developing countries face pressure from aid agencies and foreign investors to pursue policies consistent with their ideologies in line with a neoliberal agenda. The top-down aid conditionality imposed by Washington-based institutions adds further pressure to introduce neoliberal reforms and makes developing countries’ governments more accountable to donor institutions than to their people. The true measure of good governance is its ability to deliver development based on realizing people’s human rights. It entails transparency, accountability, participation, and responsiveness to the needs of the poor, marginalized and underrepresented groups.

THE CHALLENGE

Good governance is essential to achieve development while true participatory democracy ensures that development is equitable and sustainable. Public institutions need to be able to manage public resources and conduct public affairs in a manner that is free of corruption and abuse that upholds the rule of law and that protects and promotes the realization of the rights of its people. The true measure of good governance is the ability of a government to realize people’s human rights and deliver sustainable and equitable development. Good governance is derived through transparency, accountability, participation and responsiveness to the needs of the poor, marginalized and underrepresented groups.

THE CAMPAIGN FOR PEOPLE’S GOALS MAKES THE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDATIONS TO GUIDE A NEW DEVELOPMENT AGENDA TO:

Strengthen rights and opportunities of people especially traditionally underrepresented groups to take greater part in governance and affairs of the community, nationally and internationally.

Actively engage people’s participation in development and implementation of policies at local and national level, and paying particular attention to include traditionally underrepresented groups such as women, basic sectors (workers and farmers), youth, disabled persons, ethnic minorities and indigenous peoples;
Fully guarantee freedom of speech, a free press, the right to assembly and association, and the right to vote and be elected in public office;
Limit influence of money in politics by imposing spending limits, contribution limits, and bans on certain types of donations to political parties and offices;
Recognize and value cultural diversity of different communities and support and promote traditional knowledge and customary practices in governance;
Uphold the right of indigenous peoples’ communities to free prior and informed consent in all actions, policies and developments affecting their communities; and
Consciously expand education and awareness raising on people’s rights to participate in public affairs.
Institute measures for accountability, transparency, democracy and justice in governance.

Recognize, legislate, enact and operationalize the right to information. This includes publishing and disseminating budget information in easy and accessible formats through all possible means;
Perform social audits in partnership with civil society;
Hold public justice and law enforcement agencies – police force and courts – to highest standards of integrity and human rights adherence. Ensure access to remedies for victims of human rights violations by strengthening ombudspersons, elections commissions and human rights commissions; and
Introduce accountability mechanisms which people can access and participate in regardless of their background and which they can use to ensure that their human rights are being met; and ensure that these processes are decided in a transparent and equitable process.
Strengthen corporate accountability and human rights adherence.

Ensure compliance of business and industry with national laws and international human rights and environmental standards; and
Strive to create international rules and monitoring mechanisms to guide the conduct of transnational corporations, addressing issues such as transfer pricing, price fixing, tax evasion, corporate lobbying and interference in national politics.

The business sector, led by corporations, has an increasingly prominent role in
international development. Although rapidly increasing in recent years, this role has its
origins in the same neoliberal ideology that launched what has become today’s mantra
of “good governance”.

However, while the “good governance” promoted by Bretton Woods institutions
valorises the centrality of business in development and the rolling back of the state, its
policy prescriptions do not include an enforceable system for holding corporations to
account or a framework that acknowledges the impact of corporate activities on people
– who are, due to such impacts, stakeholders in corporations.

IBON International believes the creation of a system that upholds the wider interests of
stakeholders above the narrow interests of shareholders and enforces corporate
accountability in line with international human rights standards and codes of best
practice. This must underpin any governance objective agreed under the Post-2015
Agenda.

1111_5315_Without Corporate Accountability, Good Governance Falls.pdf

Achieving sustainable development entails a global transition—away from prevailing inequitable and ecologically destabilizing patterns of development, to modes of development based on shared prosperity and environmental protection. Global governance plays a crucial role in this shift.

This policy brief from IBON International argues that the general thrust of reforming sustainable development governance should be towards greater democratization and strengthening people’s rights. A reformed institutional framework for sustainable development (IFSD) following a rights-based approach should help:

Redefine the goal of governance
Address power imbalances
Address social and economic inequities
Bridge implementation and accountability gaps
Enhance policy integration and coherence

1111_5315_1330925864IBON_Susdev_Gov_policy_brief.pdf

Due to rapid globalization over the past decades, decisions about economic, social and environmental standards and baseline agreements have been set at international forums and have increasingly affected the policy space of countries, often delimiting their scope to determine their path to development.

This mounting influence of global governance structures has not been matched by a democratization of these structures. The global governance system, despite being a major proponent of “good governance”, is hindered by a critical democratic deficit—in which the wealthiest countries dictate the global governance agenda in the absence of transparency, accountability, and inequity in participation by developing countries.

As the MDGs target date of 2015 is fast approaching, the global development agenda—and the governance structures that will give it shape—are being subjected to renewed debate, examination and reconsideration. Thus the crucial question of democratizing the processes and structures of global governance has increasingly defined current policy debates. IBON International offers this policy brief as its contribution to that discourse. #

1111_5315_IBON PB - On Democratizing Global Governance.pdf

In this video, Mr Huffines elaborates on the role of the high level political forum in integrating the three dimensions of sustainable development.

This video has been produced with the financial assistance of the European Union. The contents of it are the sole responsibility of Stakeholder Forum and can under no circumstances be regarded as reflecting the position of the European Union.

Save the Children promotes a holistic post-2015 development agenda that has poverty eradication at its core and is guided by universal, equitable and human rights-based approaches to sustainable development. This briefing highlights key recommendations on global partnerships for achieving sustainable development, means of implementation, needs of countries in special situations, human rights, the right to development and global governance, which are priority issues for Save the Children. The following recommendations are based on the 10-goal framework proposed in our Ending Poverty In Our Generation report.

1111_3319_Save_the_Children_Briefing_OWG_6.pdf

In order to inform the deliberations of the sixth Session of the UN General Assembly Open Working Group (OWG) on Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), Stakeholder Forum has conducted an analysis of the proposals currently housed within the SDGs e-Inventory which relate to the thematic areas of the meeting, including regional and global governance.

The recommendations on global governance presented here have been compiled from two civil society consultations conducted by UN-NGLS in 2013: a teleconference-based consultation that resulted in the report Advancing Regional Recommendations on the Post-2015 Agenda, and an online consultation on four post-2015 reports to the Secretary-General.

1111_3099_UN-NGLS Policy Brief for OWG on SDGs-Global Governance-Dec 2013.pdf

This document provides a view of how a cross-cutting sustainable development goal would help provide governance for the Earth system whilst combining social equity through the development of a social boundary

1111_3134_PBI SDG submission NY intersessional 22 Nov 2013VA.DT.pdf

Civil society made a joint statement during the Expert Group meeting at the African Consultative Meeting on SDGs that took place in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

1111_898_CSO statement+SDGs.docx

A joint meeting between ESCWA, DESA and UNEP was organized on the 28 May prior to the RIM to debrief Major Groups on entry points and to support their preparation and interventions. Major Groups intervene 8 times in the 4 sessions --Session 1: S&CT and NGOs, Session 2: S&CT and Children and Youth, Session 3: STC, C&Y and NGOs, Session 4: NGOs -- and delivered a joint statement at the conclusion of the meeting

1111_930_0706arabrim.pdf

This report has been prepared by the Regional Coordination of the Beyond 2015 / GCAP / IFP project for Latin America and the Caribbean, based on the preliminary and partial reports received to date from the national hubs / coalitions undertaking national deliberations in the region.

1111_739_Preliminary Report.pdf

This paper is the result of more than one year of reflection by and discussion between European Task Force participants, backed up by both desk and field research. Two rounds of consultation and feedback were held within the ETF specifically on draft versions of this proposal.

For the European Task Force, the purpose of this paper is to stimulate thinking, to show that a more comprehensive approach to sustainable development is not only necessary but eminently possible and to share some innovative ideas on how to construct a post-2015 framework such that it may retain the positive features of the Millennium Development Goals and build upon them, while also overcoming some of their drawbacks.

1111_739_Putting People and Planet First.pdf

Since September 2012, Beyond 2015 and the Global Call to Action Against Poverty (GCAP) have been creating a global civil society position on a post-2015 framework. This is happening through a series of national, regional, and community civil society deliberations that are currently ongoing. So far, civil society deliberations are planned in 40 countries in Europe, Latin America, Africa, and Asia. In a review of the deliberations that have taken place so far around the world, we have received reports from 22 countries about community, regional and national deliberations. This report is the synthesis of these outcomes.

1111_739_Beyond 2015 GCAP National Deliberations Synthesis Report.pdf

The Essential Must Haves are the fruit of a global, open, inclusive and on-going conversation convened by Beyond 2015 on the essential must-haves that would need to be met in order for any new framework to be considered legitimate.

1111_739_BEYOND 2015 MUST HAVES.pdf

1111_752_Comments-on-draft-SDSN-jp report1.docx

Describe content...

1111_752_Contribution ODD SSB avec ODD.doc

Bogotá, Colombia, 5-9 of March 2013

1111_934_eclacrim.pdf

For the last 20 years, the international development debate has been dominated by two trends that seem at first to be heading in a similar direction. However, under closer scrutiny they differ with respect to their focus and underlying philosophies. These are on the one hand the agenda of reducing poverty in developing countries in its various dimensions (lack of income, education, water, political participation etc.) that found their expression in the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). On the other hand, there is the idea of sustainability that became popular at the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro in 1992 and that at the Rio+20 summit in 2012 generated a parallel concept to the MDGs: the so called Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

Two independent UN working groups will soon be created: One to discuss whether there should be a new global development agenda after the term of the MDGs ends in 2015, and what such an agenda should entail; the other is to compile a list of possible SDGs. This raises the question what happens if these separate processes actually result in two differing sets of goals, and if it might still be possible to merge the poverty and sustainability agendas.

Both agendas have a lot in common, but in contrast to the MDGs, the proponents of SDGs see poverty as merely one of a number of global issues to be addressed, which again makes those in favour of the MDGs afraid that poverty reduction will become secondary in an SDG agenda as just one item among many others. On the other hand, the pro-SDG side criticises the MDGs for having a too narrow concept of development and giving immediate results preference over socially, economically and ecologically sustainable ones.

Both are valid concerns, and thus it is important to find a solution that takes them both into account, while still satisfying the interests of countries around the world.

In this case it is helpful to highlight a rather technical aspect: The majority of the MDGs refer to improvements in the wellbeing of individuals, they are thus final goals of human development (education, health, access to water) to be measured at the micro-level. The SDG agenda also
involves such goals (clean air, biodiversity), but also ones that refer to the preservation or establishment of global public goods (limiting climate change, financial stability) that can thus only be measured through macroindicators. The latter are not objectives, but preconditions for sustainable development that for reasons of consistency should not enter into one agenda with final goals. Some of these are already addressed by MDG 8 (among them a fair financial and world trade system).

If one were to create two separate but mutually referring agendas for the future beyond 2015 – one concentrating on human development, the other on global public goods – it might be possible to address the most serious concerns of the proponents of either pure MDGs or pure SDGs.

1111_829_Post-2015_DIE_BP 18.2012.pdf

Please see attached piece in the latest issue of the scientific journal Nature. It appropriately makes the case for integrating the current, three-pillar UN sustainable development governance structure into a nested arrangement, with the economy serving society, which itself lies within the Earth's systems. The piece correctly notes that we cannot reach critical social goals such as alleviating poverty without at the same time addressing environmental well-being. The nesting of economy under society, with both nested within care for the Earth's systems that support us all, is the structural approach we should take moving forward.

Linda Sheehan
Earth Law Center, California, USA

Policy: Sustainable development goals for people and planet : Nature : Nature Publishing Group

Planetary stability must be integrated with United Nations targets to fight poverty and secure human well-being, argue David Griggs and colleagues.

I am contributing the following as an individual, though I have participated actively in the Commission on Sustainable Development and other UN processes for 15 years. I represent the Global Ecovillage Network, Association of World Citizens and Commons Action for the UN.

Rob Wheeler
robwheeler22@gmail.com


A process needs to be established to include all interested people in a collaborative process to ensure that the SDGs, Targets and Indicators are sufficient, address the right priorities, and are fully met. This means that civil society must be included much more proactively in the negotiations and decision making processes when the Goals, Targets and Indicators are actually determined and set.

The SDGs, Targets and Indicators should be based on the Rio Declaration and thus include a Rights Based Approach, the Precautionary Principle, Differentiated Responsibilities, Access to Information and Participation in Decision Making Processes, etc.

The SDGs, Targets and Indicators should be comprehensive in nature and sufficient to ensure that we fully meet and achieve all goals that have been made to date and in an urgent and timely manner. In addition, they should focus on transitioning as rapidly as possible to full sustainability; and should thus ensure that all people's basic human rights and needs can and will be fully met - thus going well beyond the MDG goals of reducing problems by half.

The UN should adopt a commons based approach and set up a High Level Panel to ensure that all of the above can and will be done and that it will lead to fulfilling all of the agreements that have been made to date

It would be a mistake to try to select a limited number of priority areas for the SDGs. All areas and sectors have to be seen as priorities and a solid case can probably be made as to why they are all essential. The SDGs must instead be comprehensive in nature and should focus on achieving all of the goals, agreements, and commitments on sustainable development that have been made to date.

Certainly all of the topic areas that have already been mentioned by governments are essential (as in the Stakeholder Forums' review of government input); and there are probably a number of additional topic areas that ought to be emphasized and mentioned as well, including adopting an integrated, multi-sectoral community based approach to sustainable rural and impoverished urban development; ecological building practices; elimination of toxic substances; and restoration of the natural environment.

While all countries and the UN ought to agree to focus on achieving all of the Goals and Targets that have been made to date, and thus a comprehensive universal listing of SDGs, Targets and Indicators, they can then be flexible in determining what each of them will set as immediate goals and put the most effort into achieving first or next. But all countries, communities and peoples should strive, and reflect periodically on their success in achieving, all of the SDGs, Targets and Indicators.

In regards to ensuring the participation of stakeholders in the process, certainly all of the various approaches that have already been mentioned by governments are essential; however in addition it is crucially important that the establishment AND achievement of the SDGs, Targets, and Indicators be fully integrated with all of the efforts to implement sustainable development. This should thus include in particular the Local and National Sustainability Strategies; 10YFPs and Local, Regional and National Action Plans on SCP; initiatives focusing on Education for Sustainable Development; Poverty Reduction Strategy Programs; Development Plans; and all other national and multi-lateral sustainable development agreements and processes. Civil society must then be involved in a participatory process to ensure that all of these efforts are integrated into one comprehensive framework that is sufficient to fully implement and achieve all of the agreements and commitments that have been made to date through the new SDGs, Targets and Indicators.

All of the principles that the UN Member States have already mentioned are essential; however it is just as essential that the Rio Declaration and Principles be accepted as a foundational basis upon which the new SDGs, Targets and Indicators must be based and achieved.

The Major Groups need to do everything possible to ensure that an adequate and ongoing Review Process is established and put in place, going will beyond what has been done to date.

The role of the new HLPF needs to be determined in regards to establishing, developing, overseeing, monitoring, assessing, and then continually improving the SDGs, Targets and Indicators process and implementation.

Again, it is essential that a Framework is adopted so that the SDGs, Targets and Indicators provide a basis for integrating, assessing, and improving everything that is being done in regards to sustainable development, at all levels and across the board, in a comprehensive manner and ensuring that all of the goals and commitments that have been made will finally be fully met.

The Global Alliance for the Rights of Nature fully supports the positions taken by the Earth Law Center for inclusion in the Major Groups¡¦ input on the development of the SDGs:
„h Support for Earth-based SDGs, specifically through inclusion of commitments to recognize in
law the rights of ecosystems and species to exist, thrive and evolve.
„h Endorsement, and promotion for adoption and implementation, of the Universal Declaration of
the Rights of Mother Earth, and active support for its implementation globally.
„h Re-characterization of ¡§sustainable development¡¨ as ¡§sustainable communities,¡¨ a term that
includes both human communities and the wider communities of the natural world. Adoption of
SDGs with a focus on sustainable communities is necessary to ensure that all elements of
well-being are considered.

The current, neoliberal economics-based development approach
distorts communities to serve the economy. Elements of sustainable human communities
include not just the economy, but also culture, societal/familial relations, healthy food, clean drinking water, sanitation, housing, necessary medical care, democratic governance, education, meaningful and appropriately rewarded labor, spirituality, civic duty, volunteerism, etc. Sustainable environmental communities similarly require healthy nutrients, clean water, biodiversity, restoration in the face of destruction, and thriving, connected habitats. The economy must be viewed as serving human and environmental communities, not the reverse.

The Global Alliance for the Rights of Nature is a worldwide network of individuals and organizations who support the recognition and implementation of Rights of Nature. http://therightsofnature.org

Robin Milam
Administrative Director
The Global Alliance for the Rights of Nature

1111_715_SDG Inputs ELC.pdf

I think the great problem with the SDG's is that they are development goals, not sustainability goals.

We should reverse the priority, to have top priority go to measurable progress toward hard targets for achieving sustainability. It's quite possible scientifically, but we’d need to use “The Commons Approach” organizationally (1). The tragedy now occurring, with the effort having the wrong order of priorities is that the implicit "sustainability goal" naturally becomes to make an effort to slow the rate of growing unsustainabiliy of the economy.

That is being achieved but fails as a way for the economies to become sustainable. It may well be thought of as an important step, but if we face the truth, it’s a total failure as a plan. You see that unfortunate trade-off in most agreements and metrics, a plan to slow the rate of growing impacts…. but it's a disaster for the earth and for the future of our complex societies.

1) The UN is Urged to Adopt “The Commons Approach” at All Levels Of Government and Throughout Society, to Achieve Real Sustainable Development and MDG goals
nhttp://www.worldwewant2015.org/node/274168#comment-41782

CALL FOR DISCUSSION NOTES (Now closed): TOPICS FOR POST-2015 THEMATIC CONSULTATION ON ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY | World We Want 2015

Two large practical problems with the UN's SD Goals.
1) The SDG's focus on development with seemingly little or no focused attention to rebound effects.
2) Projects that are intended to be sustainable are also widely using ill-defined standard measures that give misleadingly low indications of both present and future impacts.

1- lack of attention to rebound effects
The UN's SDG targets have the effects all development plans have, which is to increase human pressures on natural resources. The big "rebound effect" is the usual one, that "wealth breeds demand" because people using economic success to further invest in greater economic success. It should be but doesn’t seem to be factored into any of the plans, as if "unseen impacts don't count". We know they DO count, though, and are a quite genuine threats to success.

The development stimulus in less developed countries is one of the causes of the food crisis, for example. It both adds to the globally growing demand for resources, pushing up food prices. It also connects productive small farmers with foreign markets so they no longer sell their products in their own regions. There are lots of "back fire" effects like that. They are occurring because the SDG's are framed as development plans first, rather than as sustainability plans first.

The right step for the UN is to adopt The Commons Approach. That focuses everyone's attention on their mutual and common interests, so development avoids adding to the intensity of economic competition over resources that only speculators benefit from. In the present business climate focusing primarily on development interests is leading to plans that tragically backfire.

2 – need for a large change in our measurement methods
People need better measures of the real total effects of their choices. Better measures doesn't guarantee success but protect against failure, steering you to solutions that are much more likely to work and to last.

An unusual flaw was recently found, exposing a major source of misinformation in the design of the most familiar measures of economic impacts, the LCA and Scope 3 GHG measurement methods. Those and many other common methods use "economic accounting" not "environmental systems accounting". The two approaches are *radically different* as ways of counting the same “end product” or “whole business” externalities. The familiar methods count only the “consumption for production” of technology, and ignore the “consumption for production” for the human services needed to operate the technology(!). It's just left out.

It’s a BIG omission and a major inaccuracy for the physical measure of attributable impacts on the environment. The present LCA and Scope 3 GHG metrics are commonly leaving out 80-90% of the real environmental impacts for delivering business products and GDP! Two levels of peer-reviewed analysis of the problem are available, simple & complex, plus some collected “Slides & notes”.
- simple “Shining a light on dark energy”
nhttp://www.sustainablebrands.com/news_and_views/new-metrics/measuring-total-impacts-business
- complex “System Energy Assessment (SEA)"
nhttp://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/3/10/1908/
- collected “Slides & notes”
nhttp://www.synapse9.com/SEA/

It will take a significant effort to understand this new information on how to accurately measure and attribute the impacts of business operations and products, and then integrate it into the various CSR and Sustainability Dashboard models. Given the scale of the error it would help correct it would also seem sure to have significant value, for redirecting our efforts toward more feasible solutions.

Shining Light on “Dark Energy”: Measuring the Total Impacts of Business | Sustainable Brands
The common practice of counting impacts as “zero” for lack of information, creating a very large blind spot in our perception of the world, can be hard to avoid. It can be hard to even think about what one is leaving uncounted. We found a way to define “uncounted” in relation to global totals that needed to be accounted for.

A foremost priority of the Open Working Group for SDGs must be to develop a set of recommendations that can be merged with the outcomes of the post-2015 process so as to end up with a single future development agenda. Divergent agendas will undermine the needed and desired universal approach to development.

The inclusion of health as a central tenet of proposed sustainable development goals and within the post-2015 framework- including health indicators across all dimensions of development- will fortify and sustain development progress. This will be especially true given a future development framework that includes an expanded, more holistic view of global health priorities, with a particular focus on the global burden of non-communicable diseases (NCDs).

1111_622_NCD Alliance_Framing OWG MG inputs_12 March 2013.docx

It seems critical that we realize the need for a commons approach and address our true common interests. A profound tragedy of the commons is developing as every country's great desire for growth results in ever more intense competition over our many kinds of limited and shrinking resources. We're not caring for the earth but fighting over it. Already we see how it creates the world food crisis and keeps us from responding to climate change, among numerous other terrible consequences.

I represent the Commons Cluster, and the sub-group Commons Action for the UN http://www.commonsactionfortheunitednations.org. See our Jan 15 proposal
"Urging the UN adopt a “commons approach” at all levels of government and throughout society". http://www.worldwewant2015.org/node/274168#comment-41782

Commons Action » Commons Cluster for the United Nations

To assist in the preparation of the NGO statement, we invite all NGOs to submit their written comments on the SDGs as soon as possible to:

Three representatives of the Temple of Understanding attended the Rio + 20 Conference in June, 2012, and returned to New York City hoping for careful attention and immediate action at the United Nations to ensure implementation of the Outcome Document – which itself was not impressively strong.
To our disappointment we learned of the UN focus on the World We Want 2015 with achievement of the MDGs ordained as the current effort of UN action. Of course, these are admirable goals to which we have turned attention and energy for the past 12 years.
Now however, nine months after Rio+20, we feel that sustainable is no longer a viable term referring to the earth. We should be concerning ourselves with SURVIVABILITY of the Earth and request that the Open Working Group for the SDGs prepare plans for immediate and accelerated implemtation of existing commitments. We join Tapio Kanninen, long time UN staff member, Chief of the Policy Planning Unit in the Department of Political Affairs, and author of “Crisis of Global Sustainability” in calling for a paradigm shift to Global Survivability, a concept that stresses the absolute necessity of immediate and drastic change in institutions and policies. Without this urgency we fear more foot dragging and compromise that avoid attention to the great crisis of our time.
Joan Kirby
Temple of Understamding

It is essential to define both the specific goals and the metrics that will be used to measure attainment of those goals ex ante. We cannot measure attainment using a metric system that is inconsistent with the stated targets. For example, Millennium Development Goal (MDG) Target 7C strives to “[h]alve, by 2015, the proportion of the population without sustainable access to **safe** drinking water and basic sanitation.” While it has been asserted that this goal has been met five years ahead of schedule, this assertion is incorrect. MDG Target 7C specifically references access to “safe” drinking water, but the metric measuring attainment of the goal is merely “access to an **improved** source of drinking water.” These are not equivalent, as the UN MDG status report itself admits:

[s]ince it is not yet possible to measure water quality globally, dimensions of safety, reliability and sustainability are not … used to track progress towards the MDG target. As a result, it is likely that the number of people using improved water sources is an overestimate of the actual number of people using safe water supplies (United Nations, 2012:52).

Thus, rather than having met already the MDG drinking water goal, we have much work yet to do to ensure reliably “safe” drinking water for the world’s human populations. This work includes consistent, worldwide water quality monitoring, which has significant implications for both humans and waterway systems. In addition, expression in law of waterways’ own right to sufficient, clean water can begin to address the gap between “safe” and “unsafe” water supplies.

Cite: United Nations, “The Millennium Development Goals Report,” 2012, p. 52, http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/pdf/MDG%20Report%202012.pdf.

Linda Sheehan, Executive Director
Earth Law Center
lsheehan@earthlaw.org
www.earthlawcenter.org

While the international community is accelerating its efforts to achieve the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) by 2015, the discussion on the Post-2015 Development Framework and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) is beginning to gather momentum.

Existing literature on the MDGs points out that countries’ achievement of the goals varies significantly, given the general "one size fits all" nature of the MDGs (Vandermoortele 2011). Others also point out that MDGs lack overall objectives and perspectives on what needs to happen afterthe MDGs are achieved – namely, concrete plans and indicatorsfor developing countries to leapfrog towards sustainability are missing.

http://enviroscope.iges.or.jp/modules/envirolib/view.php?docid=4250

1111_480_SDGs_Briefing_Paper_1_en.pdf

Major Groups Recommendations for Multi-Stakeholder Engagement with the Open Working Group on Sustainable Development Goals

As part of the Rio+20 Conference follow up, governments stated that they would establish the 30 member inter-governmental Open Working Group (OWG) on Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) by September 2012. Member States will nominate representatives from the five United Nations regional groups, with the aim of achieving fair, equitable, and balanced geographic representation. In addition, paragraph 248 of The Future We Want, instructs the United Nations “to establish an inclusive and transparent intergovernmental process on sustainable development goals that is open to all stakeholders”.

Thus, in order to adhere to the requirements of The Future We Want and maximize its effectiveness, the OWG needs to ensure that it has recognized, effective and ongoing engagement of stakeholders.
Therefore, we, the nine Major Groups established in 1992 for the Rio process on sustainable development, offer recommendations on how to ensure that the deliberations of the OWG will draw on broad multi-stakeholder input and expertise thus ensuring that the SDG processes and decisions are “inclusive and transparent”.

This paper builds on the central role the Major Groups played in Rio+20 processes and is being submitted to DESA in the spirit of our continued engagement in this area. This paper will also be sent to the President of the UN General Assembly and to the Permanent Representative of the Brazilian Mission to the UN for information.

As decisions on the modalities and governance of decision-making processes (such as the OWG) will begin in earnest in October 2012, this note offers recommendations on how multi-stakeholder engagement can ensure that
the SDG processes and decisions are “inclusive and transparent” as Rio+20 called for.

Finally, we offer these recommendations in recognition that civil society and other stakeholders’ ”Major Groups” will need to be involved in designing, implementing and evaluating sustainability, and therefore have a stake
in developing the SDGs. This requires the full and fair facilitation and representation of multi-stakeholder input to the OWG and other relevant processes for the post-2015 development agenda.

1111_446_SDGs recommendations OPs on MG participation MAG Working Paper - Setting Our Common Goals 17Oct2012 (1).pdf

Stakeholder Forum has produced a synthesis report of national governments suggestions on key principles and criteria for developing a proposal for the Sustainable Development Goals.
As part of the on-going consultations on the SDGs and to feed into the work of the OWG, in October 2012, the UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA), the secretariat of the Rio+20 Conference, distributed a questionnaire to national governments to elicit their views and suggestions on some key principles and criteria for developing a proposal for the SDGs.

This report is a synthesis of the information provided in the submissions and intends to present the findings of the questionnaire in a way that is accessible to all governments and stakeholders. The information has been collated by country type and region with an aim to help identify key priorities.

Analysis of the UNDESA Survey on the Sustainable Development Goals
Stakeholder Forum