11
III. A PROPOSAL FOR THE LOCALIZATION OF TARGETS AND INDICATORS: SOME EXAMPLES This draft proposal takes the current OWG goals and targets as a starting point. It also takes into consideration major proposals produced by other GTF members, as well as those of some key partners (UN SDSN, UN HABITAT, Communitas, Cities Alliance, and CSOs), Member States, the UN Major Groups and stakeholders concerned with urban and local issues in fields like transport, energy and gender. In the specific case of Goal 11, the proposal includes many contributions from the UN SDSN meeting held in London on August 24-26th. The meeting brought together UN partners, academics, cities and local government organizations to work on the proposed targets under the “urban goal” and to take steps to develop a set of indicators under each target to ensure both an integrated (socially, economically and environmentally) and a “localized” approach.16
III. 1: This exercise and our approach to target selection Given that the Open Working Group outcome document contains over 160 targets, to keep this exercise manageable we selected a few targets to illustrate what kind of indicators could be adopted by sub-national governments. The criteria used to select those examples prioritized targets that refer to areas that are often local government responsibility (of course, in some cases these responsibilities may be shared among different levels of governments and may vary across countries). An introductory paragraph for each target described in section III.3 further explains the rationale for selection. The list is illustrative, rather than exhaustive. In fact, as argued in Section II.2 competency/responsibility for implementation is just one criterion. There are a number of areas for which it is crucial to understand the geography of deprivation through detailed geographical disaggregation of data for monitoring purposes, even if sub-national governments may not have full delivery responsibility (e.g. poverty, education, health, economic growth to name a few). Ideally, provided the final framework came to a manageable number of goals and targets, most outcome-based targets could be disaggregated by rural/urban/region/municipality. Among those, a sub-group could be identified for which sub-national governments have responsibility for delivery in addition to monitoring progress. This draft proposal contains the following information for each illustrative target: 16
Dimensions to be measured Proposed indicators Alternative indicators (if necessary) Dissaggregation proposals Cross cutting linkages with other goals/targets Sources Comments and limitations
UNSDSN, Urban Futures, ACCC and Stockholm Resilience Center, Consultation on the UN Open Working Group on the SDG’s – Urban SDG Goal 11: Targets and Indicators, London, 22-24 August 2014 (working document)