scholarly journals New Proposals for IFF Indicators in the Sustainable Development Goals

Author(s):  
Alex Cobham ◽  
Petr Janský

The search for indicators for the UN target to reduce illicit financial flows (IFF) is complicated by data issues and the difficulties of estimating what is deliberately hidden. In this chapter, we propose our two preferred indicators, that address instead the measurable consequences of IFF. In this chapter we lay out the two measures, and evaluate their strengths and weaknesses including in respect of data availability and potential work-arounds at national level. Both measures use relatively newly available data to establish scale: in the first case, the scale of the misalignment between where multinational companies carry out their economic activity, and where they are ultimately able to declare the resulting profit; and in the second case, the scale of offshore wealth which is undeclared to tax authorities.

Subject Financing the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Significance After a year of intensive negotiations, on July 16 the third UN conference for Financing for Development (FFD) culminated in 193 countries signing the Addis Ababa Action Agenda. The document sets out broad principles on how to mobilise finance in sufficient quantities to achieve the new Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), which will be agreed in September in New York. The negotiations generated consensus around new norms on tax cooperation and illicit financial flows (IFFs), but also set ambitious expectations for multilateral development banks (MDBs). Impacts Addis begins a key year for development finance, culminating in December's Conference of the Parties (COP21) on climate change in Paris. The goal of COP21 is to draft the first universal climate agreement, which should take effect by 2020 at the latest. However, COP21 must also aim to map out a credible path towards mobilising 100 billion dollars per year in climate finance.


Author(s):  
Alex Cobham ◽  
Petr Janský

This book asks: Which flows fall under the umbrella term, ‘illicit financial flows’ (IFF)? How will progress in reducing them be measured? How will that progress be achieved? And who is ultimately accountable? In this closing chapter, we summarise the findings of the volume on these questions, including in respect of the quality of existing estimates, their methodology and data and the likely scope for progress; and on the potential for scale and non-scale indicators of illicit financial flows for global targets, including the Sustainable Development Goals, and for national policy prioritisation. With political progress on the SDG target likely to be difficult, we also identify other opportunities to move the IFF agenda forward in the UN context.


2018 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 750-769 ◽  
Author(s):  
Juan Pablo Bohoslavsky

Purpose This paper aims to discuss the tax-related illicit financial flows from a human rights perspective. It argues that curbing illicit financial flows, and specifically tax abuse, is essential not only for realizing human rights but also for achieving the sustainable development goals. It provides definitions of tax evasion and avoidance, as well as estimations of illicit financial flows. It studies the tax abuse implications for human rights and sustainable development, as well as the obligations in the field of human rights and tax abuse. It also critically assesses the recent international initiatives aim at curbing illicit financial flows. It concludes with a set of recommendations on how to curb illicit financial flows. Design/methodology/approach This paper combines economic, legal and policy perspectives to study the multidimensional, complex and global problem of illicit financial flows. It not only proposes an explanation of the volume, roots and economic, social and human rights implications of illicit financial flows but it also proposes reforms that states and other stakeholders need to implement in order to curb this phenomenon. Findings Combating tax abuse and illicit financial flows more broadly, is essential to make better progress in realizing international human rights obligations. The inclusion of a specific target to reduce illicit financial flows under the sustainable development goals makes clear that curbing such flows is also essential for creating an enabling environment for sustainable development. While we should applaud that reducing illicit financial flows is mentioned in one of the targets of the sustainable development goals, the target remains broad and vague. Specific measures to operationalize this target are needed to ensure that progress is achieved and that such progress can be tracked and measured. The author presents recommendations for discussion. To promote accountability, the recommendations are addressed to specific stakeholders. Originality/value This paper tries to contribute to improve our knowledge and understanding of illicit financial flows and tax abuse more specifically at global level and their implications for human rights, to make the need for change more compelling, as well as to stimulate the debate around reforms that need to be implemented to curb illicit financial flows.


2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 462 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chris Dickens ◽  
Vladimir Smakhtin ◽  
Matthew McCartney ◽  
Gordon O’Brien ◽  
Lula Dahir

The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), are high on the agenda for most countries of the world. In its publication of the SDGs, the UN has provided the goals and target descriptions that, if implemented at a country level, would lead towards a sustainable future. The IAEG (InterAgency Expert Group of the SDGs) was tasked with disseminating indicators and methods to countries that can be used to gather data describing the global progress towards sustainability. However, 2030 Agenda leaves it to countries to adopt the targets with each government setting its own national targets guided by the global level of ambition but taking into account national circumstances. At present, guidance on how to go about this is scant but it is clear that the responsibility is with countries to implement and that it is actions at a country level that will determine the success of the SDGs. Reporting on SDGs by country takes on two forms: i) global reporting using prescribed indicator methods and data; ii) National Voluntary Reviews where a country reports on its own progress in more detail but is also able to present data that are more appropriate for the country. For the latter, countries need to be able to adapt the global indicators to fit national priorities and context, thus the global description of an indicator could be reduced to describe only what is relevant to the country. Countries may also, for the National Voluntary Review, use indicators that are unique to the country but nevertheless contribute to measurement of progress towards the global SDG target. Importantly, for those indicators that relate to the security of natural resources security (e.g., water) indicators, there are no prescribed numerical targets/standards or benchmarks. Rather countries will need to set their own benchmarks or standards against which performance can be evaluated. This paper presents a procedure that would enable a country to describe national targets with associated benchmarks that are appropriate for the country. The procedure builds on precedent set in other countries but in particular on a procedure developed for the setting of Resource Quality Objectives in South Africa. The procedure focusses on those SDG targets that are natural resource-security focused, for example, extent of water-related ecosystems (6.6), desertification (15.3) and so forth, because the selection of indicator methods and benchmarks is based on the location of natural resources, their use and present state and how they fit into national strategies.


2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Geanderson Ambrósio ◽  
Dênis Antônio Da Cunha ◽  
Marcel Viana Pires ◽  
Luis Costa ◽  
Raiza Moniz Faria ◽  
...  

AbstractInternational frameworks for greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation usually disregard country-specific inequalities for the allocation of mitigation burdens. This may hinder low developed regions in a country from achieving development in a socioeconomic perspective, such as the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) of eradicating poverty (SDG1) and hunger (SDG2). We use observed data (1991–2010) of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2eq) emissions and a sub-national human development index (MicroHDI, range [0, 1]) for Brazilian microregions to design a framework where regional mitigation burdens are proportional to the MicroHDI, without compromising national mitigation pledges. According to our results, the less developed Brazilian regions have not been basing their development in emission-intensive activities; instead, the most developed regions have. Between 2011 and 2050, Brazilian cumulative emissions from the sectors most correlated with MicroHDI are expected to be 325 Gt CO2eq, of which only 50 Gt are associated with regions of MicroHDI < 0.8. Assuming a national GHG mitigation target of 56.5% in 2050 over 2010 (consistent with limiting global warming to 2 ºC), Brazil would emit 190 Gt CO2eq instead of 325 Gt and the 135 Gt reduction is only accounted for by regions after reaching MicroHDI ≥ 0.8. Allocating environmental restrictions to the high-developed regions leaves ground for the least developed ones to pursue development with fewer restrictions. Our heterogeneous framework represents a fairer allocation of mitigation burdens which could be implemented under the concepts of green economy. This work could be an international reference for addressing both environmental and socioeconomic development in developing countries at sub-national level as emphasized by the SDGs.


2017 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 207-221 ◽  
Author(s):  
Suerie Moon ◽  
Oluwatosin Omole

AbstractAfter a ‘golden age’ of extraordinary growth in the level of development assistance for health (DAH) since 1990, funding seems to have reached a plateau. With the launch of the Sustainable Development Goals, debate has intensified regarding what international financing for health should look like in the post-2015 era. In this review paper, we offer a systematic overview of problems and proposals for change. Major critiques of the current DAH system include: that the total volume of financing is inadequate; financial flows are volatile and uncertain; DAH may not result in additional resources for health; too small a proportion of DAH is transferred to recipient countries; inappropriate priority setting; inadequate coordination; weak mechanisms for accountability; and disagreement on the rationale for DAH. Proposals to address these critiques include: financing-oriented proposals to address insufficient levels and high volatility of DAH; governance-oriented proposals to address concerns regarding additionality, proportions reaching countries, priority setting, coordination and accountability; and proposals that reach beyond the existing DAH system. We conclude with a discussion of prospects for change.


2021 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arkaitz Usubiaga-Liaño ◽  
Paul Ekins

Despite the overwhelming scientific evidence on the ongoing degradation of the environment, there is a clear gap between the urgency of the environmental crisis and the policy measures put in place to tackle it. Because of the role of metrics in environmental governance, the way environmental information is translated into metrics is of utmost relevance. In this context, we propose criteria to assesses the suitability of environmental metrics to monitor environmental sustainability at the national level. After assessing well-known environmental metrics such as the Sustainable Development Goals indicators and the Environmental Performance Index, we conclude that countries still lack robust and resonant metrics to monitor environmental sustainability. In order to bridge this metric gap, we present the Environmental Sustainability Gap (ESGAP) framework, which builds on the concepts of strong sustainability, critical natural capital, environmental functions and science-based targets. Different composite indicators are proposed as part of the ESGAP framework. Through these metrics, the framework has the potential to embed strong sustainability thinking and science-based targets in nations in which these concepts are not currently sufficiently reflected in policies.


Author(s):  
Madalena Carvalho ◽  
Sandra Caeiro

The Portuguese Distance Learning University (UAb) assess in a holistic way the Institution's Sustainability performance. In the case of research, it is evaluated by analyzing the scientific publications deposited in the Open Repository. Since 2019, it is possible to associate to each deposit the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) that match the publications. The objective of this work is, from the analysis of the publications of the Open Repository, to identify the SDG on which the academic and scientific production and the research carried out at UAb focus. An analysis of the representativeness of these objectives is made globally and segmented by community (Theses and Dissertations, Educational Resources and Scientific Publications). The approach adopted for the systematic identification of the SDG is also analyzed through the assessment of the degree of commitment that the authors show in the self-assigning of the SDG to their own productions. Finally, UAb’s contribution for the fulfillment and development of the SDG at national level is analyzed by assessing the relevance of the research and intellectual property work made available in the Open Repository.


2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 926 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luigi Petti ◽  
Claudia Trillo ◽  
Busisiwe Ncube Makore

The Agenda 2030 includes a set of targets that need to be achieved by 2030. Although none of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) focuses exclusively on cultural heritage, the resulting Agenda includes explicit reference to heritage in SDG 11.4 and indirect reference to other Goals. Achievement of international targets shall happen at local and national level, and therefore, it is crucial to understand how interventions on local heritage are monitored nationally, therefore feeding into the sustainable development framework. This paper is focused on gauging the implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals with reference to cultural heritage, by interrogating the current way of classifying it (and consequently monitoring). In fact, there is no common dataset associated with monitoring SDGs, and the field of heritage is extremely complex and diversified. The purpose for the paper is to understand if the taxonomy used by different national databases allows consistency in the classification and valuing of the different assets categories. The European case study has been chosen as field of investigation, in order to pilot a methodology that can be expanded in further research. A cross-comparison of a selected sample of publicly accessible national cultural heritage databases has been conducted. As a result, this study confirms the existence of general harmonisation of data towards the achievement of the SDGs with a broad agreement of the conceptualisation of cultural heritage with international frameworks, thus confirming that consistency exists in the classification and valuing of the different assets categories. However, diverse challenges of achieving a consistent and coherent approach to integrating culture in sustainability remains problematic. The findings allow concluding that it could be possible to mainstream across different databases those indicators, which could lead to depicting the overall level of attainment of the Agenda 2030 targets on heritage. However, more research is needed in developing a robust correlation between national datasets and international targets.


2019 ◽  
Vol 38 (4) ◽  
pp. 693-712 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carole-Anne Sénit

Spaces for civil society participation within intergovernmental negotiations on sustainability have multiplied since the 1992 Earth Summit. Such participatory spaces are often uncritically accepted as a remedy for an assumed democratic deficit of intergovernmental policymaking. I argue, however, that civil society’s capacity to democratize global sustainability governance is constrained by the limited influence of these spaces on policymaking. The article explores the relationship between the format of participatory spaces and their influence on the negotiations of the Sustainable Development Goals. It finds that civil society is more likely to influence within informal and exclusive participatory spaces, and when these spaces are provided early in the negotiating process, at international and national level. This reveals a democracy–influence paradox, as the actors with the capacities to engage repeatedly and informally with negotiators are seldom those that are most representative of global civil society.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document