Environment relevant SDG targets and indicators in the SDG Global Indicator Framework

Author(s):  
Author(s):  
W. Geng ◽  
J. Chen ◽  
H. P. Zhang ◽  
K. Xu

In September 2015, the 193 Member States of the United Nations (UN) unanimously adopted the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and its 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), aiming to transform the world over the next 15 years (ESDN, 2016). To meet the ambitions and demands of the 2030 Agenda, it is necessary for the global indicator framework to adequately and systematically address the issue of alternative data sources and methodologies, including geospatial information and Earth observations in the context of geographic location (UN-GGIM, 2016). For this purpose, the Inter-Agency and Expert Group on Sustainable Development Goals Indicator (IAEG-SDGs) created the Working Group on Geospatial Information (IAEG-SDGs: WGGI) to give full play to the role of geospatial data in SDGs measurement and monitoring. The Working Group reviewed global indicators through a ‘geographic location’ lens to pick out those which geospatial information can significantly support the production, and analyzed the methodological and measurements issues. This paper has discussed the progress in monitoring SDGs ever since the establishment of IAEG-SDGs: WGGI, as well as the existing problems, appropriate solutions and plans for the next stage of work.


2020 ◽  
Vol 36 (4) ◽  
pp. 1299-1306
Author(s):  
Bojan Nastav ◽  
Steve MacFeely

In August 2019, the IAOS discussion platform was launched with a special session at the ISI World Congress in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. The first paper published as part of that discussion series was ‘You say you want a [data] Revolution: A proposal to use unofficial statistics for the SDG Global Indicator Framework’. This follow-on paper looks back over the year since the launch, summarizes the online debate, highlights some other relevant papers, and reflects on where the discussion rests today.


2021 ◽  
pp. 344-362
Author(s):  
Winfried Huck

This chapter analyses the relationship between global public goods (GPGs) and Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). It argues that the Global 2030 Agenda of the United Nations constitutes an example of how the concept of GPGs has been given a normative dimension in international law, as well as of the difficulties that may be encountered in the process of operationalization of GPGs. The normative framework for the implementation of the SDGs relies on the use of indicators to evaluate state performance in achieving the SDGs. The choice of such indicators is crucial for appropriate decision making. However, both the usefulness and the legitimacy of indicators have been put into question. The chapter contends that the indicators are in fact normative – and intrinsically politically-driven – instruments. For this reason, the development of a global indicator framework should be expected to follow a democratic procedure involving all the relevant stakeholders.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephanie Leite

The 17 United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) employ a global indicator framework to detail each Goal and monitor its implementation. This article focuses on three targets from the indicator framework, which call for mainstreaming education for global citizenship, sustainable development, and climate change into national curricula. By investigating the practicalities of meeting these targets from an educator's perspective, this article proceeds with: arguing for a need to shift the central purpose of education; examining what is meant by education ‘for’ the three key areas included in the global indicator framework; exploring curricular opportunities offered by the SDGs; and presenting inquiry-based learning as a pedagogical approach for critically interrogating the SDGs with learners. If the SDGs are used to drive a pragmatic definition of global citizenship, then trends in education such as inquiry- and problem-based learning come to life with a clear and urgent purpose.


2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-2
Author(s):  
Luisa Bravo

Nowadays we are facing an unprecedented situation: the ‘urban’ is complex, like never before, and a great suffer comes from the humanity as a whole. The rise of poverty has generated conflicts and political instability in many countries. Equity, social justice and democracy are challenged by private interests and public space is seriously at risk. The New Urban Agenda adopted at the Habitat III conference and the related Sustainable Development Goals and their targets, with particular reference to SDG 11.7[1], recognize that public space is a key element for sustainable urban development. I strongly and passionately believe that public space is a fundamental human right, it is so precious but also so fragile that needs to be protected and preserved, if we really want to build cities for all, leaving no one behind.   [1] According to the global indicator framework, the target retlated to SDG 11.7 is: ‘By 2030, provide universal access to safe, inclusive and accessible, green and public spaces, in particular for women and children, older persons and persons with disabilities’ - https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/sdg11  


Author(s):  
V. Grachev ◽  
N. Kurysheva ◽  
O. Plyamina ◽  
V. Lobkovskiy ◽  
E. Nefedova

Проведенный анализ современных нормативноправовых документов и практики оценки физического износа структурно сложных объектов водопроводноканализационного хозяйства показал, что современные методы оценки не учитывают особенности этих объектов. Выявлены факторы, влияющие на структуру показателей оценки физического износа по основным группам и элементам объектов водопроводноканализационного хозяйства. На их основе разработан алгоритм оценки физического износа объектов с применением рискориентированного подхода для трех уровней: объект, технологические элементы объекта (сооружения), функциональные элементы в составе сооружений (здания, оборудование). Использование алгоритма позволяет разработать рекомендации по корректировке периодичности и частоте проведения мониторинга показателей уровня физического износа объектов централизованных систем водоснабжения и водоотведения и их элементов. Практическое применение разработанного алгоритма будет способствовать внедрению современных подходов по управлению рисками, связанными с уровнем физического износа и оценкой вероятности потенциальных негативных последствий природного, антропогенного и другого характера. Внедрение алгоритма позволит также устанавливать уязвимые области и проводить предупредительные мероприятия в отношении возникновения угрозы нарушения обязательных требований, в том числе меры по снижению рисков (техникотехнологическое обновление зданий, сооружений, оборудования). Это необходимо для объективного и обоснованного планирования капитального ремонта, восстановления и развития объектов водопроводноканализационного хозяйства и их элементов.The paper analyzes current regulatory documents and experience in the field of assessing the deterioration of structurally complex water supply and sanitation facilities. The paper shows that modern assessment procedures do not take into account any features of such objects. The paper identifies factors that affect the indicator framework for assessing the physical deterioration of the main groups and components of water supply and sanitation facilities. Based on these factors, the paper proposes an algorithm for assessing the physical deterioration of facilities using a riskoriented approach for three levels: an object itself, its engineering components (facilities), and their functional elements (buildings, equipment). The paper indicates that the use of the algorithm would provide for developing recommendations for adjusting the frequency of monitoring indicators of the physical deterioration level of facilities of public water supply and sanitation systems and their elements. The implementation of the developed algorithm would contribute to the successful introduction of advanced approaches to managing risks associated with the level of physical deterioration and assessing the probability of potential negative consequences of natural, anthropogenic, and other origins. The introduction of the algorithm would also allow identifying vulnerable areas and taking preventive measures against the threat of violation of mandatory requirements including measures for reducing risks (technical and engineering renovation of buildings, facilities, equipment). This is required for objective and substantiated planning of overhaul, restoration, and development of water supply and sanitation facilities and their components.


2020 ◽  
Vol 163 (4) ◽  
pp. 1751-1754
Author(s):  
Dennis S. Ojima ◽  
Rebecca Aicher ◽  
Steven R. Archer ◽  
Derek W. Bailey ◽  
Susan M. Casby-Horton ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
pp. 263355652110281
Author(s):  
John S. Moin ◽  
Richard H. Glazier ◽  
Kerry Kuluski ◽  
Alex Kiss ◽  
Ross E.G. Upshur

Background: Multimorbidity, often defined as having two or more chronic conditions is a global phenomenon. This study examined the association between key determinants identified by the chronic disease indicator framework and multimorbidity by rural and urban settings. The prevalence of individual diseases was also investigated by age and sex. Methods: The Canada Community Health Survey and linked health administrative databases were used to examine the association between multimorbidity, sociodemographic, behavioral, and other risk factors in the province of Ontario. A multivariable logistic regression model was used to conduct the main analysis. Results: Analyses were stratified by age (20–64 and 65–95) and area of residence (rural and urban). A total sample of n = 174,938 residents between the ages of 20–95 were examined in the Ontario province, of which 18.2% (n = 31,896) were multimorbid with 2 chronic conditions, and 23.4% (n = 40,883) with 3+ chronic conditions. Females had a higher prevalence of 2 conditions (17.9% versus 14.6%) and 3+ conditions (19.7% vs. 15.6%) relative to males. Out of all examined variables, poor self-perception of health, age, Body Mass Index, and income were most significantly associated with multimorbidity. Smoking was a significant risk factor in urban settings but not rural, while drinking was significant in rural and not urban settings. Income inequality was associated with multimorbidity with greater magnitude in rural areas. Prevalence of multimorbidity and having three or more chronic conditions were highest among low-income populations. Conclusion: Interventions targeting population weight, age/sex specific disease burdens, and additional focus on stable income are encouraged.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document