evento on line Roma, 30 settembre 2020
Innovazioni e problematiche di misura connesse alla sostenibilità e per il monitoraggio degli SDGs
A cinque anni dall’approvazione dell’Agenda 2030 e dei relativi Target, gli SDGs hanno assunto un peso sempre maggiore nelle politiche sovranazionali e nazionali, basti ricordare gli indirizzi della nuova Commissione UE. Per il nostro Paese è da sottolineare l’importanza della definizione della Strategia per lo Sviluppo Sostenibile a livello Nazionale e Regionale, che preveda anche il monitoraggio delle azioni attivate. Alla luce di questa evoluzione, si ritiene opportuno focalizzare l’attenzione sulla capacità di misurare l’evoluzione dei diversi aspetti connessi agli Obiettivi dell’Agenda 2030. A tal fine l'Istat produce annualmente due aggiornamenti del sistema di indicatori utili al monitoraggio degli SDGs per l'Italia. L’evento, organizzato da ASviS e Istat, è l’occasione per fare il punto sul monitoraggio degli indicatori e per presentare le innovazioni e le problematiche che si sono riscontrate nello sviluppare tali attività.
G. Lafortune, SDSN, How Is Progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals Measured? Comparing Four Approaches for the EU
1. How Is Progress towards the Sustainable
Development Goals Measured?
Comparing Four Approaches for the EU
Guillaume Lafortune
Senior Economist
Sustainable Development Solutions Network
Seminario Istat-ASviS del 30 settembre
2.
3. Background - SDG Monitoring
• SDGs provide policy framework that all 193 UN member states have
pledged to achieve by 2030.
• Good data and clear metrics are critical for each country to take
stock of where it stands, devise pathways for achieving the goals,
and track progress.
• Current assessments of the EU’s performance on the SDGs,
however, tend to reach different findings and policy conclusions on
where the priorities for further action lie, which can be confusing
for researchers and policymakers.
5. Divergence – static assessments (at one point in time)
• OECD: “OECD countries are, on average, closest to achieving goals
on Energy, Cities, and Climate (goals 7, 11, and 13) and goals
relating to Planet (Water, 6; Sustainable Production, 12; Climate,
13; Oceans, 14; and Biodiversity, 15).”
• SDSN: “The EU and its member states face the greatest challenges
on goals related to climate, biodiversity, and circular economy,
(SDG12-15) as well as in strengthening the convergence in living
standards, across countries and regions
7. Research objective
Compare and contrast findings across
four SDG monitoring instruments for the
EU and demystify drivers differences in
results and conclusions
8. Methods
• Mix of quantitative and qualitative methods
• To isolate the impact of the indicator selection (versus
methodology) control for differences in methodologies by applying
the SDSN method for standardizing, normalizing and aggregating
indicators.
• Three adjustment scenarios (minor, moderate, high).
11. Three main factors explain differences between SDSN and
other methodologies
(1) Use of non-official SDG indicators
(2) Inclusion of international spillovers
(3) Use of pre-defined targets
15. Conclusions
• Three elements are crucial for actionable and robust monitoring of the
SDGs at the country level:
1. Go beyond the official SDG indicator list
2. Define absolute performance standards and thresholds to evaluate progress on
SDG indicators
3. Focus on outcome indicators and avoid mixing them with policy inputs and policy
means indicators
• Limitations in current assessments of trajectories based on historic
outcome data should push the community to establish more “Policy
Trackers” for a large range of policy issues.
• Such “forward-looking” approaches focus on assessing policies,
investments, and regulations. They can complement outcome-based
assessments like those provided by the SDSN, the OECD, Eurostat, and
ASviS.