By Marianne Beisheim, Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik, and Felicitas Fritzsche, Stockholm University

Whilst public attention is focused mainly on the UN80 reform debate, Member States are once again reviewing the format and organizational aspects of the UN High-level Political Forum on Sustainable Development (HLPF). During the contentious review cycle in 2020, many Member States were fixated on their red lines, and in 2024, they only agreed the bare minimum. Consequently, the HLPF’s proceedings and impact still fall short of meeting expectations. The elements paper that the co-facilitators published does not yet indicate whether there will be more ambition this time.

The HLPF’s functions are clearly defined in its founding resolution and were later connected with the follow-up and review of the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. With only four years left until 2030, Member States should focus on what they need and want from the HLPF to accelerate SDG implementation. We suggest concentrating on three clusters of the HLPF’s functions, with a clear view to fostering SDG implementation at a time when multilateralism is being questioned and even undermined.

First, the HLPF uniquely brings together policy experts from different sectors and backgrounds, encouraging them to think beyond their areas of specialization. The HLPF should be enabled to better leverage this to foster integrated approaches. Currently, each HLPF reviews a set of four to five focus SDGs. Going forward, the HLPF’s reviews should place greater emphasis on relevant interlinkages, including those relating to peace and governance. The SDG reviews should identify actionable, integrated policy packages, with the potential to accelerate implementation. The Secretary-General’s guidelines for the voluntary national reviews (VNRs) should be revised to encourage Member States to present their most impactful policy packages or examples of systemic hurdles that need to be overcome. When defining the themes for the future annual HLPF meetings, Member States could draw inspiration from the integrated pathways identified by the Global Sustainable Development Reports (GSDRs).

Second, Member States should capacitate the HLPF to provide stronger guidance on how to best advance SDG implementation. This requires significantly improving the analysis and evaluation of all reviews delivered at the HLPF. Rather than allocating more time to the VNR presentations, the HLPF should dedicate this time to more in-depth policy dialogue and policy learning. To spotlight policy lessons and to reflect Member States’ needs more succinctly, independent expert commentators could be reintroduced. These policy dialogues should inform the outcome document of the HLPF, to reflect the concrete policy lessons in a way that makes the ministerial declaration more relevant to delegations from capitals. A recent independent background paper by Cepei suggests Member States should mandate more systematic follow-up of HLPF proceedings within the UN system, with “tangible influence over operational priorities, financing, and institutional reform.”

Third, Member States should use the HLPF to expand the support base for the realization of the SDGs by 2030 and beyond. The growing number of voluntary local reviews (VLRs) and the high level of interest in various parallel forums demonstrate impressive local-level ownership of the SDGs – a key achievement. It is crucial to maintain this level of interest among non-state actors in participating in SDG implementation and the HLPF’s proceedings. This brings diverse knowledge of local circumstances, needs, and viewpoints to the UN for policy learning. To take full advantage of this, feedback and learning loops must be improved. Suggestions such as reducing the HLPF to one week, severely limiting the number of side events, or holding VLRs only at the regional forums, would not be helpful.

The UN Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) Partnership Forum’s forward-looking focus on stakeholder engagement in the lead up to the HLPF should be maintained, but the outcome needs to inform the HLPF more strongly. To strengthen the follow-up of the HLPF, this should be complemented by a retrospective section matching the needs identified in the VNRs with the support provided by different stakeholders and country teams. This should also include integrated multi-stakeholder partnerships, a means of implementation that has so far been rarely realized in a meaningful way. Going forward, country teams should be strongly involved in addressing the challenges and needs identified in the VNRs, supporting Member States by incorporating them into negotiations on the UN Sustainable Development Cooperation Frameworks. For this purpose, the timing of the ECOSOC Partnership Forum could be reconsidered.

Lastly, the resolution should include some positive expectations for the 2027 SDG Summit, – the HLPF under the auspices of the UN General Assembly (UNGA). Member States should allocate the full two days to the Summit, as defined in resolution 67/290. This is particularly important as Member States invited the Summit “to consider in September 2027 how we will advance sustainable development by 2030 and beyond” (2024 Pact for the Future, Action 12b). The debates and lessons learned during the forthcoming annual HLPFs should inform the deliberations about how to proceed beyond 2030. To maintain momentum on the sustainable development agenda, a clear majority of Member States must demonstrate ambition now and push for substantial SDG successes by 2030. Otherwise, political polarization surrounding the SDGs, characterized by conflicting priorities, implementation issues, and distrust of institutions, could hinder the collective action required to achieve the Goals. After all, this review, like the UN80 discussions, is not only about administrative efficiency but primarily about political priorities.