6 April 2016: UN Member States and stakeholders have offered preliminary views on the global follow-up and review process for the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, in a series of meetings to prepare a draft resolution. The co-facilitators, the Permanent Representatives of Belize and Denmark, plan to issue an elements paper ahead of the next meeting, which is expected to convene on 28 April 2016. The consultations are focused on the follow-up and review processes in 2017, 2018, and 2019.

An expert-level brainstorming session took place on 31 March, followed by the first informal consultation with Major Groups and other Stakeholders (MGoS) on 1 April, and the first informal consultation with UN Member States, on 6 April.

In the 6 April consultation with Member States, delegates exchanged views on the topics outlined by co-facilitators Lois Young (Belize) and Ib Petersen (Denmark), which included: themes; inputs to HLPF; Voluntary National Review (VNR) arrangements; regional reviews; countries in special situations; outputs from the HLPF; and coherence between ECOSOC and the HLPF.

On setting HLPF themes, some argued that the HLPF’s success will depend on predictability of the system and the ability to conduct a review of all SDGs on a four-year cycle. Others suggested using a cross-cutting theme for each HLPF session. Many Member States agreed on the need to avoid duplication and confusion by adopting the same theme for the HLPF, SDG thematic review, and ECOSOC session, and suggested merging ECOSOC’s High-level Segment with the HLPF Ministerial Segment. Some stressed the need to treat all Goals equally and carry out a systematic review of all 17 SDGs during each session of the HLPF, so as to avoid a silo approach. Others preferred to focus on a selected number of Goals each year in order not to overburden the Forum, and to analyze each set of Goals more in depth, while still recognizing the inter-linkages with other Goals and maintaining a yearly review of Goal 17.

On reviewing progress towards the SDGs, Member States discussed the annual SDG progress report and the Global Sustainable Development Report (GSDR). The former was described as providing a state of play and explanation for trends that emerge, to provide an idea of “how it’s all going” by synthesizing all inputs to the HLPF. Some called for the SDG progress report to cover all indicators each year, not only those linked to a thematic focus. The GSDR, meanwhile, could be a synthesis of all inputs to the HLPF, in the view of at least one delegation. The Group of 77 and China has requested information on how the MDG Progress Report was conducted and what the UN Statistical Commission is planning to do with the global indicators framework in relation to the SDG Progress Report.

Regarding the national and regional reviews, discussion addressed the use of a standard format for regional reviews. Several highlighted a preference for flexibility in reporting, to encourage innovation, and take into account regional disparities. Many expressed concerns, both for developed and developing country governments, regarding the overburdening of Member States with reporting requirements. Some also cautioned against turning the review process from a voluntary sharing of experience into an accountability mechanism. Most agreed on the usefulness of creating an interactive web portal to enable access to presentations and reports as well as national and regional reviews. Delegations differed over whether the inputs to the national reviews should be synthesized, or whether this would be “impractical.”

The Voluntary National Reviews (VNRs) being undertaken by 22 countries during the 2016 session were described by one delegation as the “highlight of the HLPF” this year. Several others looked toward the 2016 session as an opportunity to gain insights for making future processes more meaningful. One said this year’s proceedings will represent a “trial” or “test” case, and should inform decisions on the 2017-2019 sessions.

On countries in special situations, small island developing States (SIDS) and others emphasized the need for the HLPF to devote adequate time to these countries, including by ensuring linkages with the SAMOA Pathway. One grouping noted that the dissolved UN Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD) had been the only space for SIDS to discuss their circumstances, and the new follow-up and review process must provide such a space.

Also during the meeting on 6 April, Francesca Perucci, UN Statistics Division (UNSD), briefed Member States on the first annual progress report on SDGs, which will be submitted in May 2016. She said this year’s report will not include any analysis, but focus exclusively on data for the SDG indicators. She noted that it will not include data for all indicators, and focus on those designated as Tiers 1 and 2, which have more robust methodology and data available. On comparability between current data and future data, she said for Tier 1 and Tier 2 indicators, the standards are unlikely to change, but there are no clear reporting mechanisms yet for Tier 3 indicators, and the IAEG is focusing on this need. She added that the Division is working to build on lessons learned from the MDG indicators and monitoring experience.

In the preceding exchange with MGoS, on 1 April, one organization noted the “palpable enthusiasm” for the SDGs among businesses, and reported that most are already planning activities to respond to the SDGs. She suggested that the private sector be able to report their contributions and learning through tools they already use, such as the GRI framework and SDG compass, while “creating a new set of parameters could lessen participation.” Another said business is “already organizing ourselves,” and the SDGs resonate with business because they are SMART (specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and time-bound).

Another group said governments should view civil society as catalysts and implementers, not only as “watchdogs.” Another civil society representative said “leaving no one behind” means addressing technological and others barriers to participation. One said online platforms to collect inputs from outside New York must have “a clear path towards deliberations” at the HLPF or else could be ignored. Another observed that in many countries, civil society participation is not formalized or defined, and suggested guidelines from the HLPF on civil society participation. One highlighted the upcoming Expert Group Meeting, on 19 April, on the participation of Major Groups and Other Stakeholders (MGOS) in implementing the 2030 Agenda and reporting to the HLPF.

Also on MGoS, through the SD2015 project funded by the European Commission, the UN Division on Sustainable Development (DSD) of the Department on Economic and Social Affairs (DESA) is organizing multi-stakeholder consultations and workshops for national and local policy makers in several countries, to build capacity and support dialogue and cooperation between national authorities and relevant stakeholder groups. DSD also launched a website to provide stakeholders with resources for promoting national capacity building.

Based on the views expressed in the meetings, the co-facilitators on follow-up and review plan to issue an elements paper ahead of the next consultations with Member States, on 28 April. [IISD Story on Expert-level Brainstorming Meeting] [Co-Facilitators’ Letter and Discussion Topics] [DESA National Capacity Building Website] [HLPF Coordination Mechanism Information]