25
In addition, cities face jurisdictional issues.
Depending on local and national governance
structures, they may not have primary public
administration responsibilities for certain parts of
the SDG agenda.
Cities are thus faced with a more complicated
task. They are judging the extent to which targets are
relevant to local circumstances while assessing the
city’s capabilities to achieve them. They must also
choose the indicators that will measure their progress. These tasks are in addition to strategy, budgets
and financing, and ongoing reporting.
From a pragmatic perspective, in the absence
of a national mandate or the prospect of federal
funding, the incentives and pay-off must outweigh the investment of the city’s time and
resources. Otherwise it is likely to lose interest in
using the SDGs as a blueprint.
With these considerations, implementation of
the SDGs for cities can generally be viewed along
five lines of effort: (1) awareness, (2) alignment, (3)
analysis, (4) action, and (5) accountability.
General awareness about the SDGs in the
USA remains fairly low and generally benefits
from a champion (in this case the Hilton
Foundation) or a campaign to enable greater
attention to the advantages that the SDGs might
provide. After awareness captures the attention of
key leadership, a process of alignment situates
the city’s priorities, strategies, policies, directives, initiatives, and activities within the aspirations and intent of the SDGs. It also identifies the
indicators that the city will use to measure its
progress toward the targets it has determined to
be relevant to its circumstances. Subsequent
analysis enables the city to build from that foundation, identifying where policy gaps or opportunities exist and have important implications for
its ability to successfully reach the targets. Ideally
that will lead to prioritizing and taking new
action, through policy or budget proposals,
public- private initiatives, new types of financing,
and citizen and stakeholder engagement.
Publishing reports or real-time data that measure
progress provide accountability. These five lines
of effort are often iterative, constituting a mutually reinforcing cycle as a city refines and deepens its activities.
The process of implementation entails (1)
decisions about the relevance of the SDG targets to a local context, (2) the extent to which
the city will customize the framework for its
own purposes, and (3) the indicators and data
sources it will use to assess progress. This is
where Los Angeles focused much of its effort
in 2018.
The process includes choices about policy
ambition and choices about metrics that indicate
progress. While these are related, they are not the
same.
3.4.1 Policy Alignment
Policy alignment takes place on a continuum. For
some cities, an existing strategy may act as the
cornerstone, which the city maps to appropriate
targets and priorities within the SDGs. The SDGs
are thus viewed through the lens of current city
priorities.
Alternatively, a city can start from the perspective of the SDGs and conceivably create a
development strategy with targets and goals
taken directly from the framework. In such a scenario, the SDGs act as the template for the city
strategy.
The approach by Los Angeles falls somewhere
in the middle of the continuum, mapping existing
plans and policies to and from the SDGs.
This took place against the backdrop of translating the agenda to the city level, with Los
Angeles judging the relevance of a specific target
to its local context, and deciding whether it makes
sense to make an adjustment.
Los Angeles city staff made it a core principle
to be holistic and comprehensive in its approach.
Each of the 169 SDG targets was tested against
the city’s plans and activities. The university student teams did this through a desk review and
analysis that included the city’s sustainability
plan, its resilience strategy, department plans and
activities, and the city’s budget.
As a first step, they tested the applicability to
the city of each target as written and agreed in the
United Nations resolution. This identified a
subset of 69 SDG targets that needed no change
3 Los Angeles: Measuring Its Ambition to Achieve the SDGs
In addition, cities face jurisdictional issues.
Depending on local and national governance
structures, they may not have primary public
administration responsibilities for certain parts of
the SDG agenda.
Cities are thus faced with a more complicated
task. They are judging the extent to which targets are
relevant to local circumstances while assessing the
city’s capabilities to achieve them. They must also
choose the indicators that will measure their progress. These tasks are in addition to strategy, budgets
and financing, and ongoing reporting.
From a pragmatic perspective, in the absence
of a national mandate or the prospect of federal
funding, the incentives and pay-off must outweigh the investment of the city’s time and
resources. Otherwise it is likely to lose interest in
using the SDGs as a blueprint.
With these considerations, implementation of
the SDGs for cities can generally be viewed along
five lines of effort: (1) awareness, (2) alignment, (3)
analysis, (4) action, and (5) accountability.
General awareness about the SDGs in the
USA remains fairly low and generally benefits
from a champion (in this case the Hilton
Foundation) or a campaign to enable greater
attention to the advantages that the SDGs might
provide. After awareness captures the attention of
key leadership, a process of alignment situates
the city’s priorities, strategies, policies, directives, initiatives, and activities within the aspirations and intent of the SDGs. It also identifies the
indicators that the city will use to measure its
progress toward the targets it has determined to
be relevant to its circumstances. Subsequent
analysis enables the city to build from that foundation, identifying where policy gaps or opportunities exist and have important implications for
its ability to successfully reach the targets. Ideally
that will lead to prioritizing and taking new
action, through policy or budget proposals,
public- private initiatives, new types of financing,
and citizen and stakeholder engagement.
Publishing reports or real-time data that measure
progress provide accountability. These five lines
of effort are often iterative, constituting a mutually reinforcing cycle as a city refines and deepens its activities.
The process of implementation entails (1)
decisions about the relevance of the SDG targets to a local context, (2) the extent to which
the city will customize the framework for its
own purposes, and (3) the indicators and data
sources it will use to assess progress. This is
where Los Angeles focused much of its effort
in 2018.
The process includes choices about policy
ambition and choices about metrics that indicate
progress. While these are related, they are not the
same.
3.4.1 Policy Alignment
Policy alignment takes place on a continuum. For
some cities, an existing strategy may act as the
cornerstone, which the city maps to appropriate
targets and priorities within the SDGs. The SDGs
are thus viewed through the lens of current city
priorities.
Alternatively, a city can start from the perspective of the SDGs and conceivably create a
development strategy with targets and goals
taken directly from the framework. In such a scenario, the SDGs act as the template for the city
strategy.
The approach by Los Angeles falls somewhere
in the middle of the continuum, mapping existing
plans and policies to and from the SDGs.
This took place against the backdrop of translating the agenda to the city level, with Los
Angeles judging the relevance of a specific target
to its local context, and deciding whether it makes
sense to make an adjustment.
Los Angeles city staff made it a core principle
to be holistic and comprehensive in its approach.
Each of the 169 SDG targets was tested against
the city’s plans and activities. The university student teams did this through a desk review and
analysis that included the city’s sustainability
plan, its resilience strategy, department plans and
activities, and the city’s budget.
As a first step, they tested the applicability to
the city of each target as written and agreed in the
United Nations resolution. This identified a
subset of 69 SDG targets that needed no change
3 Los Angeles: Measuring Its Ambition to Achieve the SDGs