93
data sources to the SDG indicators (for which an
SDG Mapping Worksheet was developed
11
).
Thereafter city policies and plans of relevance
would be mapped to the targets.
Given the centrality placed upon data in these
initial city strategy discussions, in 2016 SDSN
went a step further, launching a Local Data
Action (LDA) project exclusively focused on different approaches to local SDG monitoring. The
Local Data Action project, a joint endeavor by
SDSN Cities and SDSN TReNDS, did not present a particular model but instead aimed to create
a library of case studies and technical knowledge
documenting how global cities and localities
were currently engaging with and monitoring the
SDGs. Knowledge was curated locally, in consultation with city staff, technical partners, and other
stakeholders. As of 2019, SDSN has worked with
nine partners representing cities, regions, and
networks of cities from around the world.
12
The
group explored themes related to (1) indicator
localization (how to tailor the global indicators to
the subnational context and identify additional
local indicators to promote SDG action and
achievement); (2) data platforms (identifying
data dashboard models to provide easy-to-use
granular data on SDG dimensions); (3) the use of
third-party data (filling sub-national data system
gaps with third-party data, such as citizengenerated or telecommunications data); and (4)
national to local data integration (specifically
focusing on methods for aligning and integrating
national and subnational SDG reporting
systems).
13
The case studies were structured
around five key questions: (1) What are the most
pressing SDG-related problems? (2) What was
the identified data solution? (3) What was the
building process, including the various steps
11 Available at: http://unsdsn.org/what-we-do/solution-initiatives/usa-sustainable-cities-initiative-usa-sci/
12 Aruba, Belo Horizonte in Brazil, a network of municipalities in Colombia, Patiala in India, LA in the USA,
Bristol in the UK (all 2018), Baltimore in USA (2017),
California Bay Area in the USA (2017), and a network of
municipalities in Brazil (2017). Visit: https://www.sdsntrends.org/local-data-action
13 For more information, visit: https://www.sdsntrends.
org/local-data-action
involved? (4) What are the strengths and weaknesses of the approach, as discussed with local
stakeholders? (5) How replicable is the model in
other contexts?
7.6.2 Impact and Lessons
As a result of these programs, SDSN has documented emerging practices on local SDG monitoring in four US cities; Baltimore, San Jose,
New York, and Los Angeles.
Four years since SDSN’s localization studies
began, we have identified a number of insights
from across cities and regions working to monitor and achieve the SDGs.
7.7
Local SDG Monitoring Efforts
Gain Most Traction When
Aligned with Existing City
Planning and Measurement
Frameworks
Nearly all of the cities and regions studied noted
that it was hard to pique local political interest
unless the SDG framework was presented as an
additive framework that would support and
improve upon existing plans and commitments,
including the priorities articulated by the mayor
or local government leader in their election manifestos. As such, local partners within academic
institutions and city stakeholders recommended
mapping SDG indicators onto existing local
strategies and monitoring tools, for example, in
San Jose, local academic partners undertaking
SDG mapping looked at how the SDGs might
support the city’s new 15-year Climate Smart San
Jose sustainability plan. In part because of this
work, the city placed a strong emphasis on people
and quality of life, as well as environmental outcomes, in the final strategy launched in 2017.
14
This approach was mirrored on the other side of
the world, in Patiala, India, where the SDG strategy was developed around the stated priorities of
14 For more on the Climate Smart San Jose plan, visit
http://www.sanjoseca.gov/climatesmartsanjose
7 Top-Down and Bottom-Up Approaches to the SDG Monitoring Challenge
data sources to the SDG indicators (for which an
SDG Mapping Worksheet was developed
11
).
Thereafter city policies and plans of relevance
would be mapped to the targets.
Given the centrality placed upon data in these
initial city strategy discussions, in 2016 SDSN
went a step further, launching a Local Data
Action (LDA) project exclusively focused on different approaches to local SDG monitoring. The
Local Data Action project, a joint endeavor by
SDSN Cities and SDSN TReNDS, did not present a particular model but instead aimed to create
a library of case studies and technical knowledge
documenting how global cities and localities
were currently engaging with and monitoring the
SDGs. Knowledge was curated locally, in consultation with city staff, technical partners, and other
stakeholders. As of 2019, SDSN has worked with
nine partners representing cities, regions, and
networks of cities from around the world.
12
The
group explored themes related to (1) indicator
localization (how to tailor the global indicators to
the subnational context and identify additional
local indicators to promote SDG action and
achievement); (2) data platforms (identifying
data dashboard models to provide easy-to-use
granular data on SDG dimensions); (3) the use of
third-party data (filling sub-national data system
gaps with third-party data, such as citizengenerated or telecommunications data); and (4)
national to local data integration (specifically
focusing on methods for aligning and integrating
national and subnational SDG reporting
systems).
13
The case studies were structured
around five key questions: (1) What are the most
pressing SDG-related problems? (2) What was
the identified data solution? (3) What was the
building process, including the various steps
11 Available at: http://unsdsn.org/what-we-do/solution-initiatives/usa-sustainable-cities-initiative-usa-sci/
12 Aruba, Belo Horizonte in Brazil, a network of municipalities in Colombia, Patiala in India, LA in the USA,
Bristol in the UK (all 2018), Baltimore in USA (2017),
California Bay Area in the USA (2017), and a network of
municipalities in Brazil (2017). Visit: https://www.sdsntrends.org/local-data-action
13 For more information, visit: https://www.sdsntrends.
org/local-data-action
involved? (4) What are the strengths and weaknesses of the approach, as discussed with local
stakeholders? (5) How replicable is the model in
other contexts?
7.6.2 Impact and Lessons
As a result of these programs, SDSN has documented emerging practices on local SDG monitoring in four US cities; Baltimore, San Jose,
New York, and Los Angeles.
Four years since SDSN’s localization studies
began, we have identified a number of insights
from across cities and regions working to monitor and achieve the SDGs.
7.7
Local SDG Monitoring Efforts
Gain Most Traction When
Aligned with Existing City
Planning and Measurement
Frameworks
Nearly all of the cities and regions studied noted
that it was hard to pique local political interest
unless the SDG framework was presented as an
additive framework that would support and
improve upon existing plans and commitments,
including the priorities articulated by the mayor
or local government leader in their election manifestos. As such, local partners within academic
institutions and city stakeholders recommended
mapping SDG indicators onto existing local
strategies and monitoring tools, for example, in
San Jose, local academic partners undertaking
SDG mapping looked at how the SDGs might
support the city’s new 15-year Climate Smart San
Jose sustainability plan. In part because of this
work, the city placed a strong emphasis on people
and quality of life, as well as environmental outcomes, in the final strategy launched in 2017.
14
This approach was mirrored on the other side of
the world, in Patiala, India, where the SDG strategy was developed around the stated priorities of
14 For more on the Climate Smart San Jose plan, visit
http://www.sanjoseca.gov/climatesmartsanjose
7 Top-Down and Bottom-Up Approaches to the SDG Monitoring Challenge