Press Release: UNECE launches Dashboard to track regional progress on SDGs
This is a press release from UNECE which can be found here.
The Sustainable Development Goals’ globally-agreed framework of 232 indicators allows everyone—governments, researchers, civil society, business and beyond—to keep track of how our countries are progressing towards environmental, social and economic sustainability.
A new UNECE Dashboard for SDGs, launched ahead of the Regional Forum on Sustainable Development for the UNECE Region, brings together available data for its 56 member countries, providing for the first time a regional perspective on the global indicators.
With data for 80 regionally-relevant indicators across all 17 goals, users can see snapshots of where countries stand for each indicator, view differences between women and men; create graphs and maps; compare countries; access definitions and explanations; and download full datasets for more in-depth analysis.
UNECE Executive Secretary Olga Algayerova emphasized that “Countries from across the UNECE region have made clear the need to enhance monitoring of 2030 Agenda progress – a crucial foundation for the transformative policies needed for the Decade of Action to deliver the SDGs. UNECE’s Dashboard for SDGs offers a tool to support these efforts. But the availability of data remains a significant challenge. UNECE will continue to advance statistical cooperation in the region, mobilizing expertise and building countries’ capacities to help address key gaps”.
Data gaps remain key challenge
SDG indicators can tell us a good deal about progress and challenges across a range of issues, but we still have a long way to go to get the full picture: much of the information we need to guide and evaluate policies is absent, incomplete or of questionable quality.
The major gap is data disaggregation: the 2030 Agenda’s vision to “leave no-one behind” requires all relevant indicators to be broken down by sex, age, ethnicity, for indigenous groups, migratory status, disability status, etc. For that to be possible, a massive increase in data collection is required. To date, the only disaggregation offered in the UNECE dashboard is by sex, where possible with the currently-available data.
Global indicators are classified by an inter-agency group into three tiers, according to the extent to which there are internationally-agreed concepts and methodology, combined with actual data availability. Since the adoption of the global framework, this has helped focus international efforts where they are most needed, for developing methodology and international standards and targeting capacity development in countries to help them improve their data collection and processing.
Currently half of the indicators are classified as tier I, and another 40 per cent as tier II. This is a marked improvement since the global indicator framework was first adopted in 2016, when only 36 per cent of indicators were considered to have a sound internationally-agreed methodology and widespread data availability (tier I). Back in 2016, 39 per cent of indicators were classified as tier III, meaning either that agreed concepts and definitions were lacking, or data availability was poor, or both. With focused international efforts, including those of UNECE’s many expert groups and task teams, a large number of indicators now have more clear definitions and greater data availability, and this continues to improve.
But despite these significant advances, there are still significant gaps. In the UNECE region, for example, time-use data are sorely lacking. There are established techniques, definitions and recommendations for conducting time-use surveys (including UNECE’s Guidelines for harmonizing time-use surveys) but conducting such surveys remains expensive and is often given a low priority, meaning that important information on the time women and men spend doing paid and unpaid work remains patchy, even in the most developed countries of the region.
Statistical cooperation between countries at UNECE contributes to filling some of the key gaps. For example, on population and housing censuses and national accounts, UNECE guidance and capacity development helps countries produce the statistics that are at the core of almost all goals: a very large proportion of the global indicators require either total population, GDP or both for their calculation.
Name of pavilion Contact email Link to pavilion schedule #Atoms4Climate B.Carpinelli@iaea.org https://www.iaea.org/topics/climate-change/the-iaea-and- cop/cop27 Adaptation Fund mpueschel@adaptatio n-fund.org https://www.adaptation-fund.org/cop27/ Africa Pavilion email@example.com https://www.afdb.org/en/cop27 Australia Australiacop27pavilion @industry.gov.au www.dcceew.gov.au/cop27aus Bellona Pavilion firstname.lastname@example.org https://bellona.org/news/climate-change/international-climate- conferences/2022-10-bel
Heroes of Environmental Diplomacy: Profiles in Courage. Drawing on interviews and the inside stories of those involved, each chapter follows one or more of these heroic individuals, a list which includes Sidney Holt, Christiana Figueres , Maurice Strong, Franz Perrez , Luc Hoffmann, Mostafa Tolba , Maria Luiza Ribeiro Viotti, Raul Oyuela Estrada , Barack Obama and Paula Caballero. UN related events in 2023 January January 13-15 th : Thirteenth Session of the International Renewable Energy Agency Assembly - World Energy Transition – The Global Stocktake Abu Dhabi UAE January 16-20 th : World Economic Forum – Cooperation in a Fragmented World Davos Switzerland March March 5-9 th : Least Development Countries fifth Conference (Doha) March 22 to 24 th : UN Water 2023 Conference (New York) April April 21-23 rd : World Bank Group Spring Meeting April 24-27 th : Forum on Financing for Development April 24-27 th : UN World Data Forum Hangzhou China Ma
COP 27 was both better and worse than expected, say Prof. Felix Dodds and Chris Spence - originally published with Inter Press Service here. It’s finally over. After the anticipation and build-up to COP27, the biggest climate meeting of the year is now in our rear-view mirror. The crowds of delegates that thronged the Sharm el-Sheikh international convention center for two long weeks have all headed home to recover. Many will be fatigued from long hours and sleepless nights as negotiators tried to seal a deal that would move the world forwards. Did all this hard work pay off? In our opinion, COP 27 was both better and worse than we’d hoped. Failing to Follow the Science First, the bad news. COP 27 failed to deliver what the science tells us was needed. With the window of opportunity closing fast on our goal of limiting global temperature rise to 1.5C or less, COP 27 did far too little on the all-important issue of mitigation—that is, cutting emissions. The case for urgent a