UN science report to guide countries on the SDGs

When representatives from 43 countries met at the UN headquarters in New York this summer, all eyes were on theannual reportthat probes how far countries have come in implementing a handful of the Sustainable Development Goals (可持续发展目标s) adopted two years ago this month to end poverty and help improve people’s lives worldwide.

But more quietly, a group of 15 scientists who also convened at theHigh-Level Political Forum(HLFP)were busy laying the groundwork for a different document – one designed to look ahead to guide policy, rather than look back to evaluate progress.

Set to first be released in 2019, and then every four years, theGlobal Sustainable Development Report（GSDR）将提供基于科学的指导，以帮助各国确定自己的可持续发展道路。

Scientists involved say it is similar in ambition to the scientific assessments of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPPC) that run parallel to the political negotiations for climate action.

“It is not just a report, it is a tool for enabling countries to identify different approaches towards implementation”

Lucilla Spini

气候变化过程集马来西亚政府和理事委员会科学顾问扎克里·阿卜杜勒·哈米德（Zakri Abdul Hamid）表示，这是一个很好的先例member at the UN Technology Bank for the Least Developed Countries.

“The work of the IPCC had shown the way [on] how decisions arrived at by policymakers and negotiators could be improved by relying on scientific evidence,” he said. “GSDR is following the same path.”

IPCC-like influence

Zakri，声音倡导科学角色in the UN process, believes the report will bring “added value” to countries’ implementation efforts. “For a long time, science [has not had a] high profile to assist the various negotiations taking place at the UN, in particular those that concerned socio-economic development,” he toldscidev.net。“越来越多，科学的声音正在被关注。”

Just like the IPCC reports, the GSDR will be based on evidence, aims to influence decision making, and runs parallel to the political process of implementing the SDGs. According to the部长宣言of last year’s HLPF, where it was formally adopted, it will complement the annual SDGs progress report by being “more scientific and analytical, focused on the science-policy interface”.

“It's not going to be a political paper – we are very independent,” says Eeva Furman, director for Centre for Environmental Policy at the Finnish Environment Institute and one of the scientists elected to the group behind the report.

独立是重要的——只是having a report that regularly presents evidence to policymakers, according to Saleemul Huq, senior fellow at the International Institute for Environment and Development in the UK and an expert on links between climate change and development. “I think that was the biggest strength of the IPCC,” he says.

Furman is careful to also point out some differences from the IPCC’s work. For one thing, the GSDR won’t rely on peer-reviewed literature alone, but will also look at so-called “grey literature” which includes other sources of research.

She explains this is because the knowledge sources and disciplines that need to be combined to inform the SDGs are diverse and go beyond the natural sciences.

The budget is another point of difference, Furman points out. “We don't have the huge mechanism [of the IPCC]. We are talking about a group of 15 people who get their travel paid when they come to meetings.”

This year’s HLPF was just the second time the group got to talk face-to-face since work began in the beginning of the year.

“[But we are] aiming for the same level of impact that the IPCC has on decision-making – maybe even higher,” says Furman.

寻找未来

The concept of transformation – how to get societies to become more sustainable – will be a key theme in the report. But rather than offering prescriptive answers, the aim is to help governments understand what they should focus on, how science links with policy and society, and how they can get input from scientific communities within their borders.

“Our report is different from the yearly UN report that looks at how different goals have progressed,” said Furman. “[It] is very much looking into the future.”

Huq agrees that the GSDR should be about solutions, including cost-effectiveness analysis. “[It needs] to be about what works, what doesn’t work, what can we do to enhance actions that are working in some places and make them more ambitious and more universal,” he says.

GSDR背后的小组专注于提供证据支持的建议和实用解决方案。它还可以避免产生由科学主导的大量文档，而有利于用可访问的语言编写的苗条卷。“ [这不会成为200页的报告，” Furman说。

Huq同意这种方法。他说：“可持续发展目标和IPCC之间有一个很大的区别。”他的前几个IPCC评估报告是在气候变化科学进行了激烈辩论的时候编制的。但是，对于可持续发展目标，已经达成了采取行动的协议并且没有科学要检查的协议，GSDR可以并且应该专注于实施建议。

Although afirst ‘prototype’ editionof the GSDR was put together in 2014, plans for producing it as part of the UN process were formalised at last year’s HLPF. Lucilla Spini, head of science programmes at the International Council for Science (ICSU), wasactively involved在包括2016年“飞行员”版本在内的原型中，审查了章节并促进了科学家的贡献。

Calling the GSDR a ‘report’ does not do it justice, according to Spini. “It is not just a report, it is a tool for enabling countries to identify different approaches towards implementation,” she says. “It should offer a ‘one-stop shop’ on assessing science-policy interfaces and an overview of emerging issues.”

It’s also a community-building tool, says Spini, to encourage dialogue among scientists, and between the scientists and policymakers. “My personal role has been to build trust between the international scientific community and the UN DESA team [the UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs team in charge of compiling the report],” she says. “And despite very tight deadlines, many scientists decided to help out.”

Process and the global South

在接下来的几天中，该小组将通过DESA website。Furman says open calls such as this, and the very openness of our conversation, are signs that the group wants to be inclusive and transparent.

“The group believes that dialogue with society and other parties will help the impact of their work,” she says. “Both process as well as content are important.”

“It's not going to be a political paper – we are very independent.”

Eeva Furman

Part of this focus on process is an emphasis on contributions from the developing world. A forthcoming workshop in Helsinki will have an equal split between developing and developed country participants, says Furman.

她说：“然后，我们特别关注与发展中国家特别[与发展中国家有关的问题，就像整个科学结构一样……在发展中国家中建造的方式 - 您需要哪种网络，基础架构，教育，能力建设。”

根据Huq的说法，来自发展中国家的专家参与是IPCC早期报告的问题，但情况有所改善。近年来被证明有用的一种策略是为发展中国家的年轻研究人员提供培训，以便他们成为未来的主要作者。

That element of capacity building pays off in the long-term, says Huq. “That’s where you can fill the gaps – there may be some countries in some geographical locations where at the moment there may not be enough experts, but you can then invest in creating the experts over time.”