Premium
Follow‐up and Review of the Sustainable Development Goals: Alignment vs. Internalization
Author(s) -
Persson Åsa,
Weitz Nina,
Nilsson Måns
Publication year - 2016
Publication title -
review of european, comparative and international environmental law
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.37
H-Index - 18
eISSN - 2050-0394
pISSN - 2050-0386
DOI - 10.1111/reel.12150
Subject(s) - sustainable development , principal (computer security) , visibility , political science , process management , millennium development goals , balance (ability) , management science , public relations , business , risk analysis (engineering) , computer science , economic growth , psychology , economics , developing country , computer security , geography , neuroscience , meteorology , law
Follow‐up and review arrangements will play a critical role in ensuring that the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are effectively implemented, much of which will need to happen at the national level. This article examines the nature of commitments that countries have made and if follow‐up and review arrangements currently planned are consistent with those. In particular, we consider the need to encompass both the global SDG targets and the nationally defined targets foreseen. We also discuss the balance between following up and reviewing outcomes vis‐à‐vis behaviour to achieve those outcomes. Following a review of current plans for follow‐up and review, we further draw lessons from principal–agent theory and from the two predecessors of the SDGs, Agenda 21 and the Millennium Development Goals. We conclude that increased attention and visibility of nationally defined and internalized targets is likely to enhance implementation effectiveness, and that they should therefore be accommodated in the follow‐up and review systems.