Germany
Intergovernmental negotiations on the post-2015 agenda
Stock-taking, 19-21 January 2015
German statement
on “Intergrating SDGs in the post-2015 agenda” and “Follow up and review”
Mr Co-Facilitator,
Germany aligns itself with the statement delivered by the European Union.
Sustainable Development Goals will form the core of the transformative post-2015 agenda.
The open working group did an excellent job: the group managed to present a proposal of
goals and targets that is balanced in nature and transformative in content and adequately
addresses the interlinked challenges the world is facing. In this regard we welcome
resolution 68/309 of the General Assembly.
While the OWG’s proposal should be the main basis for integrating the SDGs into the
agenda, Germany supports the suggestion for a technical proofing of its targets. This
technical proofing has to be based on clearly defined criteria to ensure that we do not fall
behind or contradict existing agreements. Furthermore technical proofing should improve the
coherence of the targets, but must maintain their present level of ambition.
Most importantly, the technical proofing must not touch any substantial content of the
OWG proposal, as doing so would endanger the sensitive balance of the proposal. If we
open any one aspect of the proposal for negotiations, we risk losing the whole ambitious but
delicate compromise which the OWG reached in the course of one and a half years of hard
work.
To avoid intensive discussions of a “technical” nature between member states, technical
experts of the UN System should be given the mandate to carry out the technical proofing
and they should subsequently present a proposal to member states for consultation.
Furthermore we welcome the idea of the Secretary General to elaborate “essential
elements” to frame the SDGs and communicate their political essence worldwide. This
communication effort is necessary to generate the political impetus needed for the global
transformation to sustainable development. It will be of crucial importance to communicate
the set of SDGs as a whole and avoid assigning goals to certain elements to avoid silothinking.
This would contradict the idea of a holistic and three-dimensional approach.
The session in March should be used to discuss the number and the concrete wording of
these elements. We must ensure that the “essential elements” adequately reflect the main
requirements of the SDGs: they are to be “people-centered”, “planet-sensitive” and address
the three dimensions of sustainable development in a balanced way.
For effective implementation of the post-2015 agenda, an acceptable and efficient review
mechanism in regular intervals will be essential. The High-Level Political Forum on
Sustainable Development will play the key role when it comes to the review of the
implementation of the global agenda.
The review mechanism for the post-2015 agenda should provide relevant information on
where we stand in the implementation and analyze factors of success to serve as an
important tool for policy decisions. Therefore it has to go beyond simply monitoring global
progress. To reach this, it should be based on the following seven main elements and
criteria:
1. The review mechanism should be anchored in strong national ownership. The national
level would therefore be the starting point for a review mechanism.
2. The review mechanism should be voluntary and therefore needs to be incentivebased.
Possible incentives for countries to participate might be heightened visibility for
their progress and efforts, access to means of implementation and further support, and
participation in a forum for the establishment of new partnerships, constructive dialogue,
peer learning and an exchange of best practices.
3. The review process should be multi-layered.Following an initial review at the national
level, the regional level could help to prepare countries for their presentation of progress
at the global level. The regional level could be useful for peer review and peer learning,
given that circumstances and conditions in countries of a given region are most likely to
be comparable.
4. It should be based on a multi-stakeholder approach, in the sense that all stakeholders
will have to contribute to the implementation of the agenda.
5. The review mechanism and implementation should be fact-based. High quality and realtime
data and informative indicators are a prerequisite for monitoring, review and
implementation. Low capacity countries will require support in the collection,
dissemination and use of data. The UN Statistical commission could coordinate the
development of an indicator framework and the collection and aggregation of data for
monitoring global progress.
6. It is necessary to establish the review process as far as possible using existing
monitoring and review structures for other processes, to avoid overstraining international
and national capacity, and to ensure coherence and synergies.
7. Last but not least, a compelling and comprehensive Global Sustainable Development
Report, with input from eminent scientists, will be of key importance for the review. Each
report should focus on one or two relevant themes and bring the Forum’s attention to
new challenges that we aren’t even aware of today.
But let us be clear: any monitoring and review mechanism will only be effective and efficient
if it is acceptable for all states. We look forward to discussing how to achieve this in greater
detail when we meet again in May and when we meet during the next ministerial meeting of
the HLPF in July.
Thank you very much.
Stock-taking, 19-21 January 2015
German statement
on “Intergrating SDGs in the post-2015 agenda” and “Follow up and review”
Mr Co-Facilitator,
Germany aligns itself with the statement delivered by the European Union.
Sustainable Development Goals will form the core of the transformative post-2015 agenda.
The open working group did an excellent job: the group managed to present a proposal of
goals and targets that is balanced in nature and transformative in content and adequately
addresses the interlinked challenges the world is facing. In this regard we welcome
resolution 68/309 of the General Assembly.
While the OWG’s proposal should be the main basis for integrating the SDGs into the
agenda, Germany supports the suggestion for a technical proofing of its targets. This
technical proofing has to be based on clearly defined criteria to ensure that we do not fall
behind or contradict existing agreements. Furthermore technical proofing should improve the
coherence of the targets, but must maintain their present level of ambition.
Most importantly, the technical proofing must not touch any substantial content of the
OWG proposal, as doing so would endanger the sensitive balance of the proposal. If we
open any one aspect of the proposal for negotiations, we risk losing the whole ambitious but
delicate compromise which the OWG reached in the course of one and a half years of hard
work.
To avoid intensive discussions of a “technical” nature between member states, technical
experts of the UN System should be given the mandate to carry out the technical proofing
and they should subsequently present a proposal to member states for consultation.
Furthermore we welcome the idea of the Secretary General to elaborate “essential
elements” to frame the SDGs and communicate their political essence worldwide. This
communication effort is necessary to generate the political impetus needed for the global
transformation to sustainable development. It will be of crucial importance to communicate
the set of SDGs as a whole and avoid assigning goals to certain elements to avoid silothinking.
This would contradict the idea of a holistic and three-dimensional approach.
The session in March should be used to discuss the number and the concrete wording of
these elements. We must ensure that the “essential elements” adequately reflect the main
requirements of the SDGs: they are to be “people-centered”, “planet-sensitive” and address
the three dimensions of sustainable development in a balanced way.
For effective implementation of the post-2015 agenda, an acceptable and efficient review
mechanism in regular intervals will be essential. The High-Level Political Forum on
Sustainable Development will play the key role when it comes to the review of the
implementation of the global agenda.
The review mechanism for the post-2015 agenda should provide relevant information on
where we stand in the implementation and analyze factors of success to serve as an
important tool for policy decisions. Therefore it has to go beyond simply monitoring global
progress. To reach this, it should be based on the following seven main elements and
criteria:
1. The review mechanism should be anchored in strong national ownership. The national
level would therefore be the starting point for a review mechanism.
2. The review mechanism should be voluntary and therefore needs to be incentivebased.
Possible incentives for countries to participate might be heightened visibility for
their progress and efforts, access to means of implementation and further support, and
participation in a forum for the establishment of new partnerships, constructive dialogue,
peer learning and an exchange of best practices.
3. The review process should be multi-layered.Following an initial review at the national
level, the regional level could help to prepare countries for their presentation of progress
at the global level. The regional level could be useful for peer review and peer learning,
given that circumstances and conditions in countries of a given region are most likely to
be comparable.
4. It should be based on a multi-stakeholder approach, in the sense that all stakeholders
will have to contribute to the implementation of the agenda.
5. The review mechanism and implementation should be fact-based. High quality and realtime
data and informative indicators are a prerequisite for monitoring, review and
implementation. Low capacity countries will require support in the collection,
dissemination and use of data. The UN Statistical commission could coordinate the
development of an indicator framework and the collection and aggregation of data for
monitoring global progress.
6. It is necessary to establish the review process as far as possible using existing
monitoring and review structures for other processes, to avoid overstraining international
and national capacity, and to ensure coherence and synergies.
7. Last but not least, a compelling and comprehensive Global Sustainable Development
Report, with input from eminent scientists, will be of key importance for the review. Each
report should focus on one or two relevant themes and bring the Forum’s attention to
new challenges that we aren’t even aware of today.
But let us be clear: any monitoring and review mechanism will only be effective and efficient
if it is acceptable for all states. We look forward to discussing how to achieve this in greater
detail when we meet again in May and when we meet during the next ministerial meeting of
the HLPF in July.
Thank you very much.
Stakeholders