Presentation by Ms. Tania Valerie Raguz, Representative of the World Society for the Protection of Animals (WSPA)
HLPF: Promoting the integration of economic, social and environmental dimensions of sustainable development
by
Tania Valerie Raguž, Representative
the World Society for the Protection of Animals (WSPA) at the EU in Brussels
1. Fostering integration of economic, social and environmental dimensions in policy implementation?
• Mandate: UNGA resolution A/RES/67/290 o.p. 1:
Decides that the HLPF shall….. enhance the integration of the three dimensions of sustainable development in a holistic and cross-sectoral manner at all levels……
starting point is the lessons learned from the CSD
HLPF has been mandated to go further providing an dynamic platform for regular dialogue, stocktaking and agenda-setting that will contribute to the enhanced integration of the 3 dimensions in a holistic, cross-sectoral manner at all levels.
• General Assembly:
Possible scenario: Q. of convening a meeting in 2015 in relation to launch of post-2015 development Agenda
- Yes: Political direction as to stocktaking, and agenda-
setting.
- No: HLPF interim work will be determined by its mandate under the auspices of ECOSOC.
• Until decision made have to assume the latter – main focus of presentation will be on the potential contribution of the HLPF under the auspices of ECOSOC to ensure it contributes to the broader post-2015 agenda.
During interim have to ensure HLPF work fulfils both its mandates as stipulated by RES 67/290 as a “hybrid” under the auspices of the both UNGA and ECOSOC i.e. contribute to on-going processes in defining lessons learned from CSD and the MDGs processes.
Also how can we maximise the contribution of upcoming HLPF work within the ECOSOC space to its future review mandate in 2016 on the follow-up and implementation of SD commitments including MOI within the context of the post-2015 agenda?
• ECOSOC: HLPF Agenda-setting mandate to advance integration of 3 dimensions
Agenda-setting is recognized by RES 67/290 as an essential element of innovative dynamics of the HLPF
RES 67/290 clearly sets out numerous agenda setting points e.g. identifying thematic focus, follow up and review progress of implementation, sharing of best practices via voluntary reviews, consider the DCF work, regional processes, negotiate a ministerial declaration, conduct regular reviews in 2016 to replace AMR etc.
An important agenda point is the HLPF to have a thematic focus reflecting the integration of the 3 dimensions in line with the thematic focus of the activities of the Council and consistent with the UNGA led post-2015 agenda.
• How to go about this this – points to keep in mind:
Res 67/290 provides some answers e.g. o.p. 12 - participation in HLPF to reflect the balanced integration of social, economic and environmental dimensions of SD (policy implementation) and to provide a dynamic platform for regular dialogue, stock-taking.
“ABC” of agenda setting to navigate us in this exercise – not reinventing the wheel e.g. UNEP Integrated Policy-making Guidelines:
- Frame the issue in economic/social/environmental terms
- Harmonize multi-stakeholder interests e.g. taking in regional differences and national priorities.
- Manage the entry of an issue into the HLPF agenda
- Explore policy opportunities:
Within the greater global policy framework
Set up inter-agency mechanisms
Identify root-causes
Set policy objectives
Formulate policy options
Galvanizing political will e.g. “balancing” the 3 dimensions of SD.
Agenda setting exercise will also have to foresee setting a course of action for decision-making processes at global, regional, national levels with a view to ensuring effective implementation:
Who will choose the criteria to make it universal and attractive for key actors from each policy dimension to engage?
How to address emerging issues?
How will baselines be established – ownership lies in the implementation of the SD agenda.
Division of labour – how to balance SDGs v GSDR review?
Assessing capacity and making informed decisions?
Implementation covered by other discussants but just to highlight the fact the need to systematically prepare the ground especially at sub-regional and national level for implementation:
High-level of diversity of SD stakeholders increases complexity of the exercise and increases the vulnerability of implementation – how to address status of NSDS, particular priorities of SIDs, LDCs LLDCs, MICs, MGs. use of the DCF, a UN inter Agency road map for accelerating implementation of 3 dimensions in the UN work
Need innovative follow-up mechanism for HLPF to ensure policies are being subjected to a robust “SD integration filter” at all policy levels.
Given the magnitude of agenda points – upcoming 2nd HLPF meeting could be once again “stock-taking” in nature but lays further groundwork by building on the initial direction provided by inaugural HLPF meeting and set out in A/RES/67/290.
Despite the urgency – interim phase should be a process of laying the groundwork of how the HLPF should work – built up in phases so cornerstones are in place in readiness for when the Forum’s substantive mandate kicks in (in 2016).
Agenda design should accommodate a decision-making cycle and was of providing practical solutions for action to ensure the envisaged dynamism. Points to consider:
How will the thematic focus of future HLPF be decided
How and when will critical operational decisions be made for future work of HLPF (other than HL and Ministerial negotiated declarations) i.e. beyond the coordination mechanism envisaged in Res 67/290 between the Presidents of UNGA, ECOSOC and the relevant Bureaux of the Council and Assembly.
• One concrete contribution that the HLPF can take at it upcoming meeting is to provide guidance on the scope and methodology of the GSDR.
2. How can science and GSDR contribute to setting the HLPF agenda? (promoting the integration of economic, social and environmental dimensions of sustainable development)
• Mandate: o.p. 20 A/RES/67/290 - to strengthen the science-policy interface by various means, including in the form of a GSDR
• Current challenges:
Complexity of SD challenges require integrated, transdisciplinary and transformational knowledge which concerns both policy and science – which often do not emerge simultaneously.
to date, integration of science into policy efforts to implement SD are subject to “sectoralization” e.g. primarily geared towards issue-specific challenges and incorporated into specific policy instruments e.g. climate change, biodiversity.
Often global assessments do not reflect regional, sub-regional and national priorities.
• o.p. 20 already sets part the HLPF’s agenda: to consider in 2014, the scope and methodology of a GSDR
• Potential value of this exercise:
HLPF can establish itself as an important space to improve science-policy interface for SD and feed into the post-2015 agenda - regular GSDRs could map out the current status and help the HLPF identify which SD issues need to be addressed more by science.
The GSDR methodology needs to go beyond mere assessments of current practice and identify means of integrating interdisciplinary policy action and science research collaboration that cuts across sectors, disciplines and established political processes e.g. “Nexus” concept used to integrate research and policy action in the area of water energy land and food security.
Contributes to the HLPF own agenda-setting exercise of integrating all SD dimensions - by identifying which SD topics lack such integrated collaboration due to too vertical or sectoral approaches
Take into account regional, sub-regional and national perspectives in analytical, policy work and capacity so as to enable more systemic analysis of globally agreed commitments for regional/sub, and national policy making processes.
Potential for a stronger linkage between HLPF and post-2015 agenda by mobilizing cooperation of broader networks of scientific communities at all levels (e.g. addressing the transparency of science, technology and innovation)
Interdisciplinary nature of this exercise highlights the need for support by other cross-disciplinary actors so enhancing the platform for partnerships within HLPF e.g. UNESCO, UN Regional Commission, World Bank, Regional Development Banks, scientific communities, academia, major groups and other relevant stakeholders. How can the DCF work be better harnessed to serve the HLPF role?
• Member States are expected to take a decision at the HLPF’s 2nd meeting (Prototype report executive summary, SG report)
How will this process be steered e.g. as per op. via ECOSOC president with respective bureaux or “friends of”?
To enhance integrated, trans-disciplinary evidence-based decision-making at all levels, “space” needs to be allocated within the HLPF agenda - to address regular GSDR reporting issues e.g. stocktaking, identifying focus of future GSDR’s for relevant stakeholders.
• Conclusion:
Interim transition period provides “space” for us to design a HLPF that is innovative, ambitious, universal and moves beyond standard UN working procedures.
Should take the opportunity – A/RES/67/290 provide a safeguard – organizational review of the HLPF during the 73rd session of UNGA.
by
Tania Valerie Raguž, Representative
the World Society for the Protection of Animals (WSPA) at the EU in Brussels
1. Fostering integration of economic, social and environmental dimensions in policy implementation?
• Mandate: UNGA resolution A/RES/67/290 o.p. 1:
Decides that the HLPF shall….. enhance the integration of the three dimensions of sustainable development in a holistic and cross-sectoral manner at all levels……
starting point is the lessons learned from the CSD
HLPF has been mandated to go further providing an dynamic platform for regular dialogue, stocktaking and agenda-setting that will contribute to the enhanced integration of the 3 dimensions in a holistic, cross-sectoral manner at all levels.
• General Assembly:
Possible scenario: Q. of convening a meeting in 2015 in relation to launch of post-2015 development Agenda
- Yes: Political direction as to stocktaking, and agenda-
setting.
- No: HLPF interim work will be determined by its mandate under the auspices of ECOSOC.
• Until decision made have to assume the latter – main focus of presentation will be on the potential contribution of the HLPF under the auspices of ECOSOC to ensure it contributes to the broader post-2015 agenda.
During interim have to ensure HLPF work fulfils both its mandates as stipulated by RES 67/290 as a “hybrid” under the auspices of the both UNGA and ECOSOC i.e. contribute to on-going processes in defining lessons learned from CSD and the MDGs processes.
Also how can we maximise the contribution of upcoming HLPF work within the ECOSOC space to its future review mandate in 2016 on the follow-up and implementation of SD commitments including MOI within the context of the post-2015 agenda?
• ECOSOC: HLPF Agenda-setting mandate to advance integration of 3 dimensions
Agenda-setting is recognized by RES 67/290 as an essential element of innovative dynamics of the HLPF
RES 67/290 clearly sets out numerous agenda setting points e.g. identifying thematic focus, follow up and review progress of implementation, sharing of best practices via voluntary reviews, consider the DCF work, regional processes, negotiate a ministerial declaration, conduct regular reviews in 2016 to replace AMR etc.
An important agenda point is the HLPF to have a thematic focus reflecting the integration of the 3 dimensions in line with the thematic focus of the activities of the Council and consistent with the UNGA led post-2015 agenda.
• How to go about this this – points to keep in mind:
Res 67/290 provides some answers e.g. o.p. 12 - participation in HLPF to reflect the balanced integration of social, economic and environmental dimensions of SD (policy implementation) and to provide a dynamic platform for regular dialogue, stock-taking.
“ABC” of agenda setting to navigate us in this exercise – not reinventing the wheel e.g. UNEP Integrated Policy-making Guidelines:
- Frame the issue in economic/social/environmental terms
- Harmonize multi-stakeholder interests e.g. taking in regional differences and national priorities.
- Manage the entry of an issue into the HLPF agenda
- Explore policy opportunities:
Within the greater global policy framework
Set up inter-agency mechanisms
Identify root-causes
Set policy objectives
Formulate policy options
Galvanizing political will e.g. “balancing” the 3 dimensions of SD.
Agenda setting exercise will also have to foresee setting a course of action for decision-making processes at global, regional, national levels with a view to ensuring effective implementation:
Who will choose the criteria to make it universal and attractive for key actors from each policy dimension to engage?
How to address emerging issues?
How will baselines be established – ownership lies in the implementation of the SD agenda.
Division of labour – how to balance SDGs v GSDR review?
Assessing capacity and making informed decisions?
Implementation covered by other discussants but just to highlight the fact the need to systematically prepare the ground especially at sub-regional and national level for implementation:
High-level of diversity of SD stakeholders increases complexity of the exercise and increases the vulnerability of implementation – how to address status of NSDS, particular priorities of SIDs, LDCs LLDCs, MICs, MGs. use of the DCF, a UN inter Agency road map for accelerating implementation of 3 dimensions in the UN work
Need innovative follow-up mechanism for HLPF to ensure policies are being subjected to a robust “SD integration filter” at all policy levels.
Given the magnitude of agenda points – upcoming 2nd HLPF meeting could be once again “stock-taking” in nature but lays further groundwork by building on the initial direction provided by inaugural HLPF meeting and set out in A/RES/67/290.
Despite the urgency – interim phase should be a process of laying the groundwork of how the HLPF should work – built up in phases so cornerstones are in place in readiness for when the Forum’s substantive mandate kicks in (in 2016).
Agenda design should accommodate a decision-making cycle and was of providing practical solutions for action to ensure the envisaged dynamism. Points to consider:
How will the thematic focus of future HLPF be decided
How and when will critical operational decisions be made for future work of HLPF (other than HL and Ministerial negotiated declarations) i.e. beyond the coordination mechanism envisaged in Res 67/290 between the Presidents of UNGA, ECOSOC and the relevant Bureaux of the Council and Assembly.
• One concrete contribution that the HLPF can take at it upcoming meeting is to provide guidance on the scope and methodology of the GSDR.
2. How can science and GSDR contribute to setting the HLPF agenda? (promoting the integration of economic, social and environmental dimensions of sustainable development)
• Mandate: o.p. 20 A/RES/67/290 - to strengthen the science-policy interface by various means, including in the form of a GSDR
• Current challenges:
Complexity of SD challenges require integrated, transdisciplinary and transformational knowledge which concerns both policy and science – which often do not emerge simultaneously.
to date, integration of science into policy efforts to implement SD are subject to “sectoralization” e.g. primarily geared towards issue-specific challenges and incorporated into specific policy instruments e.g. climate change, biodiversity.
Often global assessments do not reflect regional, sub-regional and national priorities.
• o.p. 20 already sets part the HLPF’s agenda: to consider in 2014, the scope and methodology of a GSDR
• Potential value of this exercise:
HLPF can establish itself as an important space to improve science-policy interface for SD and feed into the post-2015 agenda - regular GSDRs could map out the current status and help the HLPF identify which SD issues need to be addressed more by science.
The GSDR methodology needs to go beyond mere assessments of current practice and identify means of integrating interdisciplinary policy action and science research collaboration that cuts across sectors, disciplines and established political processes e.g. “Nexus” concept used to integrate research and policy action in the area of water energy land and food security.
Contributes to the HLPF own agenda-setting exercise of integrating all SD dimensions - by identifying which SD topics lack such integrated collaboration due to too vertical or sectoral approaches
Take into account regional, sub-regional and national perspectives in analytical, policy work and capacity so as to enable more systemic analysis of globally agreed commitments for regional/sub, and national policy making processes.
Potential for a stronger linkage between HLPF and post-2015 agenda by mobilizing cooperation of broader networks of scientific communities at all levels (e.g. addressing the transparency of science, technology and innovation)
Interdisciplinary nature of this exercise highlights the need for support by other cross-disciplinary actors so enhancing the platform for partnerships within HLPF e.g. UNESCO, UN Regional Commission, World Bank, Regional Development Banks, scientific communities, academia, major groups and other relevant stakeholders. How can the DCF work be better harnessed to serve the HLPF role?
• Member States are expected to take a decision at the HLPF’s 2nd meeting (Prototype report executive summary, SG report)
How will this process be steered e.g. as per op. via ECOSOC president with respective bureaux or “friends of”?
To enhance integrated, trans-disciplinary evidence-based decision-making at all levels, “space” needs to be allocated within the HLPF agenda - to address regular GSDR reporting issues e.g. stocktaking, identifying focus of future GSDR’s for relevant stakeholders.
• Conclusion:
Interim transition period provides “space” for us to design a HLPF that is innovative, ambitious, universal and moves beyond standard UN working procedures.
Should take the opportunity – A/RES/67/290 provide a safeguard – organizational review of the HLPF during the 73rd session of UNGA.