Meeting of the HLPF under the auspices of the ECOSOC, 26 June to 8 July 2015
Messages of the Rapporteur from the HLPF Senior Officials Meeting, 26 June – 2 July 2015, Trusteeship Council
Mr. President,
Excellencies,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
I’m pleased to provide you herewith with the main messages of the discussions on follow-up and review, the Global Sustainable Development Report, the science-policy interface and data of the first five days of this year’s HLPF.
On Follow-up and review, general messages were the following:
• An effective follow-up and review mechanism is necessary to the success of the new agenda. The Post-2015 Summit in September is expected to give broad guidance on follow-up and review; however, further discussion will be needed. Guidance on the reviews should not be overly prescriptive, yet should be clear on what is expected.
• The main principles that were put forward for the reviews were:
• They should be voluntary and state-led;
• addressing progress on all SDGs and means of implementation;
• support countries in making informed policy-choices;
• be rigorous and evidence-based;
• be open and inclusive of all stakeholders;
• build on existing platforms, bodies and fora;
• developing countries should be given support through capacity building in this respect.
• Further, the review mechanism should refrain from shaming, but build incentives to induce change, share experiences and discuss solutions. It should aim to create a culture of openness and ground in evidence based discussions.
• Follow-up and review should happen at multiple levels, all the way from local to global. The starting point must be the country level.
• It was also mentioned that peer reviews contribute to collective learning and could be integrated into the follow-up and review processes.
On the National level:
• The national level should be the primary basis of the overarching review mechanism. It will inform the regional and global reviews. Coherence across these levels needs to be ensured.
On the regional level:
• Regional level follow-up and review can serve as a platform for exchange of best practices and experiences to discuss common challenges, regional trends and to support regional coherence.
• Different regions should organize their own review processes, building on existing institutions and processes and taking into account regional contexts.
Regarding the global level and the role of the HLPF:
• Member states agreed that the HLPF should play a decisive role in following up progress on the implementation of the new agenda. Reference was made to the post-2015 zero draft, which refers to the HLPF as the apex of the review process.
• The HLPF should become a place for dialogue between all countries and all stakeholders, including parliaments on follow-up and review.
• Thematic platforms were recognized as important for monitoring and follow-up of SDGs.
• Thematic reviews at HLPF should draw from thematic reviews taking place in other fora such as ECOSOC and its subsidiary bodies as well as other international agencies and organizations and look at topics in an integrated manner. They should have a cross-cutting approach to avoid working in silos.
• It was also recognized that member states would have to provide further clarity on issues such as:
• how to organize the periodic reviews of national progress and the relationship between the different levels in this regard;
• how to organize thematic reviews;
• on the scope and methodology of the Global Sustainable Development Report GSDR;
• and on the positioning of the HLPF within the UN development system.
• An annual SDG progress report and the GSDR were mentioned as important reports to inform the review work of the HLPF.
On the GSDR, the main messages included the following:
• The inclusive approach of the 2015 edition of the GSDR was welcomed.
• Member states also expressed their views on function, content, form, elaboration and principles regarding future GSDR editions, such as:
• It should inform intergovernmental discussions, highlight the most relevant information regarding progress on the SDGs, give key recommendations for policy-making, and be a communication tool for the agenda. It should be produced in collaboration with all relevant UN agencies, draw on peer reviewed sources and avoid duplication of other reports.
• It should be clearly linked to the implementation, follow-up and review of the SDGs, focusing in particular on the interlinkages of the SDGs and identify emerging issues. Thematic chapters could be linked to the agenda of the HLPF and inform its discussions.
• Regarding the periodicity of the GSDR, some member states expressed a preference for a yearly report, others only every four years aligned with the meeting of the HLPF under the auspices of the General Assembyl.
On the science-policy interface:
• To strengthen the science-policy interface, the HLPF should provide a platform for science-policy dialogue, highlight trends and provide policy-relevant analysis and translate outcomes of science-policy debates into action, thereby contributing to agenda setting.
• The interface function would involve communication among policy makers, science communities and civil society. Not only “western science” but also traditional knowledge and various perspectives are important for this dialogue.
• The HLPF could help ensure that the post-2015 agenda topics are on the research agendas of scientists around the world.
On the importance of data for implementation, follow-up and review of the agenda:
• It was broadly recognized that data collection and analysis would be critical for implementation, follow-up and review of the post-2015 agenda and that it would be crucial to use disaggregated data such as by income, age, migratory status, disability, gender and other.
• All stakeholders should have access to this information and data. Country capacity for data collection, statistics and analyses will need to be strengthened, in particular in LDCs and SIDS.
