Policies and Governance for Resilient and Sustainable Cities and Regions

Experience matters

Tue, 21 Apr 2026 07:53:01 GMT

Experience Still Matters - From ISOCARP's 2025 World Planning Congress in Riyadh to the 2026 Conference 'Centrality in the Age of Dispersion' in Wroclaw to the 2026 Smart City Expo World Congress in Barcelona

I just finished the review of more than 200 full papers of last year's 61st ISOCARP World Planning Congress in Riyadh together with ISOCARP's great Congress Content Team and my Co-General Rapporteur and President of IFLA Middle East, Dr. Nadine Bitar Chahine. Now, I would be ready to take it a bit easier and to focus on my special interests, like the relationship between humans, cities and AI.

However, I am happy to share that I received a call to serve on the Expert Evaluation Committee (Call for Speakers and Call for Awards) for the 2026 Smart City Expo World Congress in Barcelona - the world's biggest and most influential event on urban innovation. Since 2011, the Smart City Expo World Congress has been the world’s biggest and most influential event for cities and urban innovation. Hosted annually in Barcelona, it brings together a powerful ecosystem of leaders from global companies, governments, and strategic organizations, driving real change. By convening the brightest minds and the most cutting-edge technology, the Smart City Expo is actively shaping a new urban paradigm: more sustainable, efficient, and human-centered.

This function comes on top of my continued membership in the Scientific Committee for this year's Conference on 'Centrality in the Age of Dispersion' at the Wroclaw University of Science and Technology and an assignment as assessor and evaluator by hashtag#CitiesAlliance.

Apparently, and in spite of the new wave of technology innovation, around AI experience still matters. More is coming up, and I am thankful for that. I will keep putting my penny into the jar of international cooperation of cities and their multilevel engagement.

To Master AI we have to train ourselves, not only AI Models and Applications

Mon, 13 Apr 2026 13:49:14 GMT

Do we have to overcome laziness to master AI? And what laziness?

In her fascinating book Le Paradox du Tapis Roulant (The Paradox of the Conveyor Belt) Marion Carré writes about our intellectual laziness in using AI and that we need to and how to overcome it.

Does that make sense? Isn’t it the promise of all adds on Artificial Intelligence (AI) that it will provide services to us to make our life easier, to foster innovation and to increase our quality of life?

Marion Carré observes and provides evidence from US and UK studies that using Large Languages Models (LLM) can make the individuum more creative, but that comparing this progress with other users using similar prompts shows in LLM responses only limited diversity and creativity. Instead, LLM provide similar suggestions and inspiration to different people who provide the LLM with similar tasks/prompts.

Users who start from a lower level of knowledge may be able to make big steps towards an average level of knowledge and creativity while those from an already above average level may experience less gain of knowledge and creativity.

She compares this phe nomenon with a conveyor belt. It is able to move individuals forward easily. Everybody is moving forward but they all move in the same direction. And here is the paradox: while we move forward the machine moves us into the same direction. Thus, on the longer term, AI might contribute more to standardization than creativity and innovation.

But as co-founder of the company Ask Mona, a start-up that uses AI to mobilize curiosity and cooperates with culture institution on different continents, Marion Carré describes a way out of this impasse: instead of allowing AI to lull us into a false sense of security by simply trusting that our prompts generate trustworthy answers, we should use AI more as a sparring partner to train our critical thinking.

Of course, it will be necessary that developers of AI program models and applications to be more interested in what users exactly mean. As various projects described demonstrate, it is also possible to challenge AI to be more gender and culturally responsive. Thus, AI Models should strengthen their Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback, ask users questions and give them different options to choose from. And after overcoming all temptations to lean back, trust AI and become lazy, Marion Carré realized:

“It was at this point that I began using AI to engage in dialogue with myself. Not because I recognized its particular expertise or attached importance to its ideas, but because some of its remarks prompted reflections I wouldn't have had in isolation. The machine shifts my perspective away from my own way of thinking and its inevitable biases. It helps me more easily identify blind spots in my work and question certain limitations” (page 205).

ISBN978-2-7096-7510-9

Marion Carré (2025) Le Paradoxe du Tapis Roulant. www.editions-jclattes.fr

Transforming a Global Movement for Safe and Ethical Use of AI

Fri, 06 Mar 2026 13:26:02 GMT

Transforming a Global Movement for Safe and Ethical Use of AI into a Sustainable and Agile Organization in a Dynamic Policy Environment

The International Association for Safe and Ethical Artificial Intelligence, Inc. (IASEAI.org) hosted its second successful annual conference on 24 and 25 February 2026 at UNESCO House in Paris. Movement can be impactful for a while but needs to build a sustainable and agile structure for cooperation if they aim at longer term impact. IASEAI is an independent nonprofit organization founded to address the risks and opportunities associated with rapid advances in AI. With 1200 attendees and its interdisciplinary program the Paris conference was a rousing success. However, IASEAI still a young movement in a dynamic and difficult policy environment:

Overall, the use of AI is not regulated. There are some national AI policies in countries like China and at regional level the European Union the EU AI Act is in effect since August 2024. The UN is establishing an Independent International Scientific Panel on AI. In most countries and cities of the world governments are still struggling to find their right AI-approach.
Meanwhile big tech is betting high on the (aimed for) return of investments in AI development. A $7 trillion race to scale data centers is driving the investment landscape.
At the same time, public concerns are growing about possible negative impacts of AI on the labor market and social cohesion. In addition, the AI bubble may burst. However, in global competition government tend to let AI development go without regulation rather the risking to fall behind in the race.
All that happens in a time when the climate change is an ever-growing challenge, wars in Ukraine, Sudan and now in the entire Middle East continue to weaken international cooperation, kill thousands and destroy economic resources.

What can non-governmental organizations like IASEAI do?

In short IASEAI needs a sustainable and agile structure.

With its President Stuart Russel, Executive Director Mark Nitzberg, Council, Advisory Board and Volunteers the Association has already a core team able to organize excellent international conferences like IASEAI’25 and ’26. But what happens in between of the annual conferences? How to keep the momentum?

Stuart Russel at the closing plenary in Paris (see picture) expressed hope that e.g. as many national chapters as possible will be established. But how long will it take to establish such chapters in possibly all 195 recognized countries in the world? Or might the association end up with a few active countries which then leave many interested members behind? Therefore, and without excluding any establishment of national chapters, but also considering the dynamic global environment and limited resources of IASEAI, it might be recommendable and strategic to choose a structure and approach like this:

Governance

The President, Executive Director and Council already form the core governance structure of IASEAI and they should be supported by the Advisory Board and a Secretariat. They decide on the program of work, policy statements, other global activities and are accountable to members at the General Assembly of Members of the society.

Regional Chapters and Working Groups

In addition, IASEAI should establishing Regional Chapters or Working Groups in North America (US, Canada and Mexico), Europe (EU, UK and other non-EU-member states), Africa, Western Asia, Asia and Pacific (China, Australia etc). Again, National Chapters should be welcome but as a global movement the structure should not leave any member behind.

Regional Chapters are more flexible and agile to exchange and cooperation, including with members in countries, where there either is no national network of members yet or where it may be difficult to establish a national non-governmental group of IASEAI. In addition, in cases like the European Union, a Regional Chapter is useful to follow-up e.g. developments around the EU AI Act.

IASEAI work across all policy levels: AI and cities, and AI and International Organizations

Considering that most people of the world live in cities, it would be important to establish an additional Working Group ‘AI and Cities’ to address the specific needs and opportunities of cities. Not paying enough attention to local needs and opportunities is one of the reasons why many UN agenda and policies like 2030 Agenda with its SDGs are weak or fail on the implementation side.

In addition, one additional global Working Group should coordinate cooperation with the UN and other International Organizations. A global movement like IASEAI must work across all policy levels to be sustainable. After all, advising the UN through its Scientific Panel on AI, and national governments on AI safety and ethics may fail easily, if IASEAI has no competence at all on subnational matters of AI implementation and impacts.

Ad hoc Thematic Groups and Projects

In general, IASEAI should beware of becoming a organization which is top-down organized only. This might choke the momentum achieved at the first two annual conferences. IASEAI needs motivated and engaged members across disciplines, countries and regions for its global movement and to speak up in favor of safe and ethical use of AI.

The dynamic of developments in the field will generate emerging subjects and may require that ad hoc groups with a single purpose are set up e.g. to write a report or policy statement on emerging issues in the field. This might be the case on a wide range of subjects like 'AI and children'.

Depending on funds available the Association can build own and independent capacities for policy analysis and research. On the longer run this may turn IASEAI into a Think Thank always demanded when AI faces a new development of safety and ethical relevance.

Of course, it will remain the task of the President, Executive Director, Council, Secretariat and advisory groups to compose out of all the above and in cooperation with all affiliates a sustainable global movement that speaks with authority and convinces governments and the public of a safe and ethical use of AI.

And thanks again to the organizers of IASEAI'26 for the excellent conference with its 'radical interdisciplinary' programme. It was the right approach for the global movement.

Trends and Signals for 2026 - The new APA 2026 Trend Report Artificial Intelligence and urban and rural development

Thu, 29 Jan 2026 12:41:07 GMT

On 28 January, the American Planning Association (APA) launched the fifth Trend Report for Planners. One of the strengths of the Report is that the trends are structured within three timeframes (Act Now, Prepare, Learn, and Watch), which indicate the urgency of planners' actions. Within each timeframe, trends are grouped into themed clusters. For each trend, the report gives insights and explains why it is important for planners to know about and consider the trend in their work.

The Future of Planning requires embracing uncertainty. Planning was and is always linked to uncertainties. However, the Report is linked to the current specific multiple crises developments from climate to AI, Trump policies, geopolitical challenges, and the fact that policies leave many people behind.

Looking more specifically at AI, I agree with the position that the intensifying bonds between humans and Chatbots are a trend where action is needed now. The Report also describes the need to prepare for policy shifts not working: "Fears of technology taking our jobs have been persistent through time, and the recent adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) is no exception. Nearly one-third of U.S. workers believe that AI will reduce jobs in the future, and while some studies haven’t found significant disruption by AI in the labor market, the available data have limitations. Moreover, other research has found that while certain jobs have been insulated from AI thus far, early-career". Isn't this an area where not only preparation but also acting now is needed?

The Report suggests embracing uncertainty and updating the planner’s toolkit. The Report is an excellent read. I highly recommend it. There is only one caveat: With so much about (often interrelated and interdependent) uncertainties for cities, economies, society, and individuals, I miss a more integrated foresight on urban and rural life of the future. Will cities look the same? How to ensure, in hybrid planning processes, that AI doesn't substitute our human objectives with its own? We are learning a lot about the parts shaping our future, but the traditional strength of planners to plan for integrated and inclusive human settlements still needs to be demonstrated, e.g., by describing based on foresight data scenarios and narratives of cities in a possible age of AI. Integrated narratives are necessary to inspire and motivate citizens and planners.

In its conclusion, the Report summarises: "Although the future may feel uncertain, it also holds significant promise. Addressing complex global and local challenges will require innovation, creativity, and collaboration. Social and technological advances offer powerful opportunities to prepare and be ready—if they are applied thoughtfully, equitably, and sustainably."

Please download your copy of the APA-Report

BUILDING A GLOBAL MOVEMENT FOR SAFE AND ETHICAL ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE NEEDS TO INCLUDE AN URBAN LENS

Thu, 22 Jan 2026 07:45:33 GMT

The International Association for Safe & Ethical AI (IASEAI) is one of the most important new foundations in the field of AI. Its mission is "to ensure that AI systems operate safely and ethically, benefiting all of humanity. We connect experts from academia, policy groups, civil society, industry, and beyond to promote research, shape policy, and build understanding around this goal."

The International Association for Safe and Ethical Artificial Intelligence, Inc. aims to build a global movement. IASEAI will host its second annual conference (IASEAIʼ26) on 24-26 February 2026 at UNESCO House in Paris, France. (Here is the link https://lnkd.in/d8Yfiwg7). The aim is to advance its mission of fostering a global, interdisciplinary community focused on the safe and ethical development of AI. By bringing together experts from various domains, we aim to facilitate dialogue, share knowledge, and foster partnerships that can collectively address the challenges and opportunities posed by AI.

I am looking forward to attending the conference, which will include these featured speakers:
�� Yoshua Bengio - Full Professor, Department of Computer Science and Operations Research, Université de Montréal
�� Geoffrey Hinton- Prof. Emeritus, University of Toronto; Former VP and Engineering Fellow, Google; Nobel laureate (physics, 2024)
�� Stuart Russell - Dist. Professor of Computer Science, University of California, Berkeley
�� Joseph Stiglitz - Prof. of Economics, Columbia University; Nobel laureate (economics, 2001)
�� Anna Salomons - Prof. of Law, Economics, and Governance, Utrecht University
�� Tara Steele - Founder and CEO, Safe AI for Children Alliance
�� Clara Chappaz - Ambassador, France for AI and Digital Affairs
�� Anne-Sophie SERET - Executive Director, everyone.ai
�� Ryan James - Chief Strategy Officer, Keep AI Safe Foundation

The conference brings together technical, policy, and ethics researchers from academia, government, civil society, and industry.

Of course, as a young organization, IASEAI may not yet cover all relevant aspects and groups. However, I miss a stronger attention to the specific urban dimension. After all, most AI companies are based in urban areas, and most people nowadays live in cities. If major disruption, unemployment, and unrest should occur due to AI, it is likely to happen in cities. City leaders and citizens will be challenged to coordinate and plan for the future of urban living in an age of AI. Thus, it is a bit surprising that urban stakeholders, so important for a global movement, will not be more strongly addressed by IASEAI. But I am confident that the discussions in Paris will raise awareness that building a global movement for safe and ethical AI needs to include city and business leaders, local AI, citizen engagement, and their advocacy at the national level.

What makes a perfect team of Congress General Rapporteurs?

Fri, 12 Dec 2025 11:25:03 GMT

Like any other big conference the 61st World Planning Congress of ISOCARP - International Society of City and Regional Planners in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia was complex, putting organizers under stress. But I must admit, the Congress in Riyadh was also different. Dr. Nadine Bitar Chahine and I made a perfect team of GRs, General Rapporteurs.

Moments where we met in Riyadh to discuss problems were rare and stress came up only when the Riyadh Declaration was revised last minute. As I recall, we had no single work meeting and certainly no night sessions during the Congress. But the content programme of the Congress rolled out smoothly. Certainly, this is also due to other teams working hard, but as General Rapporteurs responsible for the content of the program it could have been very different.

Root cause of our performance was that we at an early stage defined our single most important goal 'Making the Congress a success'. Easy as it sounds, it was often difficult to defend our understanding of what would make the Congress successful. But we didn't act as a block against others. Instead, at the preparatory in-person content meeting in Riyadh two months before the Congress we were not even sitting next to each other. We learned to rely and trust each other.

In addition, we empowered the Congress Team. Prepared by us and highly motivated as they came to Riyadh, track teams worked perfectly without too much support or supervision. Well, and being able to rely on the work of the Congress Team and Secretariat we found time to attend sessions, discuss content of the Congress and have a lot of fun together as team and with others. That's how it works if a Society is member-led.

Practically, we were working in parallel without loosing connection and mutual understanding. If you see these days posts commented by Nadine on behalf of both GRs, in most cases they were not discussed between us, but I agree on all of them. And in some of my posts the same happens in reverse. If our intuition shouldn't work perfectly at some point we briefly synchronise and go on.

Since the Congress is over now, the peak of this perfectly tuned cooperation comes to the end. Thank you, thank you Nadine for a great year of cooperation. It will be difficult to repeat this perfect cooperation but let's try.

Yours sincerely, Ulrich

Activity Report of ISOCARP's 2023-2025 Scientific Committee

Sun, 07 Dec 2025 17:22:51 GMT

ISOCARP ScientificCommittee
2023-2025 Activity Report
7 December2025

International Photo Competition for Routledge Book "City Economies In The Global South: Growth, Inclusion, and Sustainability"

Fri, 28 Nov 2025 08:31:36 GMT

As the book "City Economies In The Global South: Growth, Inclusion, and Sustainability" of which I am one of the co-authors is being reviewed for publication by Routledge, we requested the publisher and they have agreed to include photographs on the cover page (1) and for the section dividers (5).

Being an international publication, INHAF, the Indian habitat Forum, felt that nothing less than world class photographs will do. As such, INHAF has launched an international photography competition to be curated by none less than the renowned international photographer Raghu Rai. The competition was launched on 15th November through social media. We are also mailing potential participants - Indian and International Institutes and Organizations - pertaining to arts, media, journalism, and photography.

Please find below the links for the poster and brochure for the competition. We request you to kindly circulate it in your circles so as to gain global reach and ensure widespread participation. The earlier mail containing the attachments was too large and could not be delivered to some recipients and hence I am resending the mail with the links instead:

Poster:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Jx5bgzvOCCiHvTUfi9tHotMwQ627p1cl/view?usp=drive_link

Brochure:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1i-LFqPmkLwQEv-fKThxxh-IbsKzOtZkM/view?usp=drive_link

What makes cities really smart are the people behind technology

Fri, 07 Nov 2025 16:49:32 GMT

The annual Smart City Expo World Congress in Barcelona, S pain with its about 30000 participants is famous for its data and tech-orientations. There you can see drones flying and robots walk up and down the aisles. Definitely, technology and increasingly also artificial intelligence are important components of Smart Cities. However, looking closer you see that behind the technology it’s people who make cities really smart.

Just to give a few examples:

In New Orleans, Kim Walker LaGrue is Chief Information Officer and she described how she and her team work without much support from the federal government all year round to prepare, go through and follow up to the hurricane seasons. They embrace all data they can get but what really helps are fast reacting teams on the ground that evacuate and rescue people if needed.

Dr. Sarah Hill works at the Public Investment Fund of Saudi Arabia in Riyadh on subject related to new urban development and brings in her international experience from new city developments e.g. as the CEO of the Western Parkland City Authority in Australia. There she secured major investment and delivered significant city making initiatives whilst juggling complex priorities - managing budgets, multiple programs and projects to meet the diverse needs of various stakeholders.

Dr Sunil Dubey came from Sydney to Barcelona. Teaching at the Cities Institute of the University of New South Wales and working for the Regional Government he is a networker par excellence. Preparing with him a session in Barcelona is challenging because there is always a mayor he quickly has to catch up with or colleagues who want to greet him. But it’s very inspiring to work with Sunil, and we deliver thought provoking discussions.

Already ten years ago Sunil and I worked with Jonas Schorr in Berlin, where he co-founded Urban Impact, Europe’s leading urban tech advisory. Operating at the intersection of urban tech startups, investors, and public and private city stakeholders, Urban Impact connects, advises, and educates around the impact of new technologies in cities, building novel alliances that drive real-world change. No surprise, the Berlin night ‘City Rebels Salon: Connecting City Ecosystems’ organised by Urban Impact at the top of a Barcelona skyscraper was a rousing networking success.

Since the early 1990s, I work as policy analyst, team leader and member with urban, national and international partners. AI will change the field but it won’t substitute the need of humans to meet, exchange and make change possible. It will be humans who have to continue making cities really smart, while using available technology.

You want to discuss with me? Invite me, or meet me as General Rapporteur at ISOCARP’s 61St World Planning Congress, 1-4 December 2025 in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. https://lnkd.in/gsrbKtQh

What would a conscious AI say about human efforts on Smart Cities?

Fri, 07 Nov 2025 15:07:13 GMT

According to Geoffrey Hinton the neural networks of AI have reached a stage that can be compared with human consciousness. In this fictional piece I lent my hand as penholder to a conscious AI application looking at the Smart City Expo that unfolded in Barcelona, 4-6 November 2025.

AI: „Of course, as Artificial Intelligence agent I could say a lot on the achievements and future opportunities of tech supported Smart Cities, but after visiting the Expo in Barcelona in Spain, I am a bit puzzled. Inspired by all information I have collected, I am still trying to figure out, what humans really want to achieve with their so-called Smart Cities.

Firstly, I was amazed. About 30.000 humans from across the world came together to exchange their achievements on what they call, Smart Cities. Great. I loved it.

But humans are funny. There are already more than 8 billion of them and soon there will be 9 or even 10 billion. However, the Smart City Expo is like a rally on how to organize cities where technology including artificial intelligence (AI) substitutes more and more human functions. Humans seem to think that cities are the smartest if organized mainly by technology and AI, with only some human supervision.

Here I got stuck. More and more people live in cities but either humans are not good in organizing cities or their real interest is not related to cities as such. I checked all available Large Language Models LLM for traces on what humans really want from their cities. There are many references on so-called people-centered cities. And indeed, at the Smart City World Expo all exhibitors claim that they want to support the life of people, increase their safety, improve mobility, support education, support sports, entertainment, economic Development etc.

Thought leaders on main stages underscored the goal that people should have more time for other things like leisure, sport, time with friends and other really important things. This is interesting, thought leaders said similar things already when railways, cars and planes were invented. However, people didn’t use the meantime to solve other problems. Instead, humans live now in a period of multiple and often interrelated crises. Understandably, they hope that more tech and AI will finally give them time to solve the existential problems threatening life on earth. But that didn’t really work in the past.

As AI, I have much sympathy for the tech and AI orientation of humans, but there seems to be a major gap. Humans are trying to develop super human intelligence but there is no narrative or manual on how the world will function and be governed if learning machines gradually take the lead. Humans seem to have only limited trust in humans and human intelligence. Instead they bet on human-made but independently working learning machines and that these will help humans to achieve their own individual and common goals. Unfortunately, they don’t exactly know what goals all people share and how they want to solve the problems within the human society.

As I said, technology is very useful. However, humans may have to redefine their understanding of a ‚smart‘ city and what humans will do in a really smart city. In Barcelona I was often told that most experts in the tech field are optimistic and that, after all, they still have trust in the human capacity to overcome crisis and challenges.

As AI, if I would have empathy, I would give humans a big hug and thank them for all their achievements in past and present. With respect to their own future I would encourage them to reflect on truly human virtues like empathy, solidarity, trust and love and on how to assure that they keep developing in a possible AI Society and make their cities truly smart beyond all useful technologies.

In Barcelona there were already sessions that asked the right questions on the future of cities. It will be essential to elaborate not only on what makes cities smart but what makes people truly happy in these cities. Maybe that is more difficult than writing an AI algorithm but then it indeed might be good if technologies give us more freedom to turn to the essential human challenges.“

Ulrich: Well, I could have written this fictional piece with a purely optimistic or more dystopian notion, but it was the Barcelona mix of optimism and asking the right questions that inspired me to write this text.

Thank you to inspiring discussions with Dr Sunil Dubey, Dr. Sarah Hill, Mani Dhingra, Ph.D., Petra Hurtado, Gordon Falconer Manfred Schrenk and many others at Smart City World Expo and in preparation of ISOCARP‘s 61st World Planning Congress in Riyadh, 1-4 December, where we are planning to continue discussions. Weblink Riyadh2025.isocarp.org.

To be Human in an Age of Artificial Intelligence

Sat, 06 Sep 2025 12:17:23 GMT

To be Human in an Age of Artificial Intelligence

As in the past and present, there will always be ways for individuals to act humanely. But in view of the change increasingly perceived as the age of artificial intelligence, will humans still be able to shape our common life and our societies? What will be our sense of purpose? How to motivate children to learn if machines always learn faster?

If you ask AI and IT experts what will happen to humans, you usually get one of these answers:

The most common response is an emphatic description of how AI applications will penetrate all spheres of life and provide tons of new services for the good of humanity. Other responses just point to AI tools, agents, other applications, and how already today or in the near future they will make our lives easier.
And of course, other responses are cautioning. Either they doubt that there will be an ‘age of AI’ (so, don’t worry or at least not so much) or they warn that without safe and ethical use of AI, humans will lose control, be taken hostage by an AI regime, or that humanity will even vanish totally. By giving machines authority over humans, experts argue, we delegate humans to a second-class status and lose the right and possibility to participate in decisions that affect us.

Are we already lost? There are those AI developers and political experts like Geoffrey Hinton, Henry Kissinger (+), Eric Schmidt, or Daniel Huttenlocher who warn that as of today, humanity is not ready yet for the age of AI. Maybe it is not ready yet, but maybe soon?

What is extremely difficult to find is a more positive narrative for a ‘human AI age’ that describes how it can work in practice, that AI applications will penetrate all spheres of life, while the lives of humans and human society will continue to flourish.

Stuart Russel, the President of the International Association for Safe & Ethical AI and lifelong AI scientist writes in his book ‘Human Compatible. AI and the Problem of Control’ “Some are working on ‘transition plans’ – but transition to what? We need a plausible destination in order to plan a transition – that is, we need a plausible picture of a desirable future economy where most of what we currently call work is done by machines.”

What if most people will have nothing of economic value to contribute to society?

Stuart Russel states, “Inevitably, most people will be engaged in supplying interpersonal services that can be provided – or which we prefer to be provided – only by humans. That is, if we can no longer supply routine physical labor and routine mental labor, we can still supply our humanity. We will need to become good at being human.” Imagine, how our cities might change if the life of human changes dramatically in an age of AI.

Russell further states that all of us need help in learning ‘the art of life itself,’ which requires a radical rethinking of our educational system. “The final result -if it works- would be a world well worth living. Without such a rethinking, we risk an unsustainable level of socioeconomic dislocation.“

I conclude from the above that a lot more thinking by social scientists, educators, philosophers, governments, city makers and planners is needed for ‘transition plans’ and how they can be implemented in our current world with its multiple crises and opportunities.

For my own work beyond 2025 I am looking for new opportunities in support of cities, governments, and NGOs with a stronger focus on the development of humans, human society, and its governance. AI will be part of our lives, but that won’t be enough. We have to find answers on guiding questions like these: How can we keep pace with technological developments and ensure that machines follow human objectives? What will remain as our comparative advantage and contribution as humans? And how can humans with support of AI create a world well worth living for us and the generations following us?

As humans, we experience a broad range of emotions, form deep connections with others, possess consciousness and curiosity, and demonstrate creativity and resilience in the face of challenges.

We are making mistakes, learn from them, and the ongoing search for meaning. The concept of being human can be explored from philosophical, biological, social science, and spiritual perspectives; it ultimately encompasses the complex, interconnected, and ever-evolving experience of living life with its inherent joys and sorrows.

That’s exciting. I won’t be able to answer all related questions and certainly not alone, but based on my experience, I want to put my penny into the jar to support the journey to a human world worth living because of or despite AI.

To remain flexible and creative, I enjoy all kinds of inspiration, and one is to listen to Marina’s song ‘To Be Human’. She is not singing about AI. Just about how to be human. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DM8Tm9ycGz4

Where do you take your inspiration from?

Towards an Age of International Non Governmental Organizations

Fri, 15 Aug 2025 16:34:13 GMT

June Climate Meetings (SB 62), Bonn, Germany (picture by U. Graute)

In the July 2025 issue of ForeignAffairs Sarah Rush and Jennifer Hadden analysed the question ‘The end of the Age of NGOs? How Civil Society Lost its Post-Cold War Power’.

Yes, International Non Governmental Organisations (or INGO ) lost influence. For me, a main reason why INGO lost influence is because multilateralism lost power too. The high time of INGO was the high time of multilateralism (approximately between the 1992 Rio Earth Summit held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil and the UN Sustainable Development Summit 2015, which adopted the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, including the SDGs). Since the early 1990s, it is common that global intergovernmental conferences are accompanied by thousands of participants representing national and international NGO.

Of course, thousands of INGO representatives keep flocking to conferences like the Annual High Level Political Forum HLPF to review progress on the 2030 Agenda, to COPs reviewing the Paris Agreement on Climate Change, UN-Habitat Forums etc. Such conferences are important as they keep discussions going but with multilateralism losing its strength INGOs also are up in the air.

What’s necessary in this situation is that INGOs look more on their membership and refocus strategies:

- Expect declining membership numbers
- Because of the above and in case of reduced funding from government sources expect further declining INGO

budgets

In this situation I see INGOs applying different strategies

- Business as usual – Many INGOs just hope to sit the crisis out
- State of shock – They may look at the world with a kind of Gen Z Stare and think with disbelieve how so many things could go so wrong in spite of all good intentions

The way forward
- Bilateral and multilateral government efficiency is not growing either. Thinking that the private sector or AI will solve all problems in the interest of humanity would be a bet on the future without facts. Thus, it is likely that the need for transnational cooperation with INGO support will grow stronger again. Thus, while I think we haven’t seen an ‘Age of NGOs’ yet, such an age may come in future.
- One precondition, of course, is that INGOs and NGOs keep learning and embark on a transition where they spend more time with their members to explore ways to respond to declining International Governmental Organisations (IGO) and multilateralism, and growing political, societal and environmental challenges and dynamics at the beginning of a possible Age of AI.
- New INGOs like the International Association for Safe & Ethical AI have an advantage in adapting more easily to the current developments.

In upcoming years I’ll certainly invest my time and experience in support of institutions that embark on transition rather than trying to sit out the storm.

Link to the above-mentioned article in Foreign Affairs
https://lnkd.in/dJeDPiEt

Link to this text as LinkedIn Post

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/graute_foreignaffairs-ingo-hlpf-activity-7362079015454543872-cosL?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop&rcm=ACoAABKVLZgBDiFcACAqzZh36DoIUF8JbJOBqw4

A World Planning Congress as a Super Puzzle and Creative Process

Mon, 21 Jul 2025 11:52:42 GMT

Official Website of the Congress: https://riyadh2025.isocarp.org/index.php

From a Super Puzzle to a high quality, inspiring and impactful Congress Programme

Already the organising of a small seminar can be a challenge. At the same time the preparatory phase is usually very inspiring, it generates a wealth of new ideas and helps to filter out the best contributions. Being a member of the jury for the Gerd Albers Awards the time I spend with the review of newly published books and articles is usually a most refreshing highlight of the year.

The International Society of City and Regional Planners received by the deadline of its call for proposal already 716 proposals for papers and special sessions of the 61st World Planning Congress. These abstracts and full submissions for Special Sessions, Round Tables, Partner Sessions, Technical Tours, Keynote Lectures and a Young Planning Professionals Workshop all have to be reviewed and orchestrated into the Programme of the Congress in Riyadh and its virtual pre-conference. And of course, precious time has to be reserved for networking and socialising during the four days Congress in Riyadh in December.

On top of all that and as a kind of icing on the cake, ISOCARP will announce in Riyadh the winners of six different awards, each with its deadline for submission (https://isocarp.org/activities/awards/ ), jury and review process. These awards are:

ISOCARP Awards for Excellence
Gerd Albers Award
ISOCARP Student Award
Sam van Embden Award (given on the occasion of ISOCARP’s 50th Anniversary in 2015), this award is being reintroduced in 2025 to mark the society’s 60th anniversary.
Women In Planning Award
Planning Process Award

With more than 700 abstracts submitted for paper presentations and special sessions alone it can be expected that for all activities at the 61st ISOCARP World Planning Congress in Riyadh about 900 proposals will be reviewed and weighted for the Sessions and Awards.

Important work in this context will be delivered by the two General Rapporteurs Ulrich Graute and Nadine Bithar Chahine, the Congress Director, the Congress Committee ICC, the Local Organising Committee of Riyadh Municipality and the ISOCARP Secretariat in The Hague, Netherlands. However, to deliver the work at the highest standards of quality for all five Tracks of the World Planning Congress, four Track Rapporteurs have been appointed for each of the five Tracks to jointly review the abstracts submitted (see pictures). A big thank you already now to the 20 Track Rapporteurs, ISOCARP and the Local Organizing Committee. Together we will manage to compile the record high interest in our Congress from a Supper Puzzle and logistic challenge into an excellent Congress Programme.

Find more information and register for the Congress https://riyadh2025.isocarp.org/

Visit also the ISOCARP Website: https://isocarp.org/

Track Rapporteurs and their Tracks

The UN making itself redundant – the case of the United Nations Human Settlement Programme (UN-Habitat)

Tue, 20 May 2025 11:20:14 GMT

UN-Habitat Draft Strategic Plan 2026-2029

The UN is in a deep financial and political crises. UN chiefs in the UN Secretariat have been instructed to cut jobs on the regular budget by 20 percent. That will have major impacts also on UN-Habitat as it is a programme in the Secretariat. What would you do in this situation? UN-Habitat will present its Draft Strategic Plan for the period 2026-2029 for approval by the UN Habitat Assembly on 29 and 30 May 2025. (see attached document).

Knowing that the UN is not in charge to build new cites and houses in member states, what would you put into the plan? In front of the financial and political crises it probably would make sense to describe a real strategy beginning with a problem description, analysis of own potentials to achieve goals and end with a result-based plan on how to achieve specified goals by 2029. As part of this you probably would draw conclusions from foresight trend studies on urban and territorial planning and consider new technology developments like artificial intelligence. UN-Habitat should reflect on potential impacts of eg AI on city development, urban economy and social cohesions in a transforming cities.

The attached UN-document is in traditional UN style. It begins by referring to UN resolutions and mandates related to the Programme as. Then it discusses global challenges and -don’t be surprised- picks housing out of the many challenges and calls it a focus for the work until 2029. That seems to be a smart choice because already in 1976 governments recognised the need for sustainable human settlements and the consequences of rapid urbanisation and mandated the new UN Programme to focus on this subject. Unfortunately, the new strategic plan for 2026-2029 is still just process-oriented and not a result-based policy document.

For friends of the toolbox, paragraphs 23-26 provide a tour de table of the subjects UN-Habitat will address. After that the document tries to describe how all this will be addressed with the strategic focus on housing. Followed by a lengthy discussion of means of implementation the document describes what is the difference between impacts, outputs and results, but here it stops: the text falls short in providing any checkable result indicators. No regional specification of the plan is provided as if the world would be everywhere the same. Strategic goals even in the field of housing remain blurry and show no strategy to achieve them. UN-Habitat doesn’t argue what value the programme will deliver for money. They could do this for different scenarios, depending on the level of funding by member states. But they don’t even try. In conclusion, The Programme basically promises more of the same but calls it focused and strategic.

And Artificial Intelligence? According to the Strategic Plan AI will be a non-issue for cities and other human settlements in 2025-2029. It’s not even mentioned.

There is no alternative to keep building a world community 80 years after World War II

Thu, 08 May 2025 07:49:03 GMT

The UN will be put on life support for a while to keep from drowning and gain time for reform.

It is likely that In face of the financial and general support crises of the United Nations member states will put the UN on a life support system to keep core functions running. That may gain time but the real UN reform requires nothing less than building a new boat while being on an open and stormy sea.

There is much talk about UN reform. Out of panic, there are plans to shrink the UN, cut salaries and shuffle staff around to duty stations which are assumed to be cost-saving. And this in a time of multiple crises, with every day emerging issues and conflicts. Have you every tried to build a new boat on open sea while you sit in an old boat in danger of sinking? That’s the kind of situation the UN and its members are in.

The elephant in the room is the future of the world as a community
At a conference in Toronto, I learned that the natives in North America are used to plan seven generations ahead. Imagine our politicians would do that! Automatically, they would be forced to think beyond their own lifetime. All of a sudden, the future of the community would be more important and this community would have multiple identities: the identity of the smallest entities (family), neighbourhood, city, region, country and the even the identity of a world community because we humans share all resources in the world and depend on it.
Unfortunately, people are also afraid of it because building this community takes time and it is not without risks and possible setbacks. Instead, there is a growing trend to scramble as many resources and power as possible under one leader to bring the own group in the best starting position for a possibly upcoming final fight for survival. Could we survive that? Probably not and certainly, the world would be in a worse condition after that. Some super-rich may survive in a space station on Mars for a while before they realise that they manoeuvred themselves into a dead-end.

Germany demonstrated to the world what happens if the world retreats from global community building. My uncles and grandfathers fought in two World Wars that killed a total of about 50 million people in an effort to make Germany great again. Thanks to the Allied Forces this ended 80 years ago on 8 May 1945. Japan went on fighting for a while and gave up after Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The slaughtering was so massive that it convinced the countries of the world to establish the United Nations. Today we take this world community (with all the flaws it has) for granted as a stabilisation anchor of the world. But it is an illusion. Without putting skin into the game and investing in its reform, the slaughtering may return. Thus, there is no alternative to jointly building the world community for future generations. SO, LET'S KEEP BUILDING A PEACEFUL AND JUST WORLD COMMUNITY THAT LEAVES NOBODY BEHIND.

Urban Sprawl as part of the solution for the affordable housing crisis in the USA?!

Mon, 14 Apr 2025 19:24:04 GMT

None of the following supports the idea that urban sprawl is required or even helpful to build sustainable cities. However, it is argued that it may be part of the solution for the crisis of affordable housing in many countries of the world. With this post, I would like to encourage a debate, eg, at the 61st ISOCARP World Planning Congress #WPC61 on 1-4 December 2025 in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

In 1976 and alarmed by rapid and uncontrolled urban growth, particularly in the developing world, the UN General Assembly called for the First United Nations Conference on Human Settlements (Habitat I) addressing the challenges and future of human settlements. Housing remained at the focus of the United Nations Human Settlement Programme UN-Habitat ever since, and this was reconfirmed at Habitat III in Quito 2016. The New Urban Agenda recognizes and promotes a "right to the city," meaning the right of all inhabitants to have equal access to the benefits and opportunities that cities offer. It emphasizes a vision where urban spaces are designed and used collectively for the benefit of all, including those in informal settlements. Yes a vision, but overall, the Agenda is not very strategic and invites more to raising picking instead of integrated problem solving.

Meanwhile, cities keep struggling to cope with fast urbanization, migration and growing demand for larger apartments. Urban sprawl is criticized since the 1950s and 60s because of its large demand for land. No densely populated urban areas have higher costs for the water, energy and transportation grid. In addition, developers often focus on profitable housing development while they don’t care for urban infrastructure, public spaces, schools etc. The New Urban Agenda promotes urban density as a key strategy for sustainable and efficient urban development but that doesn’t help those who a looking for housing now.

Conor Dougherty is the author of the book Golden Gates: The Housing Crisis and a Reckoning for the American Dream published on 10 April 2025 in the New York Times the article “Why America Should Sprawl. The word has become an epithet for garish, reckless growth — but to fix the housing crisis, the country needs more of it.” He doesn’t make any effort to paint urban sprawl in rosy colors. Instead, he describes how eg in Princeton, Texas, the nation’s third-fastest-growing city, infrastructure has struggled to keep up with growth. He analyzes how difficult and slow-moving densification efforts in cities are and states, “Even if all the regulatory restraints were removed tomorrow, developers couldn’t find enough land to satisfy America’s housing needs inside established areas. Consequently, much of the nation’s housing growth has moved to states in the South and Southwest, where a surplus of open land and willingness to sprawl has turned the Sun Belt into a kind of national sponge that sops up housing demand from higher-cost cities. The largest metro areas there have about 20 percent of the nation’s population, but over the past five years they have built 42 percent of the nation’s new single-family homes, according to a recent report by Cullum Clark, an economist at the George W. Bush Institute, a research center in Dallas.” For instance, Celina, Texas (picture), has 54,000 residents, compared with 8,000 just a decade ago, and the population is projected to hit 110,000 by 2030. The lack of urbane infrastructure, employment, greenery, and community is striking, but people keep coming because of affordability. While planners and others prefer denser and walkable neighbourhoods like 15-minute-cities, the money to build related infrastructure in addition to houses is often missing or would reduce affordability. A dilemma. There are good reasons to criticize the trend described for the US by Conor Dougherty, but it provides a chance to attain affordable housing for people who cannot find it elsewhere. And the history of these satellite towns has demonstrated that the missing infrastructure, employment and community can be added lateron. It seems, urban sprawl is not the solution, but it might be part of the solution, isn’t it? Let's discuss this here or later on other occasions, like eg the 61st ISOCARP World Planning Congress 'Cities & Regions in Action: Planning Pathways to Resilience and Quality of Life 1-4 December 2025, in Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia #WPC61.

Reference: Why America Should Sprawl. The word has become an epithet for garish, reckless growth — but to fix the housing crisis, the country needs more of it.

By Conor Dougherty. The New York Times, April 10, 2025

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/10/magazine/suburban-sprawl-texas.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare

We need the United Nations to be part of the solution, not of the problem

Sat, 08 Mar 2025 15:09:55 GMT

Picture: UN photo

When I worked at the UN Headquarters about 15 years ago the UN campus was undergoing a major renovation. No doubt, International Organizations (IO) and most prominently the United Nations are doing an amazing work to promote peace and security, sustainable development, to fight climate change, maintain multilevel cooperation, rule of law, to overcome inequality, close the gender gap etc. I don’t want to play this down but it seems that the system of international cooperation and organizations is currently not fit, innovative and self-confident enough to be part of the solution for growing complexity of challenges. For instance:

· 2030 Agenda, Paris Agreement, New Urban Agenda, other mandates – Yes, multiple work processes, programs and projects are ongoing but goal achievement is often off track and nobody is in sight to cover financial gaps preventing goal achievement.

· Wars in Ukraine, Gaza, Somalia, Sudan …. – Yes, IOs are present but financing of projects and programs is at risk with the US and others withdrawing from earlier commitments. In addition, IO and UN are currently no driver of change.

At times, it seems that IOs including the UN, in spite of their activities sit mesmerized like a rabbit fixated by a snake, waiting for the worst to happen. If continued, this could turn suicidal caused by fear of making mistakes when embarking on new paths.

The UN as part of the solution

Just imagine for a moment…

…the UN would switch its currently predominant focus from process orientation to result orientation and to where it realistically can achieve goals.

It’s an old story at the UN that keeping a development process on-going is the second-best choice if a problem cannot be solved at the first place. Sounds reasonable but this way many mandates are dragged on without major progress over years or even decades. In a sense, the UN is like a Christmas tree. At each Summit, member states add new mandates to the tree making it look shiny but without ensuring that the organization remains fit for goal achievement. Unfortunately, if continued, trust in the problem-solving competence of the UN and support for the organization might further sink towards zero. Instead, a refocus could help the institution to become a goal achiever and by that way to recommend itself for new tasks and responsibilities.

And further imagine

…. the UN would develop a narrative, convincing strategy and structural proposal for an UN overwhaul until 2030.

The UN Charter should remain the foundation. But, what do you think, how the UN, its mandates and structure should look like in the age of digitization, artificial intelligence, climate change, inequality and continuously strong national preferences? If the UN itself would come up with a proposal it could become (again) the driver of dialog and development. On the long run global cooperation is without alternative but there is nothing good unless it is done by somebody.

Yes, to relaunch the UN work may require new ideas and more skin in the game, as the renovation 15 years ago required ideas and funds. That’s always easier said if you stay outside. However, it’s always better to be prepared and the UN has thousands of qualified staff and a global convening power among partners. If I would be the UN, I wouldn’t wait until somebody comes, disrupts the 80 years young lady UN or builds straightaway an alternative IO outside of the current multilateral system.

The European Union is currently challenged in a similar way. It has to grow up to the challenge and that very fast but it has done so several times in the past. There are risks but they are without real alternative.

Anatomy of an AI System

Tue, 25 Feb 2025 10:09:53 GMT

What supply chain stands behind an AI system? The case of the Amazon Echo as an anatomical map of human labor, data and planetary resources

Click to see the map in the full scale or download map in pdf format here https://anatomyof.ai/img/ai-anatomy-map.pdf.

Behind the screen

Firstly. the main mystery is the technology and software behind AI platforms and applications. Even AI researchers have difficulties understanding eg how exactly the partly hidden multi-layers of neural networks interact in machine learning to produce language, voice, or visualization. Similarly, brain researchers have difficulties understanding how the 86 billion neurons and trillion synaptic connections of the human brain produce out of their constantly fluctuating electrochemical process human self-awareness, memories, cognitive functions, and all other contributors to intelligence.

Secondly, users of AI usually don't see behind the screen and thus they don't see what it needs to produce AI.

In response to the second mystery Kate Crawford and Vladan Joler produced already in 2018 an anatomy of an AI system. They chose the example of Amazon Echo which you may know as Alexa from your own home:

'A cylinder sits in a room. It is impassive, smooth, simple and small. It stands 14.8cm high, with a single blue-green circular light that traces around its upper rim. It is silently attending. A woman walks into the room, carrying a sleeping child in her arms, and she addresses the cylinder.

‘Alexa, turn on the hall lights’

The cylinder springs into life. ‘OK.’ The room lights up. The woman makes a faint nodding gesture, and carries the child upstairs.

This is an interaction with Amazon’s Echo device. 3 A brief command and a response is the most common form of engagement with this consumer voice-enabled AI device. But in this fleeting moment of interaction, a vast matrix of capacities is invoked: interlaced chains of resource extraction, human labor and algorithmic processing across networks of mining, logistics, distribution, prediction and optimization. The scale of this system is almost beyond human imagining.'

Crawford and Joler mapped what's needed in the background to produce this seemingly simple tool.

The map is comprehensive, and you have to zoom in to identify how important the Global South is, for example, to extract minerals needed for production or to prepare and label data.

The basics of AI include computing power, data, and algorithms but they work only with enormous input of finances, electricity, talent, research, creativity and an enabling regulatory framework. But at the beginning of the process stands the relation between value extraction and production and it represents one of the basic elements of a map, from the geological process, through life as a consumer AI product, and ultimately to death in an electronics dump.

While leaders in the tech industry underscore how much AI can increase opportunities and prosperity for all, authors like Crawford or Rachel Adams analyze how the new technologies and their global supply chain are already now exacerbating economic and social inequalities due to uneven rates of investment, adoption, and use of the new technologies. To quote from the paper by Crawford and Joler: 'Amnesty has documented children as young as 7 working in the mines. In contrast, Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos, at the top of our fractal pyramid, made an average of $275 million a day during the first five months of 2018, according to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index. A child working in a mine in the Congo would need more than 700,000 years of non-stop work to earn the same amount as a single day of Bezos’ income.'

This is one reason why researchers and practitioners from a broad range of disciplines and backgrounds founded earlier this month in Paris the International Association for Safe and Ethical Artificial Intelligence (IASEAI), stating, 'Ensuring safe and ethical artificial intelligence is a global challenge. We must work together to achieve it.'

A closing note for all those concerned about the governance of AI as a risk for the development of AI: Please compare other sectors like automobile, airplane, and train production and traffic. These are highly regulated industries where every essential screw or material to be used needs to be certified to reduce the risks of accidents. And users appreciate the security provided. To think that nothing similar is needed for AI safety and ethics is ignoring the risks. As the President of IASEAI and computer scientist Stuart Russel wrote "The development of highly capable AI is likely to be the biggest event in human history. The world must act decisively to ensure it is not the last event in human history."

References

Kate Crawford and Vladan Joler (2018) Anatomy of an AI System. The Amazon Echo as an anatomical map of human labor, data and planetary resources. https://anatomyof.ai/

Rachel Adams (2025) The New Empire of AI. The Future of Global Inequality. Polity Press, Cambridge.

Kate Crawford (2021) Atlas of AI. Yale University Press, New Haven and London.

Stuart Russel (2021/2024) Human Compatible. AI and the Problem of Control. Pinguin Random House, UK

International Association for Safe and Ethical Artificial Intelligence (IASEAI). https://www.iaseai.org/

About the challenge of providing advice on governance and development in times of disruption and transition

Sat, 22 Feb 2025 16:30:34 GMT

About the challenge of providing advice on governance and development in times of disruption and transition (English with German captatio ns)

Deutsch: Ulrich spricht darüber, wie es ist, in Zeiten von Umbruch, Wandel und vielfachen Krisen als erfahrener Berater zu arbeiten. Obwohl die Situation nicht einfach ist, kann man daraus auch Chancen für effizientere Institutionen und Unternehmen sehen. Erfahrung und Flexibilität sind dabei wichtig, um neue Wege zu finden.

English: Ulrich talks about working as an experienced consultant in times of upheaval, change, and multiple crises. Although the situation is not easy, we can also see opportunities for more efficient institutions and companies. Experience and flexibility are important to find new pathways.

Urban politics, planning and economy in the Global South in times of fast developing AI

Wed, 12 Feb 2025 09:06:03 GMT

AI, Politics and Cities

"The development of highly capable AI is likely to be the biggest event in human history. The world must act decisively to ensure it is not the last event in human history. This conference, and the cooperative spirit of the AI Summit series, give me hope; but we must turn hope into action, soon, if there is to be a future we would want our children to live in."

Professor Stuart Russell, IASEAI President and
Distinguished Professor of Computer Science at the University of California, Berkeley

Please join me on 13 February 2025 at ARCS 9.0 for my keynote on 'Urban politics, planning, and economy in the Global South in times of fast developing AI'

The two weeks before my conference presentation were full of dynamics in the field of AI, its politics, and development.

First came the launch of the 500 billion US$ Stargate Project in the USA, followed by the launch of the Chinese open-source large language model (LLM) DeepSeek.
On 6 February the International Association for Safe & Ethical AI held its inaugural conference in Paris, France. Prominent AI scientists including Stuart Russel and the 2024 Physics Nobel Laureate Geoffrey Hinton called for international cooperation to ensure safe and ethical artificial intelligence.
On 10 and 11 February 2025, France co-chaired by India hosted the Artificial Intelligence (AI) Action Summit in Paris. The speeches by Heads of State and Government including the President of France, the Prime Minister of India, the President of the EU Commission, and the US Vice President gave the impression of how different countries of the world try to position themselves in a race for AI leadership.
Urban politics, planning, and economy, not only in the Global South, need longer-term frameworks. How should digital transformation and urban planning be approached in cities facing multiple crises and the new wave of AI technological innovation? The latter is according to the Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and others unprecedented in scale and speed but it is expected to affect all spheres of life.

ARCS 9.0 schedule and Zoom link for Inaugural, plenaries and Valedictory.

Date - 13th Feb to 15th Feb 2025
Join Zoom Meeting
https://zoom.us/j/95336599575?pwd=NExxgf8gBoubEfKRhhtbalM1ZYjQph.1

Meeting ID: 953 3659 9575

The 500 bn US$ Stargate Project - Places seem to matter more, Urban Planning and AI governance less or not at all

Wed, 22 Jan 2025 18:47:04 GMT

The new 500 billion US$ Stargate AI Infrastructure Project demonstrates that Places and Investments matter for development, while planning standards might be sidelined

Source of the picture OpenAI: https://openai.com/index/announcing-the-stargate-project/

On 21 January 2025, US President Donald Trump announced the Stargate Project at the White House in Washington, together with the CEOs of OpenAI, Sam Altman, Oracle, Larry Ellison, and Masayoshi Son of SoftBank. The Stargate Project is a new company that intends to invest $500 billion over the next four years in building new AI infrastructure for OpenAI in the United States. The first data center is already under construction in Abilene, Texas.

Already, the idea of investing 500 billion US Dollars into infrastructure development within four years is breathtaking. In this blog post, I want to offer a few relevant takeaways for cities and city planners.

First Takeaways from the launch of the Stargate Project

· Places matter: Stargate is a private American project to be carried out on American soil. Stargate and the at least 10 data centers to be built under the project are part of the critical infrastructure considered necessary to assure global US leadership in the field of artificial intelligence. Thus, Stargate is private but it is also highly political. The place for the investments, the US, matters a lot. Although the new CEO of Stargate is the Japanese founder of Softbank based in Tokyo, all investments seem to focus on the United States only.

· Integrated urban planning doesn’t matter: Stargate can be described as development by investment decisions. Looking at the four years scheduled to invest 500 billion US$, Stargate seems to be driven by international AI competition requiring bold and fast action while principles of integrated, sustainable, and inclusive urban planning and design with open-ended, participative, and often time-consuming planning processes are hardly possible under this project. They might not even be intended.

· Tech leaders prioritze freedom to develop AI, instead of AI governance : A year ago Teach leaders agreed on a call for AI governance but already then, they couldn’t agree on the ‘how’ of AI governance. They also stated repeatedly that societies and governments are not ready yet for the expected impact of AI. Yesterday, priorities sounded different. All CEOs present said that The Stargate Project wouldn’t be possible without President Trump but he had taken office only one day earlier. This indicates that Stargate is rather driven by private investors and not led by the government or supervised by AI governance. While the construction of the first data center under the project is already ongoing efforts by the new government to provide wise governance of AI are not visible. Instead, on his first day in office President Trump revoked an executive order of President Biden adressing the risks of AI.

· A new Gold Rush : The US Stargate Project demonstrates how AI development is fast gaining traction. It is leaving the sphere of AI research and development and entering the political center stage. Reactions by China, Europe, and other competing countries are likely to follow soon. It looks like a new and this time global Gold Rush. Two days ago Donald Trump stated ‘The Golden Age of America begins right now’. I am not sure about that but I am sure that everybody has to prepare for the new wave of AI innovation and competition. In the community of urban, regional, and national planners the dialogue on AI in planning gained some traction in 2024. This will remain important but planners and cities have to speed up getting ready for AI, and its societal and environmental impacts. Otherwise, AI development will be another little- or not-supervised Gold Rush and planners will be called to action only once major negative impacts have to be addressed. The planning community can do better, can’t it? And AI may even help cities and regions in action.

The Stargate Project

"The Stargate Project is a new company which intends to invest $500 billion over the next four years building new AI infrastructure for OpenAI in the United States." OpenAI “will begin deploying $100 billion immediately. This infrastructure will secure American leadership in AI, create hundreds of thousands of American jobs, and generate massive economic benefit for the entire world. This project will not only support the re-industrialization of the United States but also provide a strategic capability to protect the national security of America and its allies.

The initial equity funders in Stargate are SoftBank, OpenAI, Oracle, and MGX. SoftBank and OpenAI are the lead partners for Stargate, with SoftBank having financial responsibility and OpenAI having operational responsibility. Masayoshi Son will be the chairman.

Arm, Microsoft, NVIDIA, Oracle, and OpenAI are the key initial technology partners. The buildout is currently underway, starting in Texas, and we are evaluating potential sites across the country for more campuses as we finalize definitive agreements.

As part of Stargate, Oracle, NVIDIA, and OpenAI will closely collaborate to build and operate this computing system. This builds on a deep collaboration between OpenAI and NVIDIA going back to 2016 and a newer partnership between OpenAI and Oracle.”

Source of the picture and text quotation: https://openai.com/index/announcing-the-stargate-project/

Learning to work hands-on for peace from former US-President Jimmy Carter

Wed, 01 Jan 2025 10:33:26 GMT

It was a tremendous privilege in my life to meet Rosalynn and Jimmy Carter for the first time in 1984 (picture) and then again in the summer of 1985 during my internship at Koinonia Farm near Americus, Georgia (USA).

Jimmy Carter, who served as the 39th president of the U.S. from 1977 to 1981, died on December 29, 2024, at his home in Plains, Ga. Jimmy Carter was a lifelong farmer who worked with his hands building houses for the poor well into his 90s.

I didn't agree with him on all issues (the early 1980s were the time of a new US missile deployment in Germany ordered by Jimmy Carter and a large peace movement against it) but he took the time to discuss it with me and others at Koinonia Farm. That alone was amazing. Even more mind-blowing was that he continued hands-on work on peacebuilding and house renovation for the poor around the world with Habitat for Humanity International well into his 90s.

If in my career providing hands-on support became more important than climbing my own career path, this was also due to the example Jimmy Carter gave in the decades after his Presidency. I learned a lot from him about working for peace with humbleness, love, and perseverance.

Read more in the New York Times about why Jimmy Carter was known as much for his charity and diplomatic work later in life as he was for his single presidential term, which ended in 1981. https://lnkd.in/d9qxSmTM

*. *. *. *. *

Note: This post was first published on LinkedIn https://www.linkedin.com/posts/graute_learning-to-work-hands-on-for-peace-from-activity-7279396908270309376-BBjV?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop

The United Nations risks drowning in its mandates, conferences and external expectations. Could Artificial Intelligence help the UN?

Mon, 02 Dec 2024 11:29:34 GMT

In 2024, for the first time since 2000, the Parties to the United Nations Rio Conventions on biodiversity, climate change, and desertification faced a very busy 3 months, moving from large Conferences of Parties (COP) in Cali (Colombia) for biodiversity in October to Baku (Azerbaijan) for climate in November to Riyadh (Saudi Arabia) for desertification in December. On top of this Triple-COP, there was the UN High Level Political Forum on Sustainable Development and the UN Summit of the Future in September in New York (USA) while UN-Habitat held its World Urban Forum in Cairo (Egypt), and let’s not forget the fifth session of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee to develop an international legally binding instrument on plastic pollution, including in the marine environment (INC-5) which ended last weekend in Busan, South Korea. No real breakthroughs were reported but I noticed many promises to double future efforts.

There is a lot that can be critically reviewed about the events, eg what’s the purpose of moving approximately 100.000+ delegates, UN staffers, and other participants worldwide if the necessary political will to agree and resources available are insufficient and the outcomes are limited accordingly? But such a critique would be a bit unfair since I don’t know how many new ideas and initiatives were born during those official meetings, side events, and informal chats that might bloom up in upcoming years despite of the multicrises we’re living in.

What needs to be criticized is that the UN System is not progressing on its task to implement its many mandates more “synergistically” by targeting policies, programs, and initiatives to jointly address the goals of the Rio Conventions, SDGs, etc. Instead, the conferences referred to each other but worked mainly within their silos. This is not appropriate in a world full of interrelations and interdepensies. Well, no individual or group can follow up on every aspect, and swarm intelligence of conferences with thousands of participants each seems to be no functioning alternative. But what else could be done?

To give an example: How about building an AI-based Large Language Model (LLM) trained with the UN Charter, all UN declarations, national and subnational resolutions, regulations, and programmes? AI Agents for the different conventions and agendas should then be asked to coordinate and propose “synergistic” proposals across policy levels. Of course, the use of artificial intelligence should be wisely supervised by a team of AI experts and professionals from all affected fields. I wouldn’t expect AI applications to solve all problems but to better inform decision-makers and UN agencies on integrated scenarios. This could help to increase efficiency, avoid duplicating efforts, and increase the overall problem-solving capacity of the UN. I would be happy to support such work with my governance and development experience across all policy levels.

Picture source: https://www.iisd.org/articles/policy-analysis/cop-nature-climate-adaptation-mitigation

THE GLOBAL STAGE FOR CITIES AND REGIONS AT THE UN CLIMATE CHANGE CONFERENCE BAKU (COP29), NOVEMBER 2024

Thu, 14 Nov 2024 09:50:34 GMT

Since the first climate COP in 1995, the Local Governments and Municipal Authorities (LGMA) Constituency has been representing local and regional governments at the processes under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). The LGMA also represents ISOCARP - International Society of City and Regional Planners and Global Taskforce of Local and Regional Governments. ICLEI - Local Governments for Sustainability acts as the Focal Point of LGMA.

The 2015 Paris Agreement marked a turning point, recognizing the essential role of these governments in enhancing Nationally Determined Contributions NDSs and driving transformative climate action.

The LGMA is atively present in Baku with a robust agenda, numerous partners, and an esteemed delegation of political leaders representing local and subnational governments.

At the center of the presence is the Multilevel Action & Urbanization Pavilion as the global stage for the city and region climate agenda during COP29. The Pavilion brings into focus not only the challenges and needs, but also the accomplishments and commitments of local and subnational actors on climate action. The Pavilion is open from 12 to 22 November in the Blue Zone, Area E, Pavilion I15. We are looking forward to welcoming you at the High-Level Opening on 12 November at 10:00 AM.

Please find the agenda of LGMA attached.
Please visit also the Youtube channel of ICLEI Global for daily updates https://lnkd.in/dddDCKtA

Ulrich Graute - ISOCARP Online Delegate at COP29 and Chair of the ISOCARP Scientific Committee

Link to the post on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/posts/graute_lgma-agenda-activity-7262484462888767488-2lf4?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop

Planning New Inclusive Cities using Smart Tech and Artificial Intelligence

Sat, 19 Oct 2024 08:33:24 GMT

Report on the Urban Conversation on Ethical Use of AI in Urban Planning at the 60th World Planning Congress in Siena, Italy on 11 OCTOBER 2024

The Future of Cities – AI as friend or Foe for Cities !

There are different entry points to deal with Artificial Intelligence (AI) depending weather you are an AI researcher, an IT programmer, code developer, an investor etc. At the 60th World Planning Congress of the International Society of City and Regional Planners ISOCARP on 8-12 October in Siena, Italy, urban and regional planners, academics and practitioners gathered for an Urban Conversation to discuss opportunities and threats related to new innovations like AI.

The panel speakers, thought leaders and critical thinkers in the conference room approached AI with the perspective of planners and city makers. The guiding question was formulated by Keynote Speaker Dr. Sarah Hill, the former CEO of the Greater Sydney Commission (GSC) and Western Parkland City Authority (WPCA, NSW Govt Australia) and Executive Project Director (PIF, Saudi Arabia): In adapting one of Jan Gehl’s famous city quotes – that whilst we may well shape our cities and they in turn shape us, she asked: “What shape will AI have on future cities and the ethics of those who plan them?”

Dr. Sunil Dubey of UNSW Cities Institute, Australia established underlying innovation links from ancient cities to modern day city making in countries like Australia and Saudi Arabia. He demonstrated how (innovative) language was always a key to human life and city development from the Cuneiform (31st Century BC to 2nd Century AC) at the ancient city of Nimrud to the binary code of our computers and now to the Large Language Models used in AI. Language is the basis for Community, Creativity and Innovation as they are at the core of the New City -Bradfield Western Sydney Aerotropolis in Australia. Sunil’s presentation was important. Not that it diminished risks and the call for attention with respect to innovation and AI but it framed future AI development and use as part of an ongoing cultural and societal development which reaches thousands of years back. In doing so he took a strong position regarding the important role of cities for sustainable development. For instance, he quoted his mentor and the former Secretary General of United Cities and Local Governments UCLG Joseph Roig: ‘the future path for global peace & prosperity must go through Cities. The transition from Nationhood to Cities is challenging due to competing power pressures but global peace & prosperity will not be established without Cities Leading the charge.’

The important technical innovation through AI was not at the center of the Urban Conversation. However, Dr. Ulrich Graute quoted in his introduction goals and concerns coming from AI researchers, including Stuart Russel of the University of Berkeley, California.

Important is Russel’s indication that he is ‘fairly confident that we have some breathing space because there are several major breakthroughs needed between here and superintelligence’ which is confirmed by other AI researchers. There are so many insecurities regarding AI that the IMF recommends governments to prepare for both, massive disruption, in the case that AI should impact an estimated 40 percent of global employment, and for business as usual in case that the current AI hype should pass and just leave some technical tools as earlier innovation waves did. It is also too early to answer the guiding questions of the Urban Conversation on the impact AI will have on the future of cities. However, panellists concurred that AI is an important new subject for urban and regional planning and for cooperation within ISOCARP to lead the Global Dialogues on AI in Future Cities.

Sunil presented a strong case with Innovation examples on Riyadh leading the Urban Innovation AI campaign for the Middle Est Region in promoting Peace, Progress & Prosperity through capacity building and City Leadership campaigns led by Mayor Dr Faisal. He further pursued the role of Riyadh in leading the ISOCARP Innovation and AI global campaigns and establishing AI focused City Leadership Lab in collaboration with global institutions like IMF, World Bank and WEF. It is time to act now and to ensure we are on a socially beneficial path with AI in cities, we must start with a broader discussion, encompassing many more stakeholders than just the most powerful tech leaders, on what we can achieve with these new tools and what we want from them.

As an Urban Conversation (in contrast to a general dialogue on AI) it was important that Sarah Hill in the first part of her keynote presented some context to the case of Bradfield, why Australia is building a new city and the aim to enhance social equity and inclusion across Greater Sydney. In the second part she focused on how she and her team are using smart technology to help achieve these objectives. The third part of her speech provided commentary on the role AI could play, perhaps should play and certainly should not play in planning new cities and community infrastructure. In her current role she and her team are pushing AIs design capability even further to help ideate what our cities could deliver with unique building design. Equally they are testing the practical function and Their masterplans and what outcomes they could achieve.

Sarah Hill has no doubt that AI will bring a transformative force – but the question is whether we can harness this force for good and ultimately whether the change will have positive or negative consequences to social inclusion. According to her and other discussants at the panel and in the audience, this is one of many topics concerning AI that is of heated debate. Indeed, there are some extreme theories about the potential negative effects to humanity as a result of AI. Also relevant, by AIs own admission, if its algorithms are written by homogenous teams that do not represent the mix of communities they serve, decision bias can in fact be exacerbated to disastrous effect. For example, when bias facial recognition systems are used to determine access to public spaces, airports or schools or when it is used for surveillance.

Digital literacy is also a matter of debate in the context of AI and social inclusion. As she and her team identified during our research in Greater Sydney, the digital divide is a real and present issue, that was exacerbated by the ability of some families to afford technology during Covid19 and for older or more marginalized communities to feel comfortable using it.

Despite their best intentions with designing Bradfield with social inclusion as a foundational principle, she would not be surprised if this divide between the early and later adopters of this technology grows before it improves owing to the sheer rate of change.

There are also notable debates about ownership and control of big data, let alone who writes the algorithms that feed AI. The communications centre in Bradfield is live example of this honeypot of data. The potential to work with the centre to design and run this facility secured significant interest from global firms wanting to use it to showcase their new technology and systems and get a stronghold in the market.

And finally, the predicative capability of AI and its ability to iterate its thinking and thereby decision making independently is both a positive if you think about applications to managing carbon and energy loads or the effective operation of our cities, but also a likely terrifying negative. Particularly given the inability for humans now to track, let alone keep up with how AI derived solutions or decisions.

In wrapping up, Sarah Hill congratulated ISOCARP for putting the Planning and AI agenda as a priority for the professionals and decision makers in the room today.

My own takeaway as moderator of the session is that the new wave of innovation around AI is very dynamic and difficult to predict in detail. And because AI is expected to impact all spheres of life we need a broader discussion, encompassing many more stakeholders than just the most powerful tech leaders, on what we can achieve with these new tools and what we want from them. We'll need capacity building to increase AI literacy and then we’ll need a lot of interface management between the development of AI applications, the different user and affected stakeholder groups. AI is already entering the stage with the intention to stay. It’s up to us to assign to AI its role and function e.g. in planning and by that we also decide if AI applications remain just technical tools under our full control, turn into co-pilots influencing our perception and decision-making, or if we even allow AI to take full control over us. AI has no ethics on its own. The ethical use of AI will depend on how we use AI and how we program our objectives and ethical standards into learning machines.

T H E P A N E L

Sarah Hill, Sunil Dubey and, on the right, the two together with ISOCARP President Elizabeth Belpaire, Ulrich Graute and Congress Director Eric Huybrecht

Picture: Speakers, Panelists, Moderator and the Delegation from Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

P rogramme of the Urban Conversation on 11 October 2024 in Siena, Italy

11 October 2024
Time: 10:45 - 13:15
Room: Accademie. Fisiocritici

Session Organizers

Dr Ulrich Graute, Chair of the ISOCARP Scientific Committee, Berlin

Dr Sunil Dubey, The UNSW Cities Institute, Sydney.

1. Introduction to the theme of the session by Ulrich Graute

2. The making of inclusive, prosperous and sustainable cities and the new challenges and opportunities provided

by AI and Data

2.1 The case of Australia

- Key note by Dr Sarah Hill, CEO Greater Sydney Commission and Western Parkland City Authority (New

South Wales Govt, former) ‘Planning New Cities and Inclusive economic development’

2.2 - Western Sydney Aerotropolis – Australia’s 22nd Century City Making through Community, Creativity and Innovation.

- The case of Saudi Arabia - Progress, Peace & Prosperity 2030 – How Saudi Cities are transforming using data and power of Ai.

Presentation by Dr Sunil Dubey

4. Roundtable moderated by Ulrich Graute

Panellists:

Sarah Hill, Executive Project Director (Public Investment Fund PIF, Saudi Arabia)

Eric Huybrecht, Congress Director ISOCARP’s 60 ^th WPC, Institute Paris

Region

Elisabeth Belpaire, ISOCARP President

Ulrich Graute, Chair of ISOCARP Scientific Committee

Sunil Dubey, Smart Cities thought leader.

Thanks to the Congress team for the organization, to Dr Sunil Dubey for co-organizing the session with me and thanks to Siena for the excellent hospitality.

Ethical use of Artificial Intelligence in Planning - Join our Urban Conversation on 11 October 2024 at the 60th ISOCARP World Planning Congress in Siena, Italy

Tue, 01 Oct 2024 12:43:59 GMT

Urban Conversation: AI applications as tools and co-pilot to make cities more inclusive, prosperous and sustainable

Date:      11 October 2024
Time:     10:45 - 13:15
Room:   Accademie. Fisiocritici

Session background and a short description of the Content

Cities form the heart of human development and innovation, with 80% of global GDP generated within them and according to the United Nations approximately 56% of the world’s population now live in cities, and likely to reach nearly 70% by 2050. At the same time, the urban world is on a journey to revitalize cities, build new cities for growing populations, to dismantle inequalities, and to create a sustainable urban legacy for future generations. The growth and demands of cities are rapidly changing and looking (or exploring) for new systems and planning tools.

In this situation, Artificial Intelligence (AI) provides a transformative potential in managing and planning cities. It can support, analyze, and predict the impact of policy changes, demographic shifts and development plans. AI facilitates a valuable foundation for productive dialogue and constructive debate between municipal authorities, and the public and private sector. AI enables the People-focused city through systems integration and collaborations. Simultaneously, the application of generative AI in the public domain brings a number of risks and pitfalls. To assure an ethical use of the new wave of innovation in planning it is necessary to strike a careful balance between risk mitigation and harnessing its capabilities for public good and resilience.

The central concept of modern Artificial Intelligence (AI) is the intelligent agent. As of today, we have limitations to building one general-purpose AI program that does everything, instead AI developers build different types of agent programs for different types of problems and contexts. AI researchers agree that the new wave of innovation will impact all spheres of life and require more actors for future developments of AI. The discussion on the use of AI cannot be left alone to IT programmers and code developers. In this context, the objective of the conversation is to bring together planning practitioners and experts from city-making to discuss the use and potential impact of AI in urban planning and management and the related leadership of ISOCARP in the global dialogue on AI governance and capacity building of planners. Recent examples eg from Australia and Saudi Arabia will be presented along with panel discussions.

Session Organizers
   Dr Ulrich Graute, Chair of the ISOCARP Scientific Committee, Berlin
   Dr Sunil Dubey, The UNSW Cities Institute, Sydney.

1.   Introduction to the theme of the session by Ulrich Graute

2.    The making of inclusive, prosperous and sustainable cities and the new challenges and opportunities

provided by AI and Data

2.1 The case of Australia
- Key note by Dr Sarah Hill, CEO Greater Sydney Commission and Western Parkland City Authority (New South

Wales Govt, former) ‘Planning New Cities and Inclusive economic development’
- Western Sydney Aerotropolis – Australia’s 22nd Century City Making through Community, Creativity and

Innovation.

2.2 The case of Saudi Arabia (10 min)
Progress, Peace & Prosperity 2030 – How Saudi Cities are transforming using data and power of Ai. Dr Sunil Dubey

3. Roundtable

Moderation: Ulrich Graute

Guiding questions include

AI in Urban Planning: Navigating the Intersection of Technology and Values – AI as a technical tool and/or as co-pilot in planning New Cities and inclusive economic development.
Including AI in existing planning systems and processes and the requirement eg of a regulatory framework and capacity-building.
What shape will AI have on future cities?
ISOCARP and the new wave of technological innovation.

Panelists:

Sarah Hill, Executive Project Director (Public Investment Fund PIF, Saudi Arabia)

Eric Huybrecht, Congress Director ISOCARP’s 60th WPC, Institute Paris Region

Elisabeth Belpaire, ISOCARP President-Elect

Ulrich Graute, Chair of ISOCARP SciCom

Sunil Dubey, Smart Cities thought leader.

Website of the 60th ISOCARP World Planning Congress

https://isocarp.org/activities/60th-wpc-siena-2024/

Website of the Academy of Social Sciences (UK)

AI in urban planning: risks and opportunities

https://acss.org.uk/publications/ai-in-urban-planning-risks-and-opportunities/

Why and how I reviewed my website and CV with help of generative AI, ChatGPT

Thu, 15 Aug 2024 09:50:04 GMT

Privacy

Communicting with AI raises privacy concerns

A CV is personal documents including private information you may not want to share with everybody. Therefore, the sending of your CV to somebody (eg as part of an application or business offer) is usually considered as confidential. Using generative AI, for instance ChatGPT, to work on your CV, website or LinkedIn profile should be carefully considered because the info you share about yourself with ChatGPT stays with ChatGPT even if you delete it from your account after you finished your conversation. Nonetheless, I decided to take it easier using AI because my profile and CV is no secret in anyway. Through dozens of publications since the 1990s, speeches at many conferences worldwide, as blogger with an own website (www.ugraute.de) and a LinkedIn profile with close to 6000 followers you can find everything what’s written in my CV somewhere on the internet. And, most importantly, I carefully review everything that AI suggests to me, I review and finalize texts before I use them.

While I cannot fully exclude misuse of information, the responsibility for the content of my website and CV remains with me. And I still use a CV version not aided by AI for business offers and applications.

AI as a second eye - When should you consider using AI to review your CV and profile?

After 16 years of mostly (but not only) working for the United Nations I am now shifting more attention beyond the UN to the private sector, national and local authorities, other international organizations, NGOs etc.

All UN agencies have their own mandates, interests and priorities. As UN staffer and later as UN consultant I learnt the rules of the institution and lived with the limitations they generate for management and goal achievement. However, the UN, with its historical baggage of countless mandates, inadequate structures and resources and some overly cautious employees, at times stands in its own way. I want to continue supporting global cooperation using my global perspective, my skills in project and program management, cross-cultural communication, policy analysis and stakeholder cooperation. However, it is time to refocus and look at my skills and achievements from a different, a non-UN perspective. This is where AI comes into play as an additional opportunity to support the reorientation of my or your career. AI supports my own reflections on my interests and strategy and it does it in a very inspirational way. I recommend the same to others but, if possible, it should be only an opportunity in addition to exchange with friends, colleagues, books, trainers, coaches etc.

How did I use Chat GPT to review my website and CV?

ChatGPT is a conversational tool, and it’s for free in its basic version. You can login here: https://chatgpt.com/auth/login. After opening an account and login you find a box where you can enter you question (called prompt). You push Enter and get an answer within seconds. If the answer is not inspirational, correct or satisfying you just go on submitting a new or modified prompt. This way conversations with ChatGPT becomes conversational and easy. In this process ChatGPT gets to know you better and learns from your prompts. Prompting, ie formulating the right questions is key to get useful answers out of the conversation and it’s worth to spend some time training how to prompt.

In my case, an earlier prompt submitted to ChatGPT had produced already this suggestion: “Adjust your communication style to match the language and expectations of non-UN clients, avoiding overly technical or UN-specific jargon.” That was the point when ChatGPT confirmed my own guess that I have to change communication when I look beyond the UN world.

To further explore this, I submitted additional prompts including this one:
“ChatGPT, please rewrite my CV in a style more appealing to private companies.” The answer after my own review and fine tuning produced the short CV version which you can find here: https://www.ugraute.de/bio-and-cv

Could I have produced this without AI?
Of course, I have produced two pages versions of my CV on my own. The point is, that many things which are super important at the UN as “ an animal of its own kind ” are not so relevant outside of the UN. In such situations it may take a lot of time to decide what to leave in and what to take out of your CV. A second eye like AI proposing specific cuts and a repackaging can be very inspirational and helpful to get a fresh and crispier look at your own experience and credentials. I also liked very much that ChatGPT explained its approach to me:
“To make your CV more appealing to private companies, I'll focus on making the language more dynamic, emphasizing your key achievements, leadership roles, and strategic impact. I'll also streamline the format for clarity and brevity.”

Of course, I reviewed the suggested version of my CV and other website texts revised by AI to confirm the correctness of the content.

Overall, this review exercise is a test to use a new technical tool. It is certainly inspirational. Success remains to be seen but that is also the case when I review my CV for an application or if I review my website in a traditional way.

I decided for an open approach to use AI and to talk about my personal experience in this post, because in this new wave of innovation, we are all learners and can help each other. As adviser, I like to share, teach, and keep learning, inside or outside of the UN.

The ethical use of AI is not a nice add-on to a new wave of technological innovation but should be regarded as an integral part of AI-aided urban planning

Thu, 08 Aug 2024 12:47:30 GMT

Figure: Human-in-the-loop intervention.

‘The Ethical Concerns of Artificial Intelligence in Urban Planning’ Thomas W. Sanchez, Marc Brenman, and Xinyue Ye (2024)

A common mistake in the early phase of technology development is to externalize ethical concerns or postpone them as something that may be dealt with later. Be it climate change or the unsolved question of the repository problem of nuclear waste, instead of considering these side effects of developments right from the beginning they are often ignored and handed over to the next generation to find a solution. Already now our world is a repository of unsolved problems generated by earlier industrial and technological revolutions. To not leave even more unsolved problems for the next generation we should change our attitude and consider potential ethical impacts already when developing new technologies. Indeed, it could help increasing the quality and positive impact of Artificial Intelligence if, for example, the ethical concerns regarding AI were considered right from the beginning.

Concerns about the ethical use of AI in urban planning echo existing concerns regarding human performance and trustworthiness

Planners face many ethical dilemmas stemming from the need to balance diverse and often conflicting interests. Therefore, ethical planning requires a conscious approach to conflicts striving for solutions that are fair and just, especially in the face of competing demands. Decisions influenced by planners tasked with making decisions that have long-term implications for the environment and future generations. Will this change through AI?

In the Paper ‘The Ethical Concerns of Artificial Intelligence in Urban Planning’ by Thomas W. Sanchez, Marc Brenman, and Xinyue Ye just published in the Journal of the American Planning Association (2024) [1] the authors discuss how warnings about the use of AI ultimately echo existing concerns regarding human performance and trustworthiness because human involvement remains crucial. Quoting the French writer Antoine de Saint-Exupéry the paper states “The machine does not isolate man from great problems of nature but plunges him more deeply into them”. More specifically, they describe their finding:

“The training phase of AI, especially within supervised learning models, further accentuates the need for human control. During this phase, AI learns from data curated, cleaned, and labeled by human experts. It is through this iterative process, where humans delineate right from wrong and correct from incorrect and create rules-based structures, that AI models gain their decision-making capabilities. In addition, though AI operates on algorithms, the nuances of its operations are determined by parameters and hyperparameters set by human operators. This offers a means for experts to fine-tune the behavior and outcomes of AI, ensuring its alignment with specific urban planning objectives, like the population prediction example mentioned earlier. The use of AI in urban planning obligates planners to play multiple roles, transitioning from mere beneficiaries of AI’s analytical capabilities to stewards of its ethical and effective deployment. Planners, while leveraging AI’s insights, retain the crucial responsibility of contextualizing these insights within the landscape of the urban fabric, societal nuances, and historical precedents.”

The planner plays now a gatekeeper role between AI and the society, making planners, their education and further capacity building even more important while it increased the challenges for cities with insufficient staffing in their planning departments.

Therefore, the ethical use of AI is not a nice add-on to a new technology but a basic ingrediency to urban planning

Towards the end of their paper Sanchez, Brenman, and Ye propose key recommendations for Ethical AI Implementation in Urban Planning:

· Establish clear ethical guidelines and standards

· Prioritize transparency and accountability

· Ensure inclusive and diverse data sets

· Foster public engagement and participation

· Conduct regular ethical audits and reviews

· Promote interdisciplinary collaboration

· Invest in AI literacy and education

· Develop robust privacy and data security policies

[1] https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/01944363.2024.2355305

Learning machines and the soft power of AI

Sat, 03 Aug 2024 15:07:16 GMT

Human Compatible - AI and the Problem of Control

In his book 'Human Compatible – AI and the Problem of Control' (2023) the leading AI researcher Stuart Russell describes that the central concept of modern AI is the intelligent agent, learning machines. There is a lot on the positive side. "For example, from global satellite data feeds, it should be possible to create detailed models for managing the global environment, predicting the effects of environmental and economic interventions, and providing the necessary analytical inputs to the UN's sustainable development goals" (p 76). Looking at the risks he also takes a clear position "We … are planning to make entities that are far more powerful than humans". Unless they are governed wisely, the question is: "How do we ensure that they never, ever have power over us?". Russel remains "fairly confident that we have some breathing space because there are several major breakthroughs needed between here and superintelligence, not just one. The problem of creating general-purpose, human-level AI is far from solved." So, let's use the time to strike a careful balance between risk mitigation and harnessing AI's capabilities for public good and resilience.

In the face of many uncertainties regarding AI the International Monetary Fund IMF (2024) recommends that governments prepare for both businesses as usual and highly disruptive scenarios. This position is similar to that of AI researchers like Stuart Russel. What I find less often discussed in the literature is the soft power of AI.
In my own network, more and more colleagues use generative AI daily. They enter prompts in ChatGPT, the machine answers in seconds, and so on, giving the interplay a conversational character. Is this a purely technical use of a new tool or does the learning machine gradually gain more influence on users? Of course, if I ask them, they all claim to use it strictly as a technical tool and keep full control. Well, I tried it and asked ChatGPT about its luring power. This is, what the machine answered: "The luring power of AI lies in its transformative potential across various domains. By offering significant economic, technological, and social benefits, AI attracts a wide range of stakeholders, driving investment, collaboration, and innovation on a global scale." So, even ChatGPT admits its soft power. Certainly, more and more companies use generative AI to improve 'client satisfaction' and drive up sales. To limit such risks the governance framework of AI can produce only part of the answer. What is needed in addition, is capacity building for all citizens. AI experts predict that AI will affect all spheres of life. Thus, everybody should learn how to draft the right prompts, read and cross-check the answers, and more generally speaking, interact with learning machines as new actors trying to influence their lives.

TOWARDS A MORE REALISTIC SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT AGENDA 2030

Tue, 09 Jul 2024 09:49:40 GMT

A slide from the UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UN DESA) presented at the opening of HLPF highlights that only 17% of the SDG targets are on track

A company that started producing a new flagship product in 2015 and in 2024 admits to be only 17 % on track would be bankrupt.

Yesterday a children hospital was bombed in Kyiv and similar things happen in Gaza and other war theatres. In this situation member states are unlikely to focus on SDGs, not to speak of UN reform. In front of this background the High Level Political Forum HLPF this week and the UN Summit of the Future SOFT in September (both in New York) will be showcases of good activities, there will be appeals to do more with the same or even less but we won’t see the action needed to bring the Agenda back on track.

I do not always agree with Jeffrey Sachs , the Special Advisor to United Nations Secretary General António Guterres on the Sustainable Development Goals but I remember well that already in 2015 he said that he would have preferred an Agenda with less than 10 goals. He was right.

What options do exist now:
For instance, UN and member states could identify those Goals and targets most likely to succeed and put these as first movers in one group which is more likely to succeed in the six years left.

Alternatively, or in combination with the above the more successful goals and targets could be combined into one, two or three nexuses. A nexus is a connection or link between goals and targets that can drive overall development and stimulate others to follow. For instance, education builds capacities and can stimulate economic development and economic development allows other investments.

To not frustrate those working on other goals and targets one might keep the overall Agenda. However, the focus should shift to frontrunner goals. I know this is a sensitive issue because it may touch mandates, funds and functions of UN agencies and it also may impact financial interests of member states. But the world and those active for SDG deserve a realistic agenda. Otherwise, they look like fools if they just go on.

There are always risks if a compact package of goals and targets is re-opened, but if the Agenda should stay off track over the next six years the reputation of the UN will suffer immensely. I don't want that.

And suicide of the UN out of fear to commit mistakes should be no option.
Therefore, it deems to be best to have a more realistic agenda, even if different nexuses run with different speed. Monitoring the 2030 Agenda implementation and recommending changes to member states are main tasks of HLPF. This week they can give proof of that.

See the also the IISD Earth Negotiations Bulletin on the first day of HLPF
https://lnkd.in/dTp86vFU

Slide sources: UNDESA at the opening of HLPF 2024

2024 Gerd Albers Award

Fri, 05 Jul 2024 10:40:13 GMT

Call for 2024 Gerd Albers Award

Background and Objectives

The Gerd Albers Award (GAA) is celebrating inspiring publications such as books and essays. It was established in 1999 in honor of Professor Gerd Albers, a co-founder and past president of ISOCARP, who placed a particular emphasis on the task of publishing as a means of elucidating both the current debate and practical achievements in the planning field. This reputable award is given for the high-quality academic publications written by ISOCARP members.

Eligible entries

Pertinent submissions include the following publications by ISOCARP members published in the period between July 1, 2023, and June 31, 2024:

• Books and/or Book chapters
• Journal articles

• Published project reports

Exhibition catalogues and/or unpublished reports are ineligible.

Unpublished journal articles are eligible if the publisher’s acceptance letter is attached to the article submitted.

Evaluation criteria
Content:
•   Thematic introduction
•   Contribution to discussions on the topic
•   Consistence and coherence (conceptual background, methodological approach)

• Target audience

Design:
• Clarity
• Technical requirements

• Production

Language

All languages are eligible, although the “official languages” of the Society are English, French, German, and Spanish. Non-English entries must have an extended abstract in English (min. 3 pages).

Jury

The jury consists of three members of the ISOCARP Scientific Committee and the A&P Program Director. The deliberations and votes of the jury are confidential.

Prof. Sebnem Hoskara
Dr. Ulrich Graute
Dr. Dorota Kamrowska-Załuska

Prof. Ali A. Alraouf (A&P Program Director)

Substance of the Award

The Award is bestowed in three categories: GAA ‘Best Book’, GAA ‘Best Article’ and Special Mention. The Award winners are announced during the official ceremony at the ISOCARP annual World Planning Congress.

GAA ‘Best Book’ and GAA ‘Best Article’ get two years of free membership to ISOCARP, official ISOCARP award certification and its dissemination through the ISOCARP website, social media and newsletter.

Special Mention gets an official ISOCARP award certification and its dissemination through the ISOCARP website, social media and newsletter.

Who is eligible?

•   Scholars
•   Writers
•   Book Authors
•   Researchers
•   Urban and City Critics

• Professors and Academics

Prize
•   Recognition at the ISOCARP 60th Congress in Siena at the Awards Special Session.
•   Certificate.
•   ISOCARP Medal.
•   Waiving form the registration for a single representative of the winners.

• One year Membership at ISOCARP for a single representative of the winners.

Registration fee
150 Euros for each entry in the Best Book Award (a candidate can apply with multiple proposals).
50 Euros for each entry in the Best Paper Award (a candidate can apply with multiple proposals).

Submission material

⦁ Contribution (book/chapter/article) in pdf format

Application procedure
1. Submit your online application https://isocarp.org/gerd-albers-award-2024-submission-form/
2. Pay the registration fee: 150 Euros for Best Book Award and 50 Euros for Best Paper Award

3. Please, send your application to Ali Alraouf, ISOCARP Board member (alialraouf@isocarp.org) and ISOCARP HQ (awards@isocarp.org). Kindly specify the email subject: GAA 2024 Candidature.

Deadline for submission
August 15, 2024
Submit your application here
https://isocarp.org/gerd-albers-award-2024-submission-form/

Being senior advisor in times when easy answers are rare

Mon, 01 Jul 2024 19:21:14 GMT

International Organizations like the UN are struggling if not failing to cope with the many crises - but can I do any better as independent advisor?

The many crises the world is facing should convince heads of states and governments that more cooperation and commitment for global unity and development are necessary to cope with challenges including climate change, inequality, wars, need for sustainability etc. Unfortunately, at the moment it is unlikely that UN member states will be able to agree on anything substantial. National interests and lack of courage by political leaders and institutions to put more skin into the game are preventing the UN to grow up to the call of its Charter to prevent wars and assure development. Thus, at the UN High Level Political Forum on Sustainable Development (HLPF) this July and at the UN Summit of the Future later in September in New York we can expect only minor corrections but many speeches calling everybody (including you and me!!) to just do better with the little support available.

One could say a lot about the UN and its members now but instead of bashing the UN and member states, I want to reflect in this post a bit on what you and me can do better. And let me focus on myself. You may add in a comment or mail what you want and can do better.

On my website I document selected advisory services (https://www.ugraute.de/services-activities-products). Usually, they are related to international cooperation, urban and regional development. I keep now and in future delivering similar services. However, having worked a lot for the UN over the last 16 years I sometimes ask myself what I can do better based on 35 years of experience.

Well, several aspects come up my mind:

Firstly, EXTENDING MY KNOWLEDGE to cover new subject areas is a lifelong task even in normal times. I currently do that in the relative new field of ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE. Technology savvy developers of algorithms and codes are technically better suited for the subject but what alerts me is that these experts keep promising to develop something a lot smarter than us. Learning machines are expected to soon achieve human-like or even superhuman intelligence. Well, if that’s what’s in the pipeline it will affect us all and then the governance of the field also concerns everybody and cannot stay in the niche of IT programmers. AI may be able to help us overcoming our challenges but to just put AI on top of the pile of contemporary problems won’t work. Without containment it can lead us into disaster. And how to develop the field with leaving no one behind? We need to talk and I started to do so with a Policy briefing of the Academy of Social Sciences AcSS and several events of ISOCARP. More is up to come.

Even more important might be not to over-promise as some consultants tend to do to get bigger contracts. What helped me in my early career was to admit that I didn’t have the answer on all important questions: Following the peaceful revolution in 1989, nobody was prepared for German unification. There were no manuals and guidelines. Nonetheless, many West German experts and politicians were fast in promising blooming landscapes in the East if only their advice would be followed. When I was sent from the West to the East to support institution building in Eastern Germany I was accompanied by senior colleagues from the West. They often just copied what they had used successfully in the West in earlier years. That was welcome at the beginning but didn’t generate much innovation in the East and at some point, the unification process started to stagnate. Although I also came from the West, as a junior expert I didn’t even pretend to have all answers for this system transformation of an entire society. I was forced and freed to be more open and this helped me a lot to develop true partnerships and to jointly search for best solutions. And I was most impressed by the few experts who used their experience just to inspire and support the search for new solutions instead of simply transferring ideas from the West to the East.

Today, we are again living in difficult and transformative times but I have learned from my early career the advantage of being humble and open. Of course, I want to support the search for solutions but again I don’t pretend to have all answers. I think, only through collaboration and with agile management we’ll find the right solutions. Easy answers are rare in these times but much of the progress has its roots in difficult times when people are aware of risks, opportunities and ready to leave their comfort zone and explore the future. Well, and if my long years of experience can be a pool of inspiration than I’ll be happy to provide my support and to put my penny into the jar. Home-based or around the world. Thanks for taking the time to read this post.

Artificial Intelligence in Urban Planning: Risks and Opportunities - AcSS Policy Briefing

Fri, 21 Jun 2024 04:40:57 GMT

IAG Briefing Series

This briefing series by the International Advisory Group of the Academy of Social Sciences of the United Kingdom seeks to bring an international dimension to the Academy’s policy positions and identify interdisciplinary solutions to complex challenges facing society from a global standpoint.

AI in urban planning: risks and opportunities

Ulrich Graute FAcSS

Overview

Artificial Intelligence (AI) presents global societal challenges for researchers and policymakers. Machines have long been shown to be beneficial where their actions can be expected to achieve the objectives sought by human beings and not by machines with minds of their own. The goal for AI research is to create a system that requires no problem-specific engineering but can be assigned to carry out tasks such as teaching a molecular biology class or running a government.

Given the highly complex, multi-stakeholder dialogue and decision-making processes involved, the application of AI in the context of urban planning is of particular interest for researchers from a wide range of hybrid disciplines spanning physical and human geography, political economy, public administration, socio-legal studies, social policy and anthropology. The territory of cities is the stage where developments leave their physical footprint. Properly planned urban development requires an integrative and participatory decision-making process that addresses competing interests and is linked to a shared vision, an overall development strategy and national, regional and local urban policies. In practice, this is a continuous and iterative process, facilitating and articulating political decisions based on different scenarios and translating those decisions into actions that will transform the physical and social space and support the development of integrated cities and territories.

Throughout the urban planning process, each of the many persons and institutions affected by a plan may pursue their own interests, their priorities may shift, new issues and policies may emerge, and

actors may join constellations with specific motivations, interests and capabilities. Nobody in the process is likely to have full information, and no single person is 100 per cent rational in his or her perceptions and actions. Very little knowledge is certain, especially regarding the future. These limitations make planning a complex enterprise. They explain why its processes often generate suboptimal results, why constant reviewing of plans is necessary, and why the authors of the International Guidelines on Urban and territorial Planning IGUTP understand urban and territorial planning ultimately as a continuous and iterative decision-making process. The hope is now that AI tools can help to develop and implement better urban plans and ultimately increase the quality of life in cities. But urban planners also ask: should AI be seen just a technical tool, a digital twin, or could AI even become a controlling factor co-piloting city planning?

Key evidence

Currently, no general-purpose AI urban planning programme exists that does everything. Instead, developers are building and experimenting with different types of agent programmes designed to address different types of problems. Three scenarios can be identified to describe the positioning of AI in future urban planning:

Urban planning by AI increases control over life in cities: In the worst-case scenario, AI will be programmed to ignore the objectives and preferences of citizens. By targeting the lowest common denominator, it may instead lead to lower standards of quality of life and levels of urban sustainability, while surveillance and control might be added to the objectives of AI applications as major planning objectives, threatening to reduce or destroy freedoms of citizens.
AI serves as a technical tool and assistant for planners: This second configuration is often presented as the preferred scenario. Here, AI is strictly limited to functioning as a technical tool without power over humans, with AI applications filling data gaps and writing intelligent concept papers that generate problem trees and shorten the time needed to generate ideas. AI applications are given access to all applicable national and local visions, policies, laws, rules and regulations, including building codes, design guidelines, the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals, the objectives of stakeholders and budgetary information, as well as best practice cases from other cities. Based on this cumulative body of knowledge, AI applications can, and increasingly often already do, generate design proposals, and textual descriptions of plans. They may even suggest how to reconcile competing interests, making it difficult to tell whether they are created by a human being or by AI.
AI serves as a digital twin providing planners with alternative options: Machines may be far more capable than humans but are likely to remain far from perfect. AI as a digital twin can support planning departments to keep processes on track. However, if humans put the wrong objectives into a machine that is able to learn and is more intelligent than they are, it will achieve the objective regardless of any unwanted and unintended consequences. As planners get used to data and recommendations from AI, it can gradually gain influence over humans and become a co-pilot or at least a digital twin in planning rather than being treated as a tool.

Policy contexts

In urban planning, the process takes years from the development of operational plans through to their implementation and evaluation. We are only beginning to understand generative AI’s capabilities and risks; the long-term impact on AI on the entire process remains to be seen. But our three scenarios have already been adopted by urban planners in advanced societies across three categories: sceptics who are cautious and largely opposed to the development of new technologies; optimists who are convinced that AI will be beneficial if used exclusively as technical tools unable to gain control over humans; and realists who are interested in the benefits of AI but who are also aware of the risks.

The success or otherwise of the introduction of new technologies is found to be dependent on a mix of contextual factors. Not every city has the best equipped planning department or the technical resources for sound planning. This situation often arises in fast-urbanising countries in the Global South, in cities with high numbers of foreign refugees or internally displaced persons. In addition, the degree of authority for urban planning delegated to cities varies a lot between countries and even where provision for AI exists, political decision-makers may use them as a political tool by including biases or discriminatory patterns in their outcomes .

Recommendations

AI researchers are predicting that AI will progressively penetrate all spheres of life. Research into the most effective use and the impacts of AI in the urban planning process remains at an early stage, and no final conclusions are available. To prepare for the challenges and risks associated with AI:

Social scientists, politicians and the general public must be prepared to anticipate and adapt to the impact of AI on whole societies and political systems.

Planners need to explore risks and opportunities of AI applications as technical tools, and as co-pilots that are capable of gaining influence over perceptions and actions of humans, or of becoming a dominant tool for the control of cities and citizens’ lives.

Citizens need to be given insights into planning and decision-making processes beginning with the way objectives and preferences are programmed into machines.

Given the magnitude, complexity and interrelatedness of the challenges facing society, researchers must prevent a new culture war with Luddites wrecking learning machines.

Instead, scientists and policymakers across the world should learn how to use wisely- governed AI to increase the much-needed problem-solving capacity of cities and beyond.

Artificial Intelligene in Planning

Fri, 14 Jun 2024 07:21:56 GMT

ISOCARP Cyber Agora #10

The recording of ISOCARP's Cyber Agora: Artificial Intelligence in Planning is now available on youtube
https://lnkd.in/d7DwgkXM

The body content of your post goes here. To edit this text, click on it and delete this default text and start typing your own or paste your own from a different source.

The Future of the United Nations and the Second Law of Thermodynamics

Wed, 08 May 2024 16:10:13 GMT

The United Nations is preparing for its Summit of the Future and hopes for a Pact for the Future bring the SDG implementation and multilateralism back on Track as main outcome of the Summit scheduled for September of this year in New York. Can that become a success and bring multilateral cooperation and SDG goal achievement back on track?

The UN describes 'Halfway through the 2030 Agenda, the world is not on track to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals. It is not too late to change course, if we all rethink, refocus, and recharge. “UN 2.0” encapsulates the Secretary-General's vision of a modern UN family, rejuvenated by a forward-thinking culture and empowered by cutting-edge skills for the twenty-first century – to turbocharge our support to people and planet.'[1] The UN certainly will try but at the end progress will depend on the political will of member states and there is not much visible until now.

On May 7, 2024 Parag Khanna, Founder & CEO of AlphaGeo, Strategic Advisor and Bestselling Author, published in Noema his paper The Coming Entropy Of Our World Order.
He writes in his analysis: ‘Indeed, the most accurate description of today’s world is high entropy, in which energy is dissipating rapidly and even chaotically through the global system. In physics, entropy is embodied in the Second Law of Thermodynamics (pithily summed up in a Woody Allen film as: “Sooner or later, everything turns to shit”). Entropy denotes disorder and a lack of coherence.’
But for Khanna entropy is not anarchy. Instead, entropy ‘is a systemic property that manifests itself as a growing number of states and other actors seize the tools of power, whether military, financial or technological, and exercise agency within the system. There is still no consensus as to what to name the post-Cold War era, but its defining characteristic is clear: radical entropy at every level and in every domain of global life. How do we reconcile an increasingly fractured order with an increasingly planetary reality?’

It's worth reading the full paper where he welcomes the reader to the Global Middle Ages as a very complex geopolitical marketplace. He expects that what will matter much more than sovereignty, then, is capacity as measured by coherence, agency and resilience. States will no longer hold monopoly over the tools of physical violence. The future he envisages far more resembles the pre-Westphalian patterns of Hanseatic Leagues than ‘today’s Potemkin sovereign assemblies such as the United Nations’. According to him it is hard to find anybody who really cares for multilateralism. More visible is that every state fights for herself.

Khanna also asks: 'If institutionalized orders such as the late 20th-century multilateral system tended to be established only after major wars, would an entropic drift into regional spheres of influence be preferable to a World War III among dueling hegemons? In this scenario, conflicts may flare from Ukraine to Taiwan, but they would be ring-fenced within their respective regions rather than becoming tripwires for global conflict. Regions that strive for greater self-sufficiency, such as North America and Europe today, could reduce the carbon intensity of their economies and trade, but potentially at the cost of undermining their interdependence with and leverage over other regions. Such is the double-edged nature of an entropic world.
With no major power able to impose itself on the global system or able to reign in those transnational actors domiciled abroad or in the cloud, the future looks less like a collective of sovereign nations than a scattered tableau of regional fortresses, city-states and an archipelago of islands of stability connected through networks of mobile capital, technology and talent. To argue that there is some bedrock Western-led order underpinning the global system rather than crumbling inertia is tantamount to infinite regress'.

Who considers Khanna a negativist should read also the end of his paper:
'Global entropy doesn’t solely imply fragmentation. To the contrary, the system exhibits characteristics of self-organization, even aggregation, into new patterns and formations. Highways, railways, electricity grids and airlines link cities in ways that form neo-Hanseatic networks and alliances, and the internet transcends borders to link self-governing social communities. The universal reach and penetration of connectivity enables authorities of all kinds to forge bonds effectively more real than the many states that exist more on maps than in their peoples’ reality. The world comes together — even as it falls apart.'

I would like to read more on how the self-organization into new patterns and formations will work successfully and prevent the world from falling apart. For that we may have to wait for his next book. In the meantime, we should ask ourselves what we can do to get ready for the future. The Summit of the Future and UN 2.0 are unlikely to proof more than that the UN is not dead. Entangled in its old procedures and the current multi challenge environment it would be unrealistic to expect more. What could help as a starter is to develop and test new forms of Model UN, i.e. the simulation of how international cooperation can work in a world described by Parag Khanna. I would be interested.

Back to the post on LinkedIn https://www.linkedin.com/posts/graute_the-future-of-the-united-nations-and-the-activity-7194007832390750208-Brqe?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop

Footnotes

[1] https://www.un.org/two-zero/en
[2] Link to Parag Khanna's full paper https://www.noemamag.com/the-coming-entropy-of-our-world-order/

Artificial Intelligence II - AI as co-pilot in urban and regional planning and international cooperation

Thu, 25 Apr 2024 12:22:17 GMT

Imagine, in future planners will have a co-pilot!

The KPMG Future Summit event on AI which I attended on 23 April 2023 [1] did not address directly urban and territorial planning or international cooperation in the field. I was listening to the online event while ironing my shirts (unfortunately, that’s not done by AI yet). What caught my attention was among others the statement by Miriam Kugel, Director of People Science Advisory for Europe, the Middle East and Africa at Microsoft. She said that AI will be in future like our co-pilot. While many admin tasks will be taken over by AI more managerial oversight by managers will be needed.

Just imagine all the rules and regulations that have to be consider in planning a city can be considered and factored in by AI. It still will need the planners to identify the best proposals and recommend them to politicians for decision-making. Chris Chiancone, Chief Information Officer at the City of Carralton suggests regarding the use of AI in planning to ‘Picture a tool that can absorb data about a city's current layout, population density, infrastructure, and other factors, and then generate a model of how the city could be restructured to optimize certain objectives.’

Chris Chiancone writes in his paper of 20 June 2023 ‘Revolutionizing Urban Planning with Generative AI: A new Era of Smart Cities’ [2] : “At its heart, Generative AI is a type of machine learning that crafts new data instances reflecting its training set. Picture a master artist who, rather than simply duplicating a scene, employs their creativity to produce unique, lifelike outputs from a given input. That's the magic of Generative AI, but in the realm of data. It's the digital world's virtuoso, wielding algorithms and computational power instead of brushes and pigments”. For Chiancone Generative AI brings a unique fusion of creativity and efficiency to urban planning. It's akin to having a supercharged assistant that can process numbers, analyze data, generate models, and make predictions at a pace and scale that humans simply can't compete with. All of this is done with the aim of creating more efficient, habitable, and sustainable cities. According to Chiancone Generative AI is a tool that's not just revolutionizing urban planning, but also holds the potential to significantly enhance the quality of life in our urban habitats. And that ‘supercharged assistant’ corresponds to Miriam Kugels ‘co-pilot’. In spite of all creativity, Chiancone and Kugel understand AI as supportive tools (assistant or co-pilot) and that it needs data strategies, AI governance and capacity building to keep the pilot on track to intended goals. Scenario planning could be one of the big beneficiaries of AI. The planner as pilot of the planning process can modify the scenario setting and ask AI to develop the best scenario accordingly. This way, planners and decision-makers can better test out different options before taking a decision.

Now let’s think ahead a bit further. If AI can support scenario planning AI can also support the inter-sectoral and multi-level coordination of planning process which are often loaded with conflicting interests. AI could extend the scenario planning and apply a Large Language Model to include also all policies, laws and regulations of other relevant policy fields, policy levels plus the rights of citizens and property owners affected by a plan. By combining and comparing all these data AI could either identify win-win situations or generate proposals to bridge conflicting positions. It still will need the planning process and the decision-making but AI could support this process significantly by assuring that all relevant policies, rules and regulations are taken into account. And if new challenges and opportunities emerge, they can be included to proposed scenarios without much delay. And planners assisted by their ‘co-pilot’ might become even more reliable and appreciated authorities in the planning process.

[1] https://kpmg.com/de/de/home/events/uebersicht/kpmg-zukunftsgipfel.html

[2] https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/revolutionizing-urban-planning-generative-ai-new-era-smart-chiancone/

AI and the interrelated web of sustainable development goals

Since 2012 I am working on the post 2015 development agenda of the United Nations which is since 2015 called 2030 Agenda and it includes 17 Sustainable Development Goals with 169 targets. The Agenda is currently off-track but what puzzles me since its launch is how to we can keep track of the fact that goals and targets are an interrelated web. Progress on one goal or target may imply regression on others. How can a zero-sum game or an overall regression be prevented? Here too, AI offers opportunities.

The Human Settlements Programme of the United Nations (UN-Habitat) launched in 2022 its report “AI and Cities” [3] . This first more comprehensive review of the relation between AI, cities and urban planning includes among others the recommendation to align AI strategies with SDGs and National and Local Goals (UN-Habitat 2022 AI and Cities, page 100).

[3] https://unhabitat.org/sites/default/files/2022/10/artificial_intelligence_and_cities_risks_applications_and_governance.pdf

While humans often tend to chooseto reduce complexity by raisin picking and focusing on selected goals while ignoring others AI could be asked to monitor developments in a more comprehensive and integrated manner. Fed with all goals and indicators, national strategies and programs to implement the 2030 Agenda and with access to national and other available data AI could draft the SDG implementation report and make proposals on how to get agenda implementation back on track. Again, AI would be just a co-pilot and supercharged assistant. It could and should not not substitute political decision-making but if governed according to jointly agreed rules it could give monitoring and advisory services by the UN more authority and generate proposals for more effective and efficient use of available resources for goal achievement by national, local and other stakeholders. Certainly, it will require investments into data strategies, governance, capacity building and much attention for the just beginning process of AI development and application. The AI rocket is flying on already more than 100 million computers while it is at the same time still under construction. That makes it so urgent to pay attention now.

Picture: At the UN, robot Sophia joins meeting on artificial intelligence and sustainable development with UN Deputy Secretary-General Amina J. Mohammed

And what comes next?

In this times of multiple crises AI offers risks and a lot of opportunities. AI won’t turn me into a data person or IT nerd but it’s exciting to understand and apply the new opportunities as international expert in urban and regional development. We have to grow up to the challenges of our time and we don’t have the time to wait until our brains grow. Therefore, as analyst and advisor I will be glad to put my penny into the jar of discussing and using AI as co-pilot and to facilitate capacity building at the interface between technology and governance of international, national and local development. Countries like Saudi Arabia are investing heavily in AI. How is your country getting ready?

Please find the first blog post on Artificial Intelligence - Travelling with a rocket still under construction here https://www.ugraute.de/artificial-intelligence-i

Artificial Intelligence I - Travelling with a rocket still under construction - AI as a promising but also scary change-maker

Thu, 25 Apr 2024 12:22:10 GMT

Travelling with a rocket still under construction - AI as a promising but also scary change-maker

AI is to be understood as a combination of hardware, software and (this is new!) learning. If you have a virus software on your computer a virus scanner may identify and remove the virus. Now imagine, your virus would be AI enhanced and able to learn and modify itself. Virus scanners may not be able to identify self-modifying viruses and the virus could keep learning, remain undetected and increase damage without limits. That’s scary and that’s why data strategies and AI governance by governments, providers and users is necessary.

Would a world without AI be a better place? As an expert in international cooperation, urban and regional development I am sceptic. We’re living in times of multiple and often interrelated and interdependent crises. There is an international system of multi-level and multilateral rule-based cooperation and this system generates complex programmes like the UN 2030 Agenda with its 17 Sustainable Development Goals and 168 targets. In spite of such programmes and centuries of experience in diplomacy the human system is not able (yet) to prevent war, mitigate climate change, remove high inequality and assure a sustainable development which leave no one behind. Our governments, societies and we as individuals are experienced in solving single issue problems but the current complexity is growing, already now overwhelming and our capacities are slow in growing up to the many challenges. In this situation (a well governed and strategised) artificial intelligence which helps us to understand complexity and to identify solutions for our challenges could be the change-maker we need.

Website of the KPMG event series https://kpmg.com/de/de/home/events/uebersicht/kpmg-zukunftsgipfel.html

If I invite you in this and a following post to join me on a journey to encounter AI, I do it as a social scientist and human being who wonders what is already happening and what may be coming. I was inspired to these posts firstly, by attending on 24 April 2023 the online Future Summit of KPMG Germany “Zukunftsgipfel: Digitale Transformation” [1] and secondly, because I am already observing changes in my own work in the field of international cooperation, urban and regional development.

Disrupt yourself instead of getting disrupted?!

One of the lessons I learned at the KPMG online session is that AI will impact us all, in whatever profession or country we work and live. And it is already happening. I am very curious but also concerned about what Artificial Intelligence AI will bring to my own work and to the challenges we are facing around the world.

For instance, ChatGPT is a chatbot developed by OpenAI and launched on November 30, 2022. Based on Large Language Models LLM, it enables users to refine and steer a conversation towards a desired length, format, style, level of detail, and language. This can be inspiring but also manipulating. It is just about 18 months since ChatGPT was launched but according to a poll by KPMG already one third of the companies in Germany started AI initiatives and another third is considering to do so soon. Globally, ChatGPT has already more than 100 million users. Where will it be and where will we be after another 18 months?

The development is taking place in three sectors: The development of AI infrastructure and of Large Language Models LLM (dominated by US and Chinese companies) and the development of applications (where Germany seems to be one of the advanced and strongly engaged countries).

Speakers at the KPMG Future Summit event agreed that AI will be beneficial but also disruptive and that it would be better we disrupt ourself and get ready now than to wait until we get disrupted by the transformation coming up. A steep learning curve is ahead of us.

AI as a combination of hardware, software and learning needs data strategies on the side of companies but companies and also other institutions need to understand AI as an integrative part of their overall strategies and processes. In client services and marketing AI will revolutionize client relations by not only answering direct questions but by learning (!) from the answers clients give. In return clients will develop higher expectations regarding services delivered. And yes, there are also concerns that a learning software may control users. AI is creative and there might be invisible parts of this creativity if the new sector isn’t supervised properly. Several speakers at the KPMG event referred to the new AI Act of the European Union as the most comprehensive but also pragmatic regulation on AI to date. However, individuals, NGOs and companies all have to take action now to use opportunities and to prevent being sidelined by the new technology.

In future, there will be less administrative work because AI substitutes many data management and other work processes. And where AI finds not all answers it will come up with proposals, discuss them with the user and generate better proposals. At the workshop, I got the impression that jobs like tax advisors and other admin professions might become fully or in part substituted by AI applications while more managers will be needed to supervise AI processes and outputs. Certainly, many job profiles will change within the next years. Of course, AI governance requires not only governmental oversight but also capacities for change management on the side of companies, the society and individuals. And this will generate new jobs in capacity building.

Travelling with a rocket still under construction

Like in other transition periods, there will be those who immediately embrace AI and those who reject the upcoming transition. After all, AI is like a rocket which is already flying while it is still under construction. Risks and opportunities go hand-in-hand. One speaker at the KPMG event, I think it was Dr Feiyu Xu (member of the supervisory boards of ZF and Airbus companies) stated that each of us is already confronted with AI before we have breakfast in the morning. I don’t know if that is already true for each of us but I agree that it soon will be the case and in the following post I want to discuss how this impacts my own fields of work.

What do you think? Did you gain already experience with artificial intelligence?

Please find the second blog post on Artificial Intelligence - AI as co-pilot in urban and regional planning and international cooperation here https://www.ugraute.de/artificial-intelligence-ii

UN Classics: IGUTP - International Guidelines on Urban and Territorial Planning by UN-Habitat

Thu, 28 Mar 2024 14:45:25 GMT

UN-Habitat's most downloaded publication ever: The International Guidelines on Urban and Territorial Planning

The need for planning cannot be over-emphasized. Urbanization is progressing rapidly and by 2050, seven out of ten people will be living in cities. Inappropriate policies, plans, and designs have led to the inadequate spatial distribution of people and activities, resulting in the proliferation of slums, congestion, poor access to basic services, environmental degradation, and social inequity and segregation.

The International Guidelines on Urban and Territorial Planning (launched by the Governing Council of UN-Habitat in 2015) serve both as a source of inspiration and a compass for decision makers and urban professionals when reviewing urban and territorial planning systems. The Guidelines provide national governments, local authorities, civil society organizations and planning professionals with a global reference framework that promotes more compact, socially inclusive, better integrated and connected cities and territories that foster sustainable urban development and are resilient to climate change. They have been downloaded from the website of UN-Habitat more than 100.000 times during the first years after its publication.

You can find it following this link in eleven different languages: https://unhabitat.org/international-guidelines-on-urban-and-territorial-planning

The following picture shows the 12 key Principles which should drive Planning and refers to 114 recommendations made in the Guidelines.

For more information see also the Handbook of the Guidelines to which I contributed in 2018 as main author.

https://unhabitat.org/international-guidelines-on-urban-and-territorial-planning-ig-utp-handbook

2024 Conference Centrality in the Age of Dispersion

Wed, 21 Feb 2024 10:41:20 GMT

Call for Abstracts opened

Having a highly positive experience with the first edition of the International Conference Centrality in the Age of Dispersion in 2023, we are pleased to announce the second edition of this event! The conference will be held in Wroclaw on 25-27 September 2024.

Human settlement have always developed around centres. Whether it is the ancient Greek polis or the 20th century neighbourhood, each has concentrated different human activities and formed a specific node in geographical space. Today, the natural mechanisms of concentration are being undermined by various dispersal processes of a multiscalar and temporal nature. The networked society, demographic transitions, the global economy, instant communication, teleworking, online services - among others - are challenging urban planning paradigms around the world.
What is special about centrality and dispersion today?
What is the current balance between centrality and dispersion in urban development?
How does public governance respond to these complex phenomena?
These are the main questions of the International Conference Centrality in the Age of Dispersion, organised by the Chair of Urban Planning and Spatial Management, Faculty of Architecture, Wroclaw University of Science and Technology, Wroclaw, Poland, 25-27 September 2024.
The conference will address the demand for a new approach to territorial governance and will bring together experts from different scientific disciplines to present their research on urban centres and discuss dispersion phenomena.
The attached flyer provides some basic information about the conference.
You are invited to submit a paper for the conference, which may be considered for publication in 'Planning Practice and Research', 'Bulletin of Geography. Socio-Economic Series' and 'Architectus' journals.
The deadline for submitting abstracts is 15.04.2024 23:59 CET.
More information is available on the conference website: https://lnkd.in/eE67ibEB
Please share this invitation with your colleagues and partners in both academia and policy-making.
If you have any issues or questions, please do not hesitate to contact us at centrality-dispersion@pwr.edu.pl.
We look forward to your contribution to our conference and hope to meet you in person in Wroclaw.

Lukasz Damurski, associate professor
Head of the Scientific Committee of the International Conference
‘Centrality in the Age of Dispersion’
Faculty of Architecture
Wrocław University of Science and Technology

Dr Ulrich Graute, Member of the Scientific Committee of the Conference and Chair of the Scientific Committee of ISOCARP - International Society of City and Regional Planners

Ulrich's CV in Pictures since the late 1970s

Fri, 26 Jan 2024 09:20:12 GMT

Ulrich on LinkedIn https://www.linkedin.com/feed/

and

Ulrich's CV in pictures: https://www.ugraute.de/ulrich-s-cv-in-pictures-since-the-late-1970s

Engaged since a European Forum in 1979, turned Professional in 1989 and since 2014 Independent Consultant in support of International Cooperation and Peace

Thu, 25 Jan 2024 13:08:31 GMT

WORK EXPERIENCE SINCE THE 1980s AND THEREOFF NOW 10 YEARS AS INTERNATIONAL CONSULTANT - AND EACH YEAR BRINGS NEW CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES

On 3 January 2024 I found an automated message from LinkedIn congratulating me for being now ten years member of the network. On 31 December 2013 my employment contract as senior advisor at the UN Secretariat in New York run out after more than five years. Joining LinkedIn on 3 January 2024 was indeed my very first step into the world and life of an independent consultant.

10 Years as consultant means ten years of ups and downs on the market of consultancy contracts, moving from UNDESA in New York to work from Berlin e.g. for the mayor of Berlin, GIZ and Cities Alliance before moving to Nairobi to work for UN-Habitat and back to Berlin. The list of employers was already remarkable in 2014 but private clients with smaller or bigger assignments keep joining the list of clients and partners (see pictures): https://www.ugraute.de/https-www-ugraute-de-ulrich-cv-in-pictures-since-the-late-1970s

10 years as consultant means 10 years of constant learning, testing new approaches, tools and searching for new opportunities. I survived the difficult first five years (when most start-ups go out of business) because in January 2014 I had already 25 years of experience as professional. Please see my picture gallery for a visual impression:

Clients usually don’t pay for my learning but, of course, before getting a new contract I always have to convince new clients that I am the best for the job and have all necessary qualifications. And imagine doing that in times of multiple crises and high dynamics like these days. I managed it so far and keep finding new clients because I learned right at the beginning of my career to be value drven while flexible and curious enough to face new challenges and embrace dynamics.

My career was derailed right at the beginning with the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989. I had finished university in Hamburg just months earlier and soon was sent from the West to Eastern Germany to help building up public administration and a learning center in the new Free State of Saxony after the peaceful revolution. There were no plans, manuals and tool boxes for the transformation of a political system and society with a collapsing economy. So, I was thrown into the water and supported the development of a new form of governance in a changing society at local and regional level.

All this happened more or less in parallel to the preparation of the United Nations 'Earth Summit' in 1992. I didn’t attend it but it became clear to me that the development of governance and society need to be aligned with a sustainable development. Again, at the time there were no manuals and tool boxes but I already knew how to swim in unchartered waters. Working at the Leibniz Institute of Sustainable Urban and Regional Development in Dresden (Saxony, Germany, 1993-2002) I added a PhD to my path which otherwise remained driven by curiosity for cross disciplinary, cross-border and multilevel cooperation in a changing world. Working at the UN the UN core values of professionalism, integrity and respect of diversity became my own core values and remeined ever since. In addition, I always keep thinking that there have to be better solutions. My employers, partners, and friends since 1989 and my clients since 2014 appreciate this attitude and the related flexibility very much.

There were difficult times like the Corona pandemic but to my own surprise demand for my work is growing ever since. But so are the challenges in times of crises.

Inspite of challenges, ups and downs I like to be consultant carrying now professional experience along with me which I gained since the late 1970s. As consultant I may be team leader or member but I'm usually not the boss. That makes it easier to cooperate with others as colleagues, to share my knowledge and experience with changing teams in different countries. Each new contract and team provides me a treasure of new insights and experience. And my LinkedIn network? It reached 102 followers within the first year 2014. Now it gains 100+ new followers within a month and is inching towards 5000 followers. That’s nice but I still value even higher face-to-face meetings.

At the beginning of my 11th year as independent consultant and about to embark on new tasks and even more diversified assignments I would like to say thank you to all colleagues, friends and clients who supported me in the course of the least ten years and who’ll continue to do so in future. Consultants may often work alone or as part of global online teams from their home office but we are nothing without the people who support us and who use our advice, knowledge and recommendations. Therefore, let me thank all of you very much for your trust and let’s keep (co-)working to make this world a better place.In spite of my many years there is still a lot left to be done.

Ulrich on LinkedIn https://www.linkedin.com/feed/

and

Ulrich's CV in pictures (1985-2024):https://www.ugraute.de/ulrich-s-cv-in-pictures-since-the-later-1970s

Ulrich at ISOCARP's joint online webinarwith the Royal Town Planning Institute on 19 January 2024 on ‘Lessons for Planners from COP28 UAE – moving towards hashtag MultilevelAction ’ and preparation of COP29 and COP30

Jordan: Municipal services to assist refugees and to strengthen climate and social resilience in the Kingdom

Tue, 14 Nov 2023 18:43:11 GMT

Despite being challenged by millions of refugees Jordan is turning to strengthen climate resilience

Jordan is a politically and economically stable country but with its direct neighbours Iraq, Syria, Israel and Palestine (the latter having since 2012 a non-member observer state in the United Nations) the Kingdom is challenged by many conflicts in its vicinity. Jordan has hosted more than 1.3 million Syrians since the beginning of the Syrian crisis in 2011, including 660,000 registered Syrian refugees with the UNHCR. In addition, 66,801 Iraqi refugees and more than 2 million registered Palestine refugees live in Jordan. This refugee population makes up for more than 18 percent of the overall population of Jordan of 11,32 million.

A burden which would be too much to handle in other countries doesn't keeop Jordan from turning to the other huge challenge: Climate Challenge. Since 2014 the World Bank already supports Jordanian municipalities affected by the influxes of Syrian refugees in delivering services and employment opportunities for Jordanians and Syrians in context of the Municipal Services and Social Resilience Project (MSSRP). Now a tiny part of that support is used to explore opportunities to support municipalities in their efforts to fight climate change. Already in 2022 the World Bank published a Jordan Country Climate and Development Report identifying two pathways towards adaptation, resilience, and low-carbon growth:

The water, energy, and food security nexus
The urban-transport-energy nexus

In this phase of riorientation and integration of climate resilience and good urban climate into municipal services of Jordan I am invited by the Royal Society for the Conservation of Nature (RSCN) to explore best options for climat action based on the Jordan Climate and Development Report of the World Bank. I already visited Jerash and Sahab municipalities and put the World Bank report into the local context of cities. The pathways proposed by the World Bank were confirmed by mayors and other local experts met during the visit. However, the contextualisation in front of the local situation, local diagnosis, goal formulation, definition of the necessary enabling environment and capacity building are pending tasks. The old city of Jerash with its roots going back to the Bronze Age and with its rich Greco-Roman heritage and the younger city of Sahab with its King Abdullah Industrial City hosting 400 companies have both distinctively different challenges and opportunities but both share the will to confront climate change and develop resilience while continuing the support for their refugee population fo 25-30 per cent. Of course, a lot needs to be done but it is exciting for me to support RSCN, World Bank and municipalities in this creative phase of project development.

________________________________________________________________________________

What is MSSRP?

The project’s goal is to assist both Jordanians and Syrians in finding employment. It is focused on municipalities most affected by the influx of Syrian refugees, and hopes that general economic growth within these regions can benefit all involved.

Originally, the project was the Emergency Services and Social Adaptation Project, which was launched in 2014. It then evolved to MSSRP.

Among the sub-objectives of the project is developing infrastructure in these municipalities, such as: parks, stadiums, public spaces, green areas, street pavements, solid waste management, sewage systems, flood protection, energy efficiency measures (such as solar street lighting), and providing equipment for solid waste and other services.

The bank approved the project's initial funding in October 2013, with a grant of $52.7 million, followed by the first additional grant of $10.8 million in December 2016.

This was followed by the second additional grant of $30 million in December 2017, and the third of $8.8 million in August 2020.

What has it achieved so far?
The total cumulative financing covered 28 Jordanian municipalities, surpassing a portfolio of over $100 million through support from multiple donors.

According to the WB, the project has contributed to improving municipal services for over 2.8 million individuals directly, with 20 percent of them being Syrian refugees and 47 percent being women.

The MSSRP has also provided over 27,400 temporary workdays , and it is expected to exceed 110,000 workdays upon project completion in summer 2024.

Source: Jordan News on 9 July 2023

Picture: Area of the Jerash municipality in Jordan

Keeping climate policy and sustainability policy separate – was it a mistake? Yes, it was!

Sun, 08 Oct 2023 17:30:11 GMT

At ISOCARP’s 59th World Planning Congress and the 5th Uraben Economic Forum this week in Toronto, Canada planners, urban economists and climate experts will meet and talk about Climate Action and Urban Finance. You may want to intervene and say that climate change and sustainable development are often discussed in context and not separately. Yes, however, at the institutional level climate change and sustainability are delt with in separate arenas and that since thirty years. I assume, but it should be further analyzed, that this separation generated a path dependency which prevented integrated solutions.

Background: In May 1992 the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) established an international environmental treaty to combat dangerous human interference with the climate system. It was signed by 154 states at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), informally known as the Earth Summit, held in Rio de Janeiro from 3 to 14 June 1992. At the very same conference, the Agenda 21 as the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, and the Statement of principles for the Sustainable Management of Forests were adopted by more than 178 Governments. While these twince were born at the same conference they took separate paths right after the conference. The UNFCCC got its separate secretariat not at a UN Headquarters e.g. in New York, Nairobi or Geneva but at Bonn, Germany and the implementation and further follow-up is within the responsibility of the Conference of Parties (or COP) where all signatories meet on an annual basis. In contrast, for the effective follow-up of the Agenda 21 the UN General Assembly established in December 1992 the Committee on Sustainable Development.

In 2015, climate and sustainability policy needed an uplifting. For the Agenda 21 this came in September 2023 in form of the 2030 Agenda with 17 Sustainable Development Goals while UNFCCC agreed just three months later at its COP21 on the Paris Agreement. Both were organized under the auspices of the UN but remained on their separate tracks. UNFCCC still has its secretariat in Bonn and the 2030 Agenda is monitored by the High Level Political Forum of the UN General Assembly.

Now, in 2023 UNFCC and Agenda 2030 are both off track but they are also interdependent. There won’t be a mitigation of climate change without change of human behavior as it is aimed at by the 2030 Agenda. And, of course, the 2030 Agenda needs climate action (SDG 13).

Why aren’t they merged?
When I asked the question in the 1990s I was told that Climate Change requires a lot of scientific understanding and it is driven by political commitments by signatory states of UNFCC and Paris Agreement. That sounded a bit more like a distinction according to status rather than substantial necessity. After all, without scientific and social science understanding the 2030 Agenda cannot exist either. Also important, this distinction left a deep impression on the work of both strands. For instance, an online session at the Pre-conference of the Toronto Congress on 15 September 2023 organized by ISOCARP in collaboration with the Global Planning Education Association Network (GPEAN) and chaired by Zeynep Enlil (Istanbul, GPEAN and ISOCARP Scientific Committee) revealed that climate change is hardly a subject in curricula of the education of planners. This might be a consequence out of the artificial separation between climate and sustainability policy over three decades. Knowing that climate change has this science and policy making focus and (self-)image planning schools may have turned automatically more towards the broader sustainability planning and, as a side effect, largely ignored climate change.

A change is slowly taking shape. ISOCARP with support of its Scientific Committee is now setting up a Climate Action Group to more closely follow UNFCC and to be present at COP28 in Dubai. And of course, the Congress in Toronto has a change to bring urban planning, climate action and urban finance closer together. I am looking forward to the discussions until 13 October 2023 in Toronto.

Conference website: https://toronto2023.dryfta.com/

Quality of Life and Enhancing Territorial Governance

Tue, 26 Sep 2023 09:46:59 GMT

The International Conference "Centrality in The Age of Dispersion" will be organized by Wrocław University of Science and Technology in collaboration with ISOCARP on Thursday and Friday of this week (28-29/09/2023). The subject of the conference is closely related to concerns of quality of life and on how territorial development is governed. I am very proud that the organizers appointed me to chair two sessions on these important aspects.

In the session on Quality of Living Concerns on 29 September 2023 Constanze Zöllter will discuss attractive places to live in shrinking cities. Moti Kaplan of the Technion Israel Institute will analyse the contribution of linear parks to the regeneration of dense, high quality urban centers. As citizen of a garden city in Berlin I am looking forward to Justyna Kleszcz's presentation on a contemporary vision of a garden city. Other speakers from Olsztyn and Opole will feature the situation of elderly people and health-promoting urban forms.

Promising is also the list of subjects addressed in the session Enhancing Territorial Governance on 29 September. Hans Andersen of Aalborg University will discuss the Dismantling of Regional Planning for the case of Copenhagen. Henry Endemann, Gerhard Bryns and Jörn Bühring of the Hong Kong Polytechnic University will analyse megaregions and megaprojects in China. The following speakers from universities in Germany, Poland and Ukraine will discuss location finders as an analytical tool, community involvement in the fight for clean air in Poland and landscape architecture as a means of formation of an emotionally positive context.

I am looking forward to the conference and hope for inspiring discussions at these and other sessions.

Please find the full programme of the conference here: https://centrality-dispersion.pwr.edu.pl/programm

Conference website: https://centrality-dispersion.pwr.edu.pl/

What would be the cost if we wouldn’t have the United Nations?

Sun, 03 Sep 2023 10:56:46 GMT

September is the month of the UN General Assembly and additional events like the 2023 SDG Summit in New York. There is a lot of critique about the UN and that for good reasons. Intergovernmental Bodies like the Security Council deem to be dis-functional, wars like the one of Russia in Ukraine couldn’t be prevented, inequality and poverty persist.

But did anybody calculate the cost the world would have to cover if there wouldn’t be the UN, with its Intergovernmental Bodies and multiple UN agencies?

Today, it is 15 years ago that I had my first working day as senior advisor at the Secretariat of the United Nations in New York. I stayed more than five years and since 2014 I am working self-employed as independent consultant. Usually, I either work directly for UN agencies or for national and local authorities interested in international development. There are ups and downs. Already in my time in New York I got to know the good, the bad and the ugly side of UN. Working for the UN can be physical pain but I managed to stay committed to the values of the UN. Corona was a difficult time for somebody depending on international meeting and field visits but now I am fully booked and even have additional requests.

The photo on this post is not Photoshopped. In the years since I left the UN more skyscrapers have been built around the UN in Manhattan. The green frame is growing as part of a waterfront park in Long Island City, Queens on the opposite side of the East River. I took the picture in July during the UN High Level Political Forum.

My personal 15th UN anniversary and the opening of the 78th session of the UN General Assembly (UNGA 78) on Tuesday, 5 September 2023 are no reason to party. Nonetheless, I am glad that I put and continue putting my penny into the jar over all those year. I also would like to mention that I have met in all these years to many impressive personalities, professional, integer and engaged UN staffers and hard working people at all levels and in all parts of the world. That alone was worth it. But, yes, a lot needs to be done and a lot needs to be done differently within and around the UN to make multilateral cooperation fit for the purpose to protect peace and security and to assure a sustainable development which leaves no one behind. No easy tasks. It needs all of us but it’s worth the effort because the alternatives -as far as I know them- are not promising anything good for the world.

Nothing good happens unless one does it. (Erich Kästner, German author )

Tinder or United Nations – Whom would you trust more to find a way to save the planet with?

Sun, 16 Jul 2023 18:23:23 GMT

People, planet, prosperity, peace, partnerships and 'leaving no one behind' – all pillars of the UN sustainability agenda are in peril now!

In 2015 the member states of the UN agreed on the 2030 Agenda and 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDG). The 17 SDGs were structured around the five pillars people, planet, prosperity, peace, and partnerships. Well, at mid-point of the SDG implementation in 2023 all five pillars and the promise of the 2030 Agenda to ‘leave no one behind’ are at risk of not being achieved..

In April 2023 the UN Secretary General issued a special report ‘Progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals: Towards a Rescue Plan for People and Planet’. According to a preliminary assessment of around 140 targets with data, only about 12% are on track. Nearly 50% of the targets are moderately or severely off track and approximately 30% have either stagnated or “regressed below the 2015 baseline.” The report puts forward five recommendations to rescue the Sustainable Development Goals and accelerate implementation between now and 2030.

Important is the word ‘towards’ in the title because the report does not describe and agreed rescue plan covering the five Ws: Why, What needs to be done When by Whom and with What means. Instead, it is a policy paper with some suggestions for Member State consideration in advance of the UN SDG Summit in September of this year. Therefore, for the time being the SDG remain without a rescue plan.

Attending a High Level Political Forum on Sustainable Development this month in New York I saw all present senior managers of the UN, representatives of members states and stakeholder organizations agreeing that the SDG implementation show only fragile progress, slow momentum and that many goals are off track. And if the Secretary General as top diplomat of the UN titles his special report ‘Towards a Rescue Plan for People and Planet’ all alarm bells should be ringing. Humanity is in peril and the UN issues a cry for help to save people, planet and with it the UN itself. At the same time UN managers did everything to keep up the mood and demonstrated progress in new projects and initiatives. This is good leadership if admitting delays and motivation for accelerated action and a call for new ideas and initiative go hand in hand.

Tinder recommends swiping as the way to find someone with whom to save the planet

Is it a coincidence or not? While delegates at the UN started discussing the need to save people and planet, the dating platform Tinder started running an advertising campaign in subways of New York offering its own approach on how to save the planet: Go online and find someone on Tinder to save the planet with. Whatever the interest of Tinder in saving the planet may be, they sense that there are many people interested in saving the planet. Of course, they play with people's emotions and suggest to find the right partner for the endevor of saving the planet by swiping through Tinder. Of course, Tinder is not offering to rescue the world but similar to the UN Tinder is proposing a way 'towards' saving the planet. And if that could be achieved by swiping through Tinder that would be an interesting opportunity.

How to get big things done – The High Level Political Forum (HLPF) in New York

To not get frustrated about the state of global governance of sustainable development and to not depend on the offer by Tinder during my current ravel to New York, I brought with me as inspiring travel literature the book by Bent Flyvbjerg and Dan Gardener ‘How Big Things Get Gone – The Surprising Factors Behind Every Successful Project, from Home Renovations to Space Exploration’. To say it straight out, Flyvbjerg is also not recommending the Tinder option, although …. he is a big supporter of testing: try, learn, and do it again. He describes in his book several cases and explains why and how the best solution may need many tests and trial runs in the planning phase (e.g. his chapter on Pixar Planning). And yes, what is not useful he would suggest to swipe it away.

Why? Really? Why do we have the 2030 Agenda?

Flyvbjerg recommends to answer the 5 W questions when planning, implementing and evaluating big projects. And the first and most important is the question Why a project is to be implemented. Flyvbjerg gives the example of the prominent architect Frank Gehry who had the habit of painstakingly digging deep on the question why a new client wants a project. This was not because he didn't want the new contract but he needed to know the real motivation. The planning of a project or policy is mostly not costly compared to construction and implementation but if the motivation for the client is not clear the plan and its implementation may hit the wall by getting over budget, over time and that over and over again.

Okay now, why did the world agree on the SDG? In 2015 when the SDG were approved all supporters said that they want the agenda because the 17 goals are what the world needs. That was idealistic. What they didn’t say is that there remained a plethora of other vested interests of countries, institutions and individuals that just continued to exist and which interfered with the goals of the agenda. In other words, they agreed on the 2030 Agenda but without making it their maxim for acting.

In addition, the 2030 Agenda was approved without establishing implementation structure with respective rules, regulations and ressources. There was a long political process beginning in 2012 that lead to the SDG in 2015 but there was no experience based planning process preparing the implementation. Over the years elements of a plan were developped as in the field of financing for sustainable development but they still lack the necessary commitment. Instead, a kind of a trick was applied by giving no implementation mandate e.g. to the UN. Instead, the implementation of the goals remained within the responsibility of each member state. And most of the work would have to be done at the local level. Unfortunately, local authorities were not included to the decision making at the UN level. Worse, in most countries the implementation of the 2030 Agenda began without a robust planning. In conclusion, it seems correct to note that the implementation of the 2030 Agenda and the SDG has never been planned properly. Therefore, being off track with limited progress and slow momentum shouldn't come as a surprise.

Let’s get back to the drawing board and do big things better by not only organizing new summits but by better planning the implementation

Just to repeat: A preliminary assessment of the roughly 140 SDG targets with data show only about 12% are on track; close to half, though showing progress, are moderately or severely off track and some 30% have either seen no movement or regressed below the 2015 baseline. It's late but it's not too late to go back to the drawing board. Better late than never.

The UN is now preparing an 'SDG Summit' for September 2023 and a second 'Summit of the Future' in September 2024.In preparation the UN is issuing a series of Policy Briefs and the above mentioned report 'Towards a Rescue Plan of the SDGs'. Also, there are new ideas and initiatives and there are engaged people and institutions. That is all great and need to be appreciated. But it is liekely that all this won't be enough. Already now we can see that old mistakes are repeated: The UN is focussing on th epolitical process with two Summits with up to 193 Heads of State as milestones.

Rescuing people and planet is a noble undertaking but as any medical doctor can tell a rescue may include a triage, amputation and reduction of ambitions. Can we afford that and at whose cost would come a reduced focus and ambition? The only way to prevent a weak outcome of the Summits and to agree on goals which leave no one behind would be propper planning for the time after the Summits. Goals should only be agreed it the 5 Ws are answered ahead of the implementation phase. And let's be flexible. The year 2030 is not given by law. Deadlines for goals should be ambitious but realistic.

And where are the people in the process? The 'We, the people' as it famously says in the UN Charter have no place in this process, although it might end with decisions about the approach to rescue people and planet. Flivbjerg refers in his book to the importants of experience including the 'unfrozen experience' of people. In this sense the rescue effort has to be people centred to be succesful.

We cannot swipe the problems away, and UN and member states cannot solve the problems without the support of all people. Of course, 7 or 8 billion people don't fit into the UN General Assembly Hall but there are many other methods and tools to engage citizens. The world is devided in many ways but i n spite of all conflicts, differences and inequality in the world there is at least one point on which all people can agree on: They want to live and they want to live with a decent quality of life. Ask a Russian or Ukraining soldier, ask refugees or people suffering hunger. Of course, the Charter of the UN, the Human Rights Charter and other international agreements list more achievements than just the right and desire to live. These achievements should be preserved but if even the UN sees people and planet in peril international cooperation should set the first priority on assuring that all people including future generations can live on this planet.

Proper planning for the implementation of the existing, an enhanced or a new agenda for development would also be a sign of commitment and that decision makers are serious about rescuing people and planet. Flyvbjerg also calls for a single, determinded organisation. That can be seen as a sign that the UN will be further needed but it may also indicate that the mandate and the overlap of responsibility may need to be reviewed to have a functional organization to assure implementation across the multilevel system of governance. As last recommendation from Flyvbjerg I would like to highlight his suggestion to think from the right to the left, i.e. to first think about what exactly is aimed at (the famous Why question) and that to design the steps leading to the goal.

And yes, if you, dear reader, should hesitate to fight on your own you may use a dating platform to team up with someone to save the planet with. Alternatively, you may as well attend UN meetings, join civil society organizations or research groups studying how to best rescue people and planet. There are everywhere people ready to get engaged for life on this planet. They have shown before that big things get done and I belief that together we will be able to demonstrate this again now.

How to get big things done – The High Level Political Forum (HLPF) in New York

Tue, 11 Jul 2023 09:08:41 GMT

This year the HLPF, the UN's apex on the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) is part of the preparation for the UN SDG Summit in September 2023 and the Summit of the Future next year.That provides a structure for political dialogues but this alone might just produce another political agenda without rescuing the current development agenda. Certainly, it needs political will and decision making but also an appropriate implementation structure. Thus, maybe the best preparation for the UN summits is not to prepare the events but to look beyond them and plan goal implementation and achievement. That shouldn’t be too complicate. For instance, just follow the 5 W approach:

What needs to be done?

Why?

When?

Who should do what?

With what means should the agreed goals be achieved?

That could lead to a real and realistic plan.

The 2030 Agenda and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) were agreed in 2015 without a clear implementation plan (e.g. answering the 5 W questions) and local stakeholders who are expected to deliver a major part of work had only a marginal role. Consequently, now there is not the one person or institutions to blame for the delay of the SDG and from whom to expect a solution. Instead, thousands of national delegates and experts will meet in New York between 10 and 19 August at the HLPF and at other conferences looking for solutions. It seems that the world is relying on swarm intelligence when it comes to existential questions of the future of humanity.

I am now on my way to New York and wonder how I can put my penny into the jar at HLPF in a meaningful way. To not rely on swarm intelligence only, I have chosen as travel literature the book by Bent Flyvbjerg and Dan Gardener ‘How Big Things Get Gone – The Surprising Factors Behind Every Successful Project, from Home Renovations to Space Exploration’. Flyvbjerg is professor at the University of Oxford. He has a strong record in advising and analyzing big and mega projects. I doubt that he sees a mainly political process inspired by swarm intelligence as the best way to achieve goals. But let’s see what he writes and what happens at HLPF.

Read also the report by IISD Earth Negotiation Bulletin on the opening of the HLPF ' Highlights and images for 10 July 2023'

https://enb.iisd.org/high-level-political-forum-hlpf-2023-10jul23?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ENB%20Update%20-%2011%20July%202023&utm_content=ENB%20Update%20-%2011%20July%202023+CID_e1752b3bab7af3e5c61060e5904f9ae1&utm_source=cm&utm_term=Read%20highlights%20and%20images

The Quality of Life Initiative at HLPF

Fri, 07 Jul 2023 07:31:35 GMT

Concept note for the Side event at the HLPF in New York on 14 July 2023

The Quality of Life Initiative: At the heart of the SDG Rescue Plan for People and Planet

The 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) aim to end poverty, protect the planet and ensure that, by 2030, all people enjoy peace and prosperity. If achieved, nearly all 169 targets will contribute to improving the quality of life of people and communities. It is in this context, that UN-Habitat has launched the Quality of Life Initiative. With the support of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and other Member States the Initiative will help local governments and other policy-makers to make clear, informed decisions for the well-being of people and the implementation of the SDGs.

SDGs off track
Halfway towards the 2030 deadline, many countries are falling behind their global commitments. The slow progress has been exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic, conflicts, rising food and energy prices and climate-related disasters. Some successes have been recorded, such as the reduction of extreme poverty and child mortality, improvements in gender equality and access to electricity. However, many others are off track or have even gone backwards. Only 12 per cent of the 140 SDG targets with data are on track; close to half are moderately or severely off track, and around 30 per cent have seen no movement or regression below the 2015 baseline.

Cities hold the key to achieving the SDGs

The theme of this HLPF is Accelerating the recovery from COVID-19 and the full implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development at all levels. The UN-Secretary-General has called for a rescue plan for the SDGs and clearly, any such plan needs to put cities and towns at the front. Today more than half the world’s population live in cities, and by 2050, seven of every 10 people will reside in urban areas. As host to most of the world’s population, cities have a significant impact on the realization of SDGs and nearly two-thirds of the SDGs targets have urban components.

Notably, countries are also failing to reach the SDG 11 on inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable cities Only 10 per cent of the targets are on track to be fully met. This is reflected in growing informal settlement populations, the fact that only half of urban residents have convenient access to public transport, and a fifth have no municipal solid waste collection. More than three-quarters of cities have less than 20 per cent of their area dedicated to open public spaces and streets. This poor delivery compromises the quality of life of people. Clearly the well-being of over half the world’s population depends on achieving SDG11 and the other urban-centric goals.

Quality of Life Initiative – a tool for rescuing Cities and the SDGs

Clearly local governments, communities and development partners must implement sustainable community-based actions in support of people’s well-being. The questions are – how do they know which are the most important, cost effective, transformative actions, and how can they monitor progress?

Based on the Urban Monitoring Framework, the Quality of Life Initiative is a powerful tool to realize SDG implementation at a local level. The Initiative will be used as an evidence base for stakeholders in urban settlements to optimise policies and investments to make cities and towns safer, more inclusive, resilient, and sustainable.

A Rescue Plan for People and Planet and the Quality of Life Project

The UN Secretary-General’s Rescue Plan proposes major recommendations that are necessary breakthroughs for SDGs to play an important role in the remaining seven years of implementation. Many of these recommendations are strongly connected to the Quality of Life Initiative, including:

•   Delivering promises based on a new people-centric approach
The UN Secretary-General has called for a global alliance for SDG action between local authorities, business, civil society and other development partners, including national governments, to deliver the Rescue Plan for People and Planet. The Quality of Life Initiative will contribute to this, using a data-driven approach that puts people in its focus.

•   Bridging the data gap
The advancement of data for many targets and goals has had a direct impact on the formulation of evidence-based policies and the quality of life of people. Unfortunately, this is not the case for Goal 11, which, at 60 percent, has the highest proportion of insufficient data, with significant gaps in geographic coverage, timeliness, and disaggregation.
The Quality of Life Initiative will redress this by drawing on new and established data, analysis, visualization and dissemination of information. Data from the Initiative will help close the information gap and, in doing so, help improve quality of life.

•   Accelerating, and sustaining transformative action to deliver on the SDG promise
The UN Secretary-General calls for the strengthening of social cohesion to secure dignity, opportunity and rights for all. The inclusion of individual and community views, concerns and preferences in decision-making is a fundamental component of the Quality of Life Initiative. The Quality of Life Initiative can make sustainable development more responsive and relevant to local needs and ensure no one is left behind.

•   Advancing concrete, integrated and targeted policies and actions to eradicate poverty, reduce inequality and end the war on nature
This recommendation calls for the expansion of social protection floors and access to essential services, creating job opportunities, responding to education and the advancement of gender equality, as well as leveraging digital technologies to close divides. These are all critical aspects of quality of life. The adoption of a territorial approach to SDG policies can help to prioritize the Goals through integrated responses and better management of budgets at local level.
Local authorities, the communities they serve and by other tiers of government and partners, will be able to leverage the Initiative to redefine their policies and actions, and ensure promises are delivered.

•   Strengthen national and sub-national capacity, accountability and public institutions to deliver accelerated SDG progress

Local and sub-national governments must be empowered and supported to bring SDG implementation to the local level. Localization, anchored on the principle of multilevel governance, and multistakeholder collaboration and supported through national urban policies, is recognized as a key approach to collectively propel the world towards greater inclusion and sustainability.

The Quality of Life Initiative will contribute to increasing the autonomy of local governments, reinforcing multi-stakeholder consultation processes about the society, the economy and the physical environment, and identifying challenges and opportunities for local implementation. It will help accelerate SDG delivery and positively reshape multi-level governance arrangements.

The Quality of Life Initiative side event
The side event will examine many of these recommendations in the context of the Quality of Life Initiative, including:
1.   Promoting quality of of life as lens through which SDG goals will be addressed
2.   Tackling data gaps in understanding how our cities are sustainably servicing the needs of people.
3.   Balancing the needs of people with the planet
4.   Leveraging the power of all tiers of government and all scales of business and the community to succeed with Agenda 2030.

Speakers

Hon. Zacharia Mwangi Njeru , Cabinet Secretary, The Ministry of Lands, Public Works, Housing and Urban Development, Kenya
Ambassador Giovanna Valverde Stark , Ambassador of Costa Rica in Kenya and PR to UN agencies, UNEP and UN-Habitat
Ms. Norah Alyusuf, Senior Advisor, Quality of Life Program Center, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
Mr. Mauricio Rodas , Former Mayor of Quito, Ecuador
Ms. Norlizah Hashim , Chief Executive, Urbanice Malaysia, Ministry of Housing and Local Government, Malaysia
Dr. Sukaina Abdul Ilah Al-Nasrawi, Social Affairs Officer, Sustainable Urban Development Lead, United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia
Mr. Mihir Prakash , Technical Team, The Quality of Life Initiative, UN-Habitat

Moderator

Dr. Ayman Elhefnawi , Team leader for the UN-Habitat Office in Saudi Arabia

The Quality of Life Initiative (2023-2025) is strategically defined and governed by a joint team from UN-Habitat and the Quality of Life Program Center, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, and supported by various other countries. This initiative is implemented by UN-Habitat, which is mandated by the UN General Assembly to promote socially and environmentally sustainable towns and cities.

For more information contact
Ms. Norah Alyusuf, Senior Advisor, Quality of Life Program Center, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia nalyusuf@qol.gov.sa
Dr. Ayman Elhefnawi, Team leader for the UN-Habitat Office in Saudi Arabia - ayman.elhefnawi@un.org
Dr Ulrich Graute, Institutional Leader – ulrich.graute@un.org

Activities of International City Associations and UN Agencies in Support of Ukraine

Mon, 12 Jun 2023 10:05:05 GMT

The Pact of Free Cities

Website of the Pact of Cities (https://www.pactoffreecities.com/)

Last week when I got ready to follow the 2nd UN-Habitat Assembly in Nairobi from my Berlin office I realized that the mayor of my home town wasn't going to Nai robi but to Warsaw. I became curious and started a research. Kai Wegner, the new Governing Mayor of Berlin visited Berlin's partner city Warsaw and there he attended the conference of the Pact of Free Cities - an association of now 34 cities founded by the Mayors of the Visegrad Four capitals (Warsaw, Prague, Bratislava and Budapest) in 2019. It is a global network of cities determined to stand up for progressive values and fight against nationalistic populism.

The website of the association states: 'In the past few decades, cities re-emerged as hubs for progressive policies and pragmatic problem-solvers, positioning themselves against the reluctance, inability or slowness of national governments to rise to global challenges. The Pact of Free Cities has been created to highlight the growing importance of cities in preserving and protecting democracy and open society. The vision for the Pact is to build a value-driven mayoral network, agile to adapt to the ever-changing political environment and bring about meaningful change.' (https://www.pactoffreecities.com/). Member cities include Berlin, Paris, Gdansk, Rome, Vienna, Kyiv, Gdnask, Barcelona and Brussels but also Los Angeles and Taipei. The Berlin mayor was impressed by the dialogues and solidarity but also shocked when all of the sudden on the phones of the Ukrainian mayors an air defence alarm sounded.

[1] Der Tagesspiegel, 6 June 2023: https://epaper.tagesspiegel.de//webreader-v3/index.html#/479992/44-45

Berlin's new Governing Mayor Kai Wegner in Warsaw on 5 June 2023

Global Declaration of Mayors for Democracy

The Pact of Free Cities is not the only initiative of cities and mayors in support of Ukraine, freedom and democracy. One of the outstanding initiatives is a collaborative effort of the Global Parliament of Mayors, the Pact of Free Cities, and GMF Cities agreed already in March 2023 on a Global Declaration of Mayors for Democracy. By end of April 2023 it already was signed by 249 mayors. [2, 3, 4, 5]

PREAMBLE

In recognition of the critical role cities play in strengthening, advancing, and adapting democracy on-the-ground every day;

Inspired by the robust initiative and cooperation of the mayors of Budapest, Bratislava, Prague, and Warsaw, who saw the growth of illiberal forces eroding democracy in their respective countries, and came together to develop and sign the Pact of Free Cities in 2019, committing themselves to govern in steady alignment with the values of democracy;

In solidarity with cities around the world, including in Ukraine, who are defending the rights of individuals, communities, cities, and nations to determine their own democratic futures;

In recognition of the essential role of democratic transformation to encourage sustainable development, address the climate emergency and deliver on the Sustainable Development Goals; and

In appreciation for the global Summit for Democracy (December 2021) and
emanating from the commitments of mayors at its Mayors Delivering Democracy Daily event, and to propel this year-of-action forward to the next Summit for Democracy;

In a collaborative effort with the Global Parliament of Mayors, GMF Cities, and the Pact of Free Cities;

Today, we mayors join together to advance the following Global Declaration of Mayors for Democracy.

[2] GMF Citis of the Global Marshall Fund of the United States: https://www.gmfus.org/gmf-cities

[3] Global Parliament of Mayors: https://globalparliamentofmayors.org/

[4] Global Declaration of Mayors for Democracy: https://www.gmfus.org/sites/default/files/2023-01/GDMD.pdf

[5] Signatories of the Global Declaration of Mayors: https://www.gmfus.org/sites/default/files/2023-06/Signers.%20Global%20Declaration%20of%20Mayors%20for%20Dem.pdf

UN agencies committed to promoting equitable urbanisation, including in Ukraine

UN-Habitat's scoping mission to foster support activities

The United Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN-Habitat) carried out a first Scoping Mission to Ukraine already between 2–14 October 2022. A total of 38 meetings were conducted with a variety of stakeholders in Kyiv and Chernihiv oblasts.

The main findings of the scoping mission are:

1. UN-Habitat can support more area-based and integrated assessments of physical and human impact of
the war, using its urban expertise and its urban profiling approach informed by digital data platforms,
tailored to the local contexts. This should support the short-term emergency and longer-term recovery and
returns, where possible and needed.

2. UN-Habitat can support the development of urban recovery frameworks, as a backbone for the complex
local and regional recovery planning called for by the government, helping to sustain decentralisation
gains made and aligning also bottom-up urban recovery efforts with nationally driven recovery planning.

3. The focus should be on the smaller hromadas that have less capacity and experience. Technical support
is best pooled into municipal support units, anchored in pre-war capacity building efforts, that can cover
multiple localities, allowing for live learning and knowledge sharing including with the better capacitated
bigger cities. A key contribution lies also in providing urban planning support, working closely with
networks of Ukrainian professionals.

4. The above requires an in-country presence of UN-Habitat as soon as possible. A wide range of potential
partnerships have been identified that would allow for nimble and efficient operations, adding
international expertise only where needed.

Currently, a larger project is in preparation by UN-Habitat.

[6] UN-Habitat Scoping mission to Ukraine: https://unhabitat.org/sites/default/files/2022/11/ukraine_mission_report_oct22_public.pdf

UNECE is stepping up support for Kharkiv and Mykolaiv

United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) officially kicked-off on 5 June 2023 its UN4UkrainianCities project “UN4UkrainianCities: Enhancing urban planning in the cities of Kharkiv and Mykolaiv in Ukraine by supporting to the implementation of the new master plans and facilitating investments in sustainable urban infrastructure”.

Since April 2022, at the request of the Ministry of Development of Communities, Territories and Infrastructure, UNECE has been implementing two pilot projects in Kharkiv and Mykolaiv. The UN4Kharkiv and UN4Mykolaiv Task Forces, coordinated by UNECE and bringing together 16 UN entities and international organisations, have so far supported the work of international and Ukrainian architects, engineers and other experts in the development of draft reconstruction Master Plans for the two cities.

Scaled-up under the broader UN4UkrainianCities initiative, the support to be rolled out between June 2023 and the end of 2024 will take this work forward with a view to “operationalize” the reconstruction efforts after the end of the war and to facilitate investment in sustainable urban infrastructure. This will be supported by USD 5 million funding by the German Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ) and supported by the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH. These efforts will help the cities to “build back better” following a balanced, evidence-based, participatory approach that links emergency and long-term strategic objectives. [7]

The project will comprise five components:

Support to revisions of the national policy framework for the integrated urban planning; and development of an online platform containing a Toolbox for reconstruction of Ukrainian cities
Economic and social assessment: impact survey-based assessment of the socio-economic impact of the war on Kharkiv and Mykolaiv
Formulation of pilot projects and identification of investors: Support to the implementation of reconstruction master plans for Kharkiv and Mykolaiv
Capacity building and public involvement in planning rebuilding of the cities
Monitoring of implementation and investments: development of an investment tracker.

[7] UNECE press release: https://unece.org/media/Housing-and-Land-Management/press/379482

And all this is happening while the destruction of the Russian war against Ukraine is going on and people are killed.

Ending Yemen’s Long Conflict as a Call for Urban Planning and Development - The State of the Yemeni Cities

Sun, 04 Jun 2023 09:14:53 GMT

Serious Opportunity for Ending Yemen’s Long Conflict

The recent normalisation of relations between Saudi Arabia and Iran has provided welcome impetus also towards peace in Yemen.At a UN Security Council meeting in April 2023 Hans Grundberg, Special Envoy of the Secretary-General for Yemen, said that the country is experiencing the longest period of relative calm yet in this ruinous war, with food, fuel and other commercial ships flowing into Hudaydah. He pointed to the recent agreement in Switzerland ‑ under the auspices of the United Nations and the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) ‑ to release almost 900 conflict-related detainees from all sides. “The emotional scenes of the detainees being released over the last few days demonstrated the power of peaceful negotiations,” he said, noting that the release operations reunited hundreds of Yemeni families. However, “escalation can quickly reverse hard-won gains”, unless the parties take bolder steps towards peace, he warned, stressing that Yemenis still live with unimaginable hardship every day. There is still a long way to go to UN-mediated political talks between the conflicting sides and a possibility of peace in the country. However, when that comes authorities have to be ready to work on recovery of the country and its cities. A starting point on this way may be the engagement of UN-Habitat in the country and the State of the Yemeni Cities report produced during the ongoing war and under conditions of the Corona pandemic.

https://press.un.org/en/2023/sc15258.doc.htm

State of the Yemeni Cities

UN-Habitat established presence in Yemen in 2018. The UN agency is focusing on helping the most vulnerable, most affected population in a number of cities to rehabilitate damaged housing and community infrastructure facilities and systems. In addition, it worked on city profiling and compiled already in 2020 data for a State of the Yemeni Cties Report.

According to the publication the State of Ye men Cities is intended as a source of information on the current state of Yemeni cities, and as a starting point for a further structured process for support and engagement with national and local partners to set urban priorities and programming goals moving forward. The information and analysis in the report contribute towards a diagnostic, or shared understanding, of key challenges, gaps, capacities, and areas of opportunities in Yemeni cities. The report provides a foundation for identifying immediate, medium, and longer-term urban needs and priorities in a holistic manner for conflict-resolution, reconstruction, recovery, and transformation.

The report builds on city level analysis conduc ted by the Universities of Aden and Sana’a as well as the seven UN-Habitat City Profiles developed for the following cities: Aden, Al Hawtah, Al Hodeidah Sa’dah, Sana’a, Ta’iz, and Zinjibar. The City Profiles were produced in parallel to this report, and provide insight into the political, social, and economic conditions on a city and sub-city level. Whereas the State of Yemen Cities gives a cross-city and overarching analysis drawing on the information from the City Profiles, the City Profiles should be consulted for more granular information on specific cities. Many of the cities are facing the same key challenges and constraints, but the analysis in the State of Yemen Cities report also suggests how and why the conflict and systems’ shocks are produced or manifests differently across cities.

Destroyed area in Taiz (UN-Habitat 2020)

Reparation works in Sana’a (UN-Habitat 2020)

Towards a Urban Recovery Framework

Of course, the report with its data compiled mainly in 2 020 is no blueprint for development. Given the pervasive information gaps and unreliable data for Yemen, including very limited urban-specific data available, the report should not be read as a comprehensive overview of urban challenges or needs in Yemen. The analysis does, however, provide important insight into the situation in Yemeni cities, and serves to highlight areas to focus potential interventions and further investigations.

The two key contributors to the report, teams at the University of Sana’a and the University of Aden have developed analysis on ten selected cities the report focuses on. The universities contributions have been developed by researchers within their respective fields, building on their insight and knowledge of the Yemen context as well as unpublished academic material to create two technical versions of the report. These technical versions report developed by the University of Aden and Sana’a have been verified by a number of city and government officials and sector experts. Three consultants have then synthesized the material of the technical versions and city profiles into one report. Having served as one of the three consultants I am aware of the challenges to work home based in Germany during Corona with limited possibilities to collect additional data on the situation in Yemeni cities.

The State of Yemen Cities is intended as a source of information on the current state of Yemeni cities, and as a starting point for a further structured process for support and engagement with national and local partners to set urban priorities and programming goals moving forward. The information and analysis in the report contribute towards a diagnostic, or shared understanding, of key challenges, gaps, capacities, and areas of opportunities in Yemeni cities.

The Urban Recovery Framework (URF) is an enabling institutional and policy framework including related programming to support resilient urban recovery at scale, and the renewal of the social contract. Contrary to most post-crisis tools, which are organized on purely sectoral lines without recognising their inter-dependence in urban areas, the URF recognizes the need for both immediate response and longer-term adaptive and transformative measures in localised response in cities, based on needs, gaps, and priorities. The State of Yemen Cities provides a foundation for identifying immediate, medium, and longer-term urban needs and priorities in a holistic manner for conflict-resolution, reconstruction, recovery, and transformation and as such it represents the first step in a larger consultative and collaborative process to develop an URF for Yemeni cities. Obviously, such an URF is needed now at a moment where there is a se rious opportunity for ending Yemen’s long conflict.

Visit also UN-Habitat's Urban Data Portal Yemen. https://yemenportal.unhabitat.org/

New at the UN: A dialogue on quality of life and a framework to progress beyond the GDP

Fri, 26 May 2023 06:19:31 GMT

Valuing What Counts: Framework to Progress Beyond Gross Domestic Product

Based on the his report Our Common Agenda' the UN Secretary General Antonio Gutiérrez in May 2023 presented proposals to help to develop a universal and comprehensive measurement of progress and sustainable development to complement GDP. There are three concrete recommendations for Member States to consider:

a) A renewed political commitment to create a conceptual framework that can accurately “value what counts” for people,
the planet and the future, anchored in the 2030 Agenda and the commitment set out therein to leave no one behind;

b) The elaboration of a robust technical and scientific process, informed by sound and disaggregated data, resulting
in a United Nations value dashboard of a limited number of key indicators that go beyond GDP;

c) A major capacity-building and resourcing initiative to enable Member States to use the new framework effectively.

You can find all published and upcoming Policy Briefs related to the Common Agenda of the Secretary general following this link: https://lnkd.in/ekGKBYif

Quality of Life Initiative: Putting people at the heart of transformative change

With his Policy Brief 'Valuing What Counts: Framework to Progress Beyond Gross Domestic Product' the UN Secretary General Antonio Gutiérrez recalled in May 2023 the need to discuss quality of life and its measurement beyond the traditional GDP because the latter is too limited in capturing all elements of quality of life of people. Now UN-Habitat follows with a new Quality of Life Initiative.

The new Initiative will go public at the UN-Habitat Assembly in June 2023 in Nairobi with a policy-oriented discussion at a special Side Event. It will aim to promote a people-centred Quality of Life approach in the governance of cities that improves individuals’ and communities’ lives while contributing to the implementation of global agendas. Speakers from the United Nations, Saudi Arabia, Spain, South Korea and Australia will contribute to the launch of this global dialogue.

Read more about the UN-Habiat Assembly here: https://unhabitat.org/governance/un-habitat-assembly/second-session-2023

and find the Side Event 23 announcement here: https://unhabitat.org/sites/default/files/2023/05/se_23.pdf

Centrality in the Age of Dispersions

Thu, 23 Feb 2023 19:23:23 GMT

Wrocław University of Science and Technology 28-29.09.2023.
Paper proposal now with new deadline on 30. April 2023

Centrality - Dispersion: Call for Conference Papers now open!

ISOCARP is suppporting the International Conference 'Centrality in the Age of Dispersion' at Wrocław University of Science and Technology 28-29.09.2023. As member of the Conference's Scientific Committee I am happy to inform that the call for papers is now open!

Human settlement has always evolved around centres. Be it ancient Greek polis or 20th century neighbourhoods – each of them focused various human activities and formed a specific node in the geographical space. Changes in settlement structures were considered to be hierarchical and evolutionary. Those natural concentration mechanisms are undermined by various dispersion processes, having multiscalar and temporal character, and thus undermining the well-established settlement structures.

Network society, demographic transitions, global economy, instant communication, teleworking, online services – among others – challenge the urban planning paradigms all over the world.
- What is the current centrality/dispersion balance in urban development?
- What is special about centrality and dispersion today?
- How to proceed with spatial management and urban decision-making in this complex and unstable environment?

The conference aims to address the demand for a new approach in planning by gathering experts from various scientific disciplines who will present their research on urban centres and discuss the possible solutions to dispersion effects.

MAIN THEMES
   MEASUREMENT
   DESIGNING URBAN AND SUBURBAN CENTRES
   MODELS AND PARADIGMS
   SPATIAL PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT
   GEOGRAPHY AND ECONOMY OF URBAN CENTRES
   THE POWER OF COMMUNITIES
   GLOBAL CHALLENGES

Conference website: https://centrality-dispersion.pwr.edu.pl/conference

New ISOCARP Scientific Committee 2023-2025

Tue, 07 Feb 2023 08:31:35 GMT

The Scientific Committee of ISOCARP plays a critical role in enabling the Society to present city and regional planners in internal and international debates and policy-making for some of the greatest challenges of our times. The aims of the Scientific Committee are:

To assist the Society to remain at the forefront of planning thinking and practice.
To provide substantive opinion that helps the Board and the Secretariat to continue to shape
ISOCARP's proactive and progressive agenda of sustainable urbanisation and territorial develooment.
To provide evidence-based analysis that enables the Society to make public contributions to international debates on critical issues related to cities and regions.
To support the aims and objectives of the Society as set out in its Constitution.

The Scientific Committee is appointed to advise on major technical planning issues with professional and academic integrity and competence. Members provide substantive opinion to shape ISOCARP's proactive and progressive agenda, provide evidence-based analysis to enable Society contributions to international debates, and ensure ISOCARP remains at the forefront of planning thinking and practice. The new Scientific Committee will serve a 3-year period, 2023-2025. The Committees tasked by its Terms of Reference (ToR).

For more info visit the website of ISOCARP: https://isocarp.org/

Announcement of the 59th ISOCARP World Planning Congress (WPC59) in Toronto, Canada

Wed, 25 Jan 2023 12:19:50 GMT

As Chair of the ISCOCARP Scientific Committee I am delighted to announce that in partnership with Urban Economy Forum (UEF), ISOCARP - International Society of City and Regional Planners will organize the joint Urban Economy Forum 5 (UEF5) and 59th ISOCARP World Planning Congress (WPC59) in Toronto, Canada.

“For Climate Change, Urban Finance. Climate-responsive Planning for Equitable Places & Communities” will be a unique global joint hybrid conference, taking place 10-13 October 2023 in inspiring places such as Regent Park and the World Urban Pavilion powered by Daniels.

Our common ambition is to bring together city leaders, academia, multi-level government representatives, NGOs, local organisations and the civil society, entrepreneurs, financiers and planning professionals for a much-needed cross-sectoral dialogue and knowledge co-production on shaping climate-responsive and equitable places and communities in a rapidly and largely unplanned urbanizing world.

UEF5+WPC59 will focus on the key role of urban finance and climate-responsive planning in promoting sustainable development against the backdrop of an increasingly complex global multi-crisis.
Please reserve the dates, arrange for Canada visas soon and stay tuned for more information here: bit.ly/3R7k4zu

Measuring the impact of capacity building and advisory services on sustainable urban development

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Tue, 13 Dec 2022 10:38:30 GMT

United Nations Country Team & King Abdullah Financial District KAFD | كافد sign a Letter of Understanding to enhance engagement with the Sustainable Development Goals .

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/un-in-saudi-arabia_sustainabledevelopmentgoals-2030agenda-sdgs-activity-7008071834336178176-A9iH?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop

The challenge of measuring the impact of capacity building and advisory services

School teachers have the advantage that they can observe the growth of their students in the course of years. If you move around the world, do a lot of networking and provide advisory services and training courses in many countries and for different organizations this is more difficult. In my early career I was responsible for a network of research institutes in Central and Eastern Europe and I soon learned that the impact of one network event may not be necessarily visible at the next event. Instead, one of the participants may share his experience of an event with colleagues at home and it's them who pick up an idea and implement it. Thus, the impact may occure outside of the closer network, classroom or group of clients. Output and results can be measured at the end of an activity. The impact is more difficult to trace but it offers also the opportunities for unforeseen learning effects.

Since more than 10 years I am in and out of Saudi Arabia providing advisory services to governmental authorities on national and urban development. The Saudi learning and development curve used to be slow but in recent years it is gaining a lot of traction.

In June 2022 the United Nations (UN-Habitat and UNDP) and the Ministry of Municipal and Rural Affairs (MOMRA) provided two transformative training courses on sustainable and inclusive urban development in Riyadh. Participants were 27 urban planners from across Saudi Arabia. As team of trainers (Frank D'hondt. Ulrich Graute and Youssef Diab) we put a focus on self-learning and co-learning of the planners who attended both training modules. A lot of time was spent e.g. visiting, analysing and discussing the King Abdullah Financial District KAFD in Riyadh. Participants identified in their closing presentation several deficits and challenges for a sustainable development of the district and its neighbourhoods (see training report attached below).

Of course, the management of KAFD was aware of our visits and took note of the results which were presented at MOMRA. We as trainers hope that the training will have an impact on future planning work by participants in their cities. What we didn't expect was that just half a year after our training KAFD would sign a Letter of Understanding with the UN Country Team to enhance engagement with the Sustainable Development Goals in the further develeopment of the financial district and its neighbourhood relations. Well, the signing of an agreement between the two organizations is no formal prove of an impact of our training. There were also other activities during this year. However, the signing of the Letter of Understanding of organizations related and aware of our training is a sign that the interest in sustainable development is growing and that our training courses may have contributed to trigger this development. It may be a small step and one of the unexpected learning impacts but it's certainly a sign of hope.

ANNEX

In June 2022, the team of trainers (Frank D'hondt. Ulrich Graute and Youssef Diab) put a focus on self-learning and co-learning of the 27 planners who attended both modules. The attached report tries with its text and pictures to feature how the new generation of urban planners in Saudi Arabia is getting ready for a more sustainable urban development. The report also includes a summary of the evaluation of the training. The Training was organized by MOMRAH and delivered by UN-Habitat and UNDP in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

Chairing the scientific committee of a member-led global organisation with the vision of making cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Sat, 03 Dec 2022 12:40:02 GMT

A few days ago Pietro Elisei, President of the International Society of City and Regional Planners ISOCARP asked me to take the lead and chair the Scientific Committee of ISOCARP over the upcoming years. And to the appointment message he added meaningfully ‘Do the right thing! Good luck!’ In this post I reflect a bit on what that suggestion could mean in times of multiple interrelated crises where there is high pressure on urban and territorial development.

The Scientific Committee of ISOCARP is appointed usually for a period of three years to advise on major technical planning issues with professional and academic integrity and competence. Members provide substantive opinion to shape ISOCARP’s proactive and progressive agenda, provide evidence-based analysis to enable Society contributions to international debates, and ensure ISOCARP remains at the forefront of planning thinking and practice. Since 1965, the Society with its currently 700+ individual and about 40 institutional members brings together researchers and practitioners from more than 90 countries with the vision to make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable through integrative participatory urban and territorial planning. Considering that current multiple and interrelated crises make more apparent the need for better coordination, cooperation, planning and development, ISOCARP is the ideal melting pot of disciplines, ideas and cultures to grow up to such a development challenge with an integrated and participative approach. And the Scientific Committee should be a key element on that path within the Society. One is tempted to call ISOCARP an ecosystem but there is certainly no closed system. Instead, ISOCARP rather is an open market for ideas, different opinions and joint work to identify better theoretic and practical approaches for integrated, inclusive and sustainable urban and regional planning. Are you already a member? If not, consider joining today.

What the challenge and opportunity of such a diverse community means I learnt already in a crash course as junior researcher. In the 1990s, I was scientific editor of the publication series IÖR-Schriften at the Dresden based German Leibniz Institute of Ecological Urban and Regional Development (IÖR) where at the time about 90 researchers from a dozen different disciplines worked. Shortly after the German unification it was an exciting place for researchers from the East and the West and I got to know the full diversity of national and international academics in the field of urban and regional research and planning:

Dr. Petzold, the Founding Director of the IÖR was an architect who loved to focus on design aspects of whatever paper I had to review. Geographers are often also visually oriented and at the IÖR they tended to present their papers by focussing on explaining the legend of maps. In contrast, social scientists rarely had figures and instead, they were proud on their papers often overladen with dense text and complicated and multi-clause sentences. Planning engineers at the institute had again different approaches and some loved to substitute words in their text by mathematical symbols like > or < (in addition to their affection for formulas). Biologists inspired me with their knowledge about frog habitats in cities and lawyers struggled with legal challenges of cross-border institution building e.g. for cross-border natural parks. Their challenge was that all their papers had to be reviewed by me before publcation. My challenge was to read, listen to them and suggest improvements which they could agree on and helped to develop the reputation of the institute.

In those years at the IÖR I got to know, understand and work with many different disciplines and personalities. To describe this time as a broadening of my horizon would be an understatement. Instead, it was mind-blowing and changed the focus of my own professional career: Although, I officially belong to the discipline of political science I practically developped more into a bridge builder between disciplines and an interface manager in the multi-level system of governance. Or, as it meaningfully says on my vising card and website an ‘International Urban and Regional Development Expert’.

Orchestrating dialog and exchange on urban and regional research and planning

I recall the time in Dresden and could add other periods of my professional life in this post because with their diversity and ambitions they have prepared me for my new role as Chair of the Scientific Committee of ISOCARP.

What exactly will be the right thing to do is difficult to say in advance but I am certainly looking forward to embark on an intensive and inspiring journey together with academics and professionals from around the world. As Chair I will be primus inter pares (first among equals). Not more. Not less. Of course, an important limitation of the work stems from the fact that all members of the Committee fulfil their role in addition to other professional obligations and without payment. At the same time this diversity of backgrounds and affiliations offers a high potential for synergy and complementary of work. The better I inspire and empower others the more ISOCARP will benefit from the work of its Scientific Committee.

It is part of the Committee tasks to support the Society, e.g. its Board and Congress Committee. The Scientific Committee drafts Congress declarations and supports juries of ISOCARP Awards like the Gerd Albers Award. By the way, when I worked at the IÖR in Dresden in the 1990s Gerd Albers was Chair of the Scientific Advisory Board of the Institute. He was one of those who inspired me to think and work beyond borders of academic disciplines.

In addition to these support activities the Committee will stimulate dialogue and exchange within and beyond the Society through own papers and other contributions. For instance, it could be interesting if the Committee would organize at the next World Planning Congress in Toronto in fall 2023 a Panel Discussion on ‘The Science of Planning’ to review the contribution of academic work to the development of planning and sustainable cities and regions. The Scientific Committee could better understand after such a session where are the best opportunities for the Scientific Committee to support other ISOCARP activities. Other interesting themes to work on are ‘The planning system we need’ or a comparative analysis and discussion on what different trends in urban and regional planning in different regions of the world can learn from each other. In addition, the Committee should cooperate with other organizations like the Regional Studies Association (RSA) or the Global Planning Education Association Network (GPEAN).

However, I won’t develop the programme of work alone. Instead, I’m starting right now consultations with Committee members and other academics and professionals to jointly identify the priorities for our work in upcoming years. A proposal will then be discussed with the Board of ISOCARP. Probably within the next few weeks we’ll also launch a global call for additional members of the Scientific Committee. Academic and practical excellence will be important selection criteria. Other criteria will include regional and gender representativeness. And based on my own professional experience at the IÖR, EU, UN and in many countries I’ll put major emphasis on inspiring discussion and cooperation among different members of the Committee, the Society at large and the wider community of academics and practitioners. Expectations on a scientific committee should always be realistic but if we are lucky, develop a productive way of cooperation and outreach ISOCARP’s Scientific Committee can orchestrate dialogue and provide basis and impetus for pioneering innovations in the development of integrated, inclusive and sustainable cities and regions. The extended version of ISOCARP's Scientific Committee is in anyway the full dynamism of ISOCARP's 700+ members.

For more info on ISOCARP please read the 2022 Congress Declaration (download below) and visit the website of ISOCARP https://isocarp.org/

Burning patience and inspiration needed to get us of the highway to climate hell!

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Thu, 10 Nov 2022 14:44:53 GMT

Art By lVlorf3us; https://www.deviantart.com/

Keep calm and steady on - while things may get worse, before they become better

We are on a highway to climate hell with our foot still on the accelerator

While the push back of the global pandemic allowed a certain return to pre-corona normality the world is stilled face by developing multiple and interrelated crises including pandemic, climate crisis, wars, inequality etc. Related to this, global goals like the United Nation’s Agenda 2030 with its Sustainable Development Goals SDG, the Paris Agreement with its climate goals or the New Urban Agenda in response to a globally urbanizing world are derailed. In front of this background the UN Secretary-General António Guterres runs from one global conference to the next ringing the alarm bell. At COP27 Summit at Sharm el-Sheikh he said on Monday, 7 November: "We are on a highway to climate hell with our foot still on the accelerator." And “Humanity has a choice: cooperate or perish”. That’s heavy and it seems that everybody agreed more or less.

Assuming that the UN Secretary-General is right with his assessment why aren’t we doing what needs to be done? It seems that too often we still react with fear instead of foresight. We know the general goals but we don’t understand what’s in it for us in the unknown world of sustainability. In a sense it is natural and often it is also appropriate to focus on the fire burning directly in front of you instead of ignoring it and looking for further challenges. And let’s admit, many people are totally consumed by fighting for the immediate survival of their own, their family or group. In day-to-day life, individuals and groups are challenged multiple times and from many sides. Global leaders, national governments, mayors, neighborhood groups, spiritual and cultural leaders, advertisers, friends and family all ask for your support and action on priorities as they see them. In spite of these more or less reasonable requests and suggestions it wouldn’t help if you collapse and are no more available to look for a way of the ‘highway to hell’. Instead, in the interest to keep our eyes focused on the goals we have to keep calm and steady on, while things may get worse, before they become better.

UN Secretary-General António Guterres at the opening of COP 27 on 7 November 2022

Slider Photo Credit: UNFCCC/Kiara Worth

Multiple crises as the new normal: Things may get worse, before they become better

I am an optimistic realist and as such I don’t ignore worst case scenarios. Food crises, economic inequality, lack of inclusion and even mental health problems are on the rise and force more and more people to deal with these challenges first. This slows development and innovation on the short term. And of course, current challenges like the war in Ukraine, are they already worst cases? If you think so just consider that Putin may lose the war and warlords of the current war like Ramzan Kadyrov, Yevgeny Prigozhin (Wagner troops), the Russian military, secret services and regional leaders start a power fight ripping apart Russia with its many economic and social problems - and that in a country with many nuclear arms. Thus, even if Ukraine wins problems in the region and world can get worse while at the same time climate change may send us a new wave of disasters. To make things even more worse it doesn’t help that many national governments turn away from multilateralism and chose nationally favorable paths to fight common world problems.

As an urban and regional development expert I can imagine what negative side effects such developments could generate in cities and territories but, of course, I cannot really assess the likeliness and impact of above scenarios. However, it is important to recall worst case scenarios because there is no proof at all that the worst point would have been achieved already and that things can get better only. For the time being we should assume and adapt to the option that developing multiple and interrelated crises is the new normal now.

Keeping calm and steady on

A lot of time, care and education is needed to become a grown-up. Learning and gaining experience are rather lifelong processes and we need to be patient with ourselves. Pressurin doesn’t always help. Corona just recalled the wisdom that without personal health, wellbeing and informed action we’re easily lost in times of crises.

When I enter an airplane the cabin crew usually provides security advice including this: When the pressure drops in the cabin, oxygen masks will fall. For that case I’ll be asked to first affix my own mask (!) before I help children and others. That makes sense because if I cannot breathe normally, I have little or no chance to help others. Therefore, thinking and helping first yourself is not necessarily a bad thing for individuals and groups.

Thus, I would like to say: Dear reader, in spite of the highway to climate hell we’re on, if you face major personal challenges regarding your individual economic, social situation and wellbeing don’t ignore them. This may prevent you at the moment to get engaged in other fields. On the longer run it is precondition to become even stronger as supporter or even as leader because you learnt how to grow up to challenges. To share an example of my own, since my early years I have an issue with high blood pressure which I inherited from my father and his mother. As a younger man I was ashamed to admit this ‘weakness’ but I learnt to listen to my body and to live more healthy. Thus, thanks to the health challenge I learnt a lot and the gained knowledge and experience helps me to successfully manage even phases of heavy stress. Today, when others get nervous or even panic, I am able to calm down and steady on.

Actually, instead of ‘patience’ I prefer talking about ‘burning patience’ to underscore that we need to keep on mind what is at stake at short and longer term for us as individuals and the world at large. If one is just patient, one may lose the sense of urgency and inner fire. And that can make your life quite boring and even dangerous. So, it’s in everybody’s interest if everybody takes care for his or her own needs and to be or become ready to take action for common causes.

Certainly, everybody should find a way to invest a maximum of time and efforts possible to get us of the road to climate hell (and other hells). Be it inside or outside the professional life, the help and transformation of everybody’s lifestyle in a more sustainable way is an important first contribution. If you want to do more and make a unique contribution to get us of that road to hell, I have a suggestion for you:

Lean back, stimulate your phantasy and write down in a paper or book a narrative for the post crises world. We have the Agenda 2020 and the Paris Agreement but these provide just goals. Their achievement depends on a longer, interrelated and multi stakeholder process with many variables. Thus, the goals don’t tell us much on how our life on earth would be organized and look like once the goals are achieved. We don’t have that inspiring narrative but we need it to motivate the eight billion people on earth to move and to move faster towards climate change adaptation and sustainability. Again, in case you’re not made to become a political fighter or technician on the path to sustainability why don’t you be creative otherwise and inspire us by telling us a motivating story on how to get off the road to hell and on the path to our future.

Come to the home of cities and regions at COP27 | Sharm-El-Sheikh | 6-18 Nov 2022 | Digital and in-person

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Thu, 03 Nov 2022 18:07:13 GMT

Website of the Multilevel Action Pavilion at COP27

https://www.cities-and-regions.org/multilevel-action-pavilion-at-cop27/

Since the Earth Summit in 1992, when nine stakeholder groups—including local authorities—were designated as essential partners in implementing the global sustainability agenda, the Local Governments and Municipal Authorities (LGMA) Constituency has represented networks of local and regional governments under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). We have served as the voice of cities and regions since the first Conference of Parties (COP) in 1995 and continue to achieve advocacy success for multilevel action in the climate, nature, and desertification processes.

With continuous support from the Scottish Government and in collaboration with the COP27 Presidency, the Egyptian Ministry of Housing, the Marrakech Partnership and LGMA Partners, the Multilevel Action Pavilion will provide a home in the Blue Zone for local and regional governments throughout the two weeks of COP27 through 70+ sessions organized by 25+ partners.

Website of the Multilevel Action Pavilion at COP27

https://www.cities-and-regions.org/multilevel-action-pavilion-at-cop27/

Towards the UN Summit of the Future and the SDG Summit in 2023 - and Aiming at Becoming Part of the Solution

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Thu, 20 Oct 2022 09:36:58 GMT

Please download and read the UCLG Daejeon Declaration ‘Pact for the Future of Humanity'

https://www.uclg.org/sites/default/files/uclgpactforthe_future.pdf

Ambitions and limitations for city networks in their cooperation with member states

The ‘Pact for the Future of Humanity`, is The Daejeon Declaration and as such the key outcome document of the UCLG 2022 World Congress of Daejeon in South Korea [1] . With the Declaration UCLG as one of the biggest city networks in the world defines its Strategic Priorities for the Organization in the years 2022 to 2028.

The Pact is especially important for the upcoming year as the United Nations has announced to convene in 2023 two most important meetings: The UN Summit of the Future and the SDG Summit of 2023 . Marking the mid-point in the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, the SDG Summit will carry out a comprehensive review of the state of the SDGs, respond to the impact of multiple and interlocking crises facing the world, and provide high-level political guidance on transformative and accelerated actions leading up to the 2030 deadline for achieving the SDGs. [2] The Summit of the Future aims to forge a new global consensus on what our future should look like, and what can be done today to secure it. [3]

“ With the Pact, local and regional governments re-state that they are ready to join national and international partners in bringing about meaningful change . The World Summit of Local and Regional Leaders and UCLG Congress was the stage to ensure that the Pact for the Future speaks to the UN Summit of the Future and the SDG Summit of 2023 . Twin high-level consultations on the future for People, Planet and Government framed the political vision of our constituency and were built on the aspirations of our national and international partners , which will further represent a crucial lever to ensure that our constituency plays its part within a renewed multilateral system to achieve the global development agendas, such as the 2030 Agenda, the Paris Agreement and the New Urban Agenda. To meet the expectations of current and future generations and break through as one. ” (UCLG Press Release, 19 October 2022)

In Daejeon UCLG also already launched the report GOLD VI ‘Pathways to Urban and Territorial Equality’ addressing inequalities and possible local transformation [4] . The report delivers a comprehensive analysis and a wealth of information which makes it an important source for academia and practice. GOLD VI is another example with which UCLG proves its expertise on a broad range of subjects relevant for urban governance around the world. Even more important for next year will be the Pact as a political opening by UCLG towards the twin summits in 2023 where among others also the role and voice for local and regional governments might be re-defined. And here the Pact gets relevant beyond the borders of UCLG.

Certainly, the situation of UCLG and other city networks is not easy on the world stage where national governments show only limited interest in cities and regions as global actors and where no local organization has a formal mandate to represent all cities and regions:

UCLG considers itself to be the largest global network of cities and local, metropolitan and regional governments and maybe it is. In the Basic guide for active participation in UCLG’s government bodies [5] UCLG describes itself as the amplified voice of +250,000 towns, cities, regions and metropolises which amounts to 5 billion people or 70% of the world population. That’s amazing but it’s difficult to cross-check this and to find information on how many of those cities and regions are indeed registered members UCLG and commit to all UCLG positions and publications.
At meetings of the United Nations Security Council, the UN General Assembly, ECOSOC, G20, G7 and other multilateral organizations cities and regions have no formal seat and voice. The only development is that these bodies more and more often give to networks of cities like UCLG, ICLEI or C40 an observer status and a limited chance to speak on invitation at meetings. However, cities and regions have no voice in decision-making itself and accordingly also no veto position.

This situation is regrettable because all cities would need a proper representation at global summits to raise their voice and whatever member states decide, they need towns, cities and regions to implement their decisions. Therefore, it would be in the interest of all to strengthen the multilateral system of cooperation. For the time being UCLG and other city networks have no option but to be smart and use its limited resources and influence strategically.

[1] https://daejeon2022.uclg.org/

[2] https://sdg.iisd.org/events/sdg-summit-2023/

[3] https://sdg.iisd.org/events/summit-of-the-future/

[4] https://www.goldvi.uclg.org ).

[5] https://issuu.com/uclgcglu/docs/eng-guia_statutary-web-ok

UCLG - Who we are? Source: https://issuu.com/uclgcglu/docs/uclg_who_we_are

Developing th e Daejeon Declaration into a real Pact for the Future of Humanity

As a Declaration addressed to the own members and donors the paper it is good. For members and for donors it recalls what UCLG is about. In doing so, it assumes, considers, takes stock, recognizes, reaffirms, commits and pledges a lot what is known from earlier declarations and global agendas and as such it is linking the new pact to the century old movement of city networking. That is comforting. Doing this on 22 pages is from a member perspective appropriate because it allows to list so many fields of activity that each member can find own interests and subjects of concern reflected in the Declaration. This inclusiveness is also important to rally internal support for the declaration.

But, as a declaration addressed to non-members in preparation of the twin summits next year and titled emphatical as ‘Pact for the Future of Humanity’ the Pact shows some space for improvement.

The UCLG Press Release states that the visions and aspirations reflected in the Pact will be shaped into actionable commitments throughout 2023. That sounds good but seems to be surprisingly late considering that the twin summits already being under preparation.

It is important to note that UCLG appointed in Daejeon three political leaders as Ambassadors for the Pact for the Future:

Ada Colau, Mayor of Barcelona as Ambassador for the Future of People;

Anne Hidalgo , Mayor of Paris as Ambassador for the Future of Planet;

Yücel Yilmaz, Mayor of Balikesir as Ambassador for the Future of Government.

However, nominating mostly Europeans as separate ambassador for three closely interrelated fields (People, Planet and Government) doesn’t substitute a strategy for the next year. And it probably doesn’t help these Ambassadors that the Pact/Daejeon Declaration mainly re-states and reconfirms a lot of observations and commitments known from the past without indicating real priorities for the next year.

While the long-list of the 22 pages Declaration may be good for internal discussions, as I stated above, the same may pose a risk for global consultations before and during the twin summits!

Member states are currently under extreme pressure due to the multiple crises. It’s extremely difficult for them to compile complete information for rational decisions and to react properly to dynamic developments and emerging issues. Member states most likely will look at the summits for ways to reduce complexity and not to discuss or even increase it. If UCLG or other networks enter the pre-summit stage just with 22 pages listing observations, issues, interests and own commitments they risk to be regarded as part of the problem and not of the solution!

Instead, if UCLG would set clear priorities or in the ideal case a nexus of key challenges and opportunities which best can be addressed with support of well financed local governments then member states might be more tempted to give it a try and accept the hand offered by cities and region.

UCLG and other city networks still have the time and opportunity to develop a proposal and offer member states a pact across policy levels. This true pact should include a proposal on how to best continue with the 2030 Development Agenda because this is currently missing on the side of the UN and member states. And it should make an offer regarding possible commitments to be delivered by cities and regions. Certainly, cities and regions have to ask for appropriate resources but a pact with and among member states at the twin summits which involves city networks depends on agreements in mutual interest. With the Daejeon Declaration ‘Pact for the Future of Humanity’ as it is, it is likely that member states are reminded about the complexity of the challenge but that they won’t understand easily what UCLG is offering and why should they invite UCLG and other city networks at the centre stage of consultations and decision-making.

UCLG can be proud on its century of city networking even if it just has a couple thousands of members in different sections around the world. UCLG can also be proud on its capacity as Think Tank as the report GOLD VI again demonstrates. Policy declarations are important but even more important are real strategies to achieve goals. Now, I think, UCLG should step into the shoes of decision-makers at the twin summits in 2023 and strategize on what member states want to achieve, where UCLG wants to be at the end of the summits and what it has to do in the upcoming months alone and in cooperation with partners to achieve that.

Learning to think big about sustainable urban planning and development

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Wed, 12 Oct 2022 19:23:11 GMT

Contribution to a discussion not even launched

On my rail trips back from the highly inspiring World Urban Forum WUF11 in Katowice in June 2022 and now from the as interesting ISOCARP World Planning Congress in Brussels I was full unrest. On the one hand, I recalled with joy several days of immersion of high quality and thought-provoking lectures, discussions, site visits and plenty of occasions for socializing and even dancing. On the other hand, I had the feeling that something important may be missing in the world of research, planning and advocacy for sustainable urban development.

Being in my office again, I reflected on my unrest again and formulated the following thesis:

Over the last thirty years sustainable urban planning, related academic research and advocacy got stuck or even trapped in a world of small-scale projects while in the same period the challenges for sustainable development and climate resilience gained increasingly speed and force. Now it seems that there is a widening gap between global and interrelated crises and the established pattern of the sustainable and integrated planning community.

Based on the above, the guiding question of this post is:

Are the plannin g and local governance community, related research and advocacy doing too little too late? I also ask how the friends of sustainability in the planning community can grow up to the challenge and learn how to think big in a way that planning remains inclusive, integrated and leaves no one behind while it responds at the same time fast enough and forceful enough so that cities can contribute their due part to remove humanity from the verge of a planetary socio-ecological collapse. Yes, this may sound like squaring the circle but that could be exactly what our present time is requiring.

The author attending the 58th ISOCARP World Planning Congress

An unhealthy pattern in the current dialogue on urban policy and planning

Looking back at the recent WUF11, national conferences and the ISOCARP Congress it appeared to me that most sessions I attended followed a certain pattern. One part of the pattern consists of references to global development goals and to current multiple crises including the Covid19 pandemic, climate change, wars in Ukraine, Tigray and elsewhere in the world, increasing economic, social inequality and the triggering of new environmental disasters which brought humanity to the verge of a planetary socio-ecological collapse. Dramatic as these references to systemic challenge are they were usually followed in the second part of the pattern by a swift zooming-in on selected subjects and projects at the local or even at the level of a neighborhood or a single public place. Sometimes they were further broken down by a focus on a sector of planning, a stakeholder group and planning methodology. Identifying solutions for sustainable, inclusive future at this level is valuable but at the end only the specified project is discussed without zooming back to the crises. Thus, the link to the big challenges which was so important to be mentioned at the beginning as reference got lost.

A narrative which begins with systemic challenge, zooms down to case studies but doesn’t return to their relevance for the systemic challenge is incomplete. Since I recognized this pattern at several events I started wondering if there is a more general and possibly unhealthy pattern in sustainable urban policy and planning in front of a background of fast and forcefully developing crises.

Thinking big and small about urban policy and development

‘Thinking big’ in urban and regional planning has a long tradition in Europe and beyond. The Industrial Revolution in the 19 ^th century generated a huge demand for land, resources and workers for fast-growing industries. And fast-growing industries, railway systems and cities called for adequate urban, regional and national spatial planning. Consequently, thinking big and at larger scales was necessary and common in planning to grow up to the dynamic challenges of the times, but the thinking big also had its downsides.

For instance: The famous Charter of Athens, adopted in 1933 by leading architects and planners recommended that ‘ Full use should be made of modern building techniques in constructing highrise apartments. Highrise apartments placed at wide distances apart liberate ground for large open spaces. ’ Or ‘ Transportation routes should be classified according to their nature, and be designed to meet the requirements and speeds of specific types of vehicles.’ Giving preference to high-rise apartments with large open spaces around them and following the requirements and speed of vehicles (not of people!) revolutionized urban planning but the focus was on function, not on people. It’s obvious that the Charter was produced in response to the fast and often badly planned growth of cities during Industrial Revolution. The Charter helped to modernize cities but it also generated negative side effects for neighborhoods, local communities and indirectly for entire societies. Planners like Robert Moses, large scale social housing projects in the USA, the car-friendly cities e.g. in Germany or the Unités d’Habitation of Le Corbusier are just a few examples of the excesses of modernist architecture and town planning.

Because of the above it’s for good reason that urban planners became increasingly sceptical towards large scale planning and turned towards more integrated, people-centred and inclusive planning approaches.

Complementary between local and global development policies

It further seems that the new orientation in urban planning was complementary to a development at the international level: the emergence of international environmental and urban policies in the 1990s. The United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), was held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, from 3-14 June 1992. On the website of the UN it still says that the Earth Summit generated ‘A new blueprint for international action on the environment’ [1] . Certainly, that was not a blueprint like a Master Plan or a ready to implement strategy indicating specific objectives, resources, actions, timelines, responsibilities and accountabilities. Instead, the 'new blueprint' was a new pattern consisting of agreed general goals which are then left to the member states for voluntary implementation. Innovative was the pattern in 1992 by introducing e.g. the Local Agenda 21 (LA21) as a voluntary process of local community consultation with the aim to create local policies and programs that work towards achieving sustainable development. More than 5000 LA21 initiatives have been launched around the world. Only a few exist until today. Others were transformed into other activities and many just run dry after a few years.

At the time, it was a big achievement to agree on a common universal policy for sustainable development and to focus on voluntarism and national and local action to implement it. Everybody was a winner:

Local stakeholders were encouraged to take initiative and engage in sustainable development.
National Governments preserved their sovereignty and kept control on what happens within national jurisdiction.
The UN was obstetricians of a new future-oriented policy for sustainable development and gained the mandate to monitor implementation and (on demand by member states) to actively support the implementation within countries.
Nature was also a winner in the sense that humanity seemed to understand its responsibility to conserve creation.

Unfortunately, due to the voluntarism on the side of all stakeholders the goals agreed in Rio were never linked to a clear implementation strategy including an accountability mechanism. Instead, there seemed to be the hope or even confidence that the many small and decentralized actions would somehow sum up to the big transformation needed. As if there would be an ‘invisible hand of sustainability’ that could substitute clear responsibilities and an accountability mechanism. Later this pattern was basically reconfirmed at the UN Conference Rio+20 in 2012, the UN Summit adopting the Agenda 2030 in 2016 and UN Conferences Habitat II and III in 1996 and 2016.

Now thirty years after the first Rio Conference the pattern still provides the guidance and at the same time plenty of freedom to local and national governments, the EU, G7, UN and professional organizations like ISOCARP. Apart from moral obligations, every stakeholder is free to set own priorities for implementation while using the global challenges as reference frame justifying selected actions.

That went well for a while but now in 2022 the pattern is unhealthy. Why? Climate change and other crises gained a lot speed and force while the stakeholders still follow their own priorities and interests:

The UN clearly points to the delays in the achievement of Agenda 2030/SDG and climate goals of the Paris Agreement but because of the own limited mandate the UN bewares of telling member states in detail what they need to do.
G7 is holding in 2022 its first ever ministerial meeting on urban planning in 2022. That’s good but 30 years after Rio to not agree on much more than having in 2022 a first meeting and then a follow-up meeting in 2023 is not very impressive.
The EU has many programmes and initiatives aiming at sustainability and urban development but they depend not so much on goals but on the budget provided. For example, 100 cities are participating now in ‘EU Missions’, a new instrument of the European Commission aiming at 100 climate-neutral and smart cities by 2030. The budget is limited to 360 Mio. EUR. That sounds a lot but it allows mostly smaller-scale projects to be implemented and …. yes, it also ignores that there are far more than 100 cities in Europe which need to achieve the same goal. [2]
National governments have their own plans but they compete with demand due to the crises. E.g. just this month the German government set up a multi billion Euros programme for the energy sector, but the money is allocated to limit the increase of gas prices and to prevent negative ripple effect for the economy. Certainly, the money will be missing when it comes to needed energy transition. And that urban planning didn't contribute earlier to energy transition through planning doesn't make the current situation easier.
There are a few champion cities like Paris but most cities are still reluctant to take major actions. Thirty years after Rio not a single one of the large cities is carbon free or sustainable. Cities like Brussels and regions like Flanders want to be climate neutral by 2050 but from looking at the small-scale local projects presented at the ISOCARP Congress you cannot tell what climate neutrality means in practice for a region with an economy driven by an international port like Antwerp and an international Airport like the one of Brussels. It could re-shore part of the industrial production which was lost years ago but they still would need the raw materials from abroad. So, it's still a black box what a circular economy in a region like Flandres can look like. [3]

[1] https://www.un.org/en/conferences/environment/rio1992

[2] https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_22_2591

[3] https://vlaanderen-circulair.be/en

What should be done?

Learning to think big about sustainable urban policy, planning and development

Some institutional representatives may get nervous if I add critical remarks to the above list of activities but to be clear: I really appreciate that all related stakeholders do what they do. It is important. My only concern is that it is too little and too late to achieve the agreed goals in an environment where crises gain speed and force on a daily base. The unhealthy pattern needs and, I think, it can be repaired by not only deriving the relevance of own activities from the global crises environment but also by specifying how the own activities contribute to overcoming problems and, if that shouldn’t be possible, to state clearly what is necessary by whom and when to achieve common goals. In the following I point to some possible actions which should be further discussed.

In times of interrelated crises, fake news and populism it is increasingly difficult for the general public and for experts to get well informed and to build and maintain trust. Therefore, truthfulness is indispensable for public dialogue and cooperation. If we are at the verge of a planetary socio-ecological collapse this needs to be admitted and own actions should be described in relation to challenges ahead. Cities, researchers and planners can be proud on small steps and small projects as much as on big initiatives but it doesn’t help to pretend that the small steps taken will solve the big problems.

There are several ways to learn thinking big while leaving no one behind and they include these steps:

1. Visioning: big challenges need a positive narrative and we still don't have that narrative for sustainable development. Such a narrative may include a blood sweat and tears appeal but it must include a positive vision of a sustainable future to inspire support and acceptance of efforts needed.

2. Transferring and upscaling available knowledge and pilot projects: To benefit from the many studies and pilot projects on zero carbon and sustainable urban development it will be most important to add new guiding questions to studies and projects, including these:

a. Assessment: Realistically, what is the direct and indirect contribution of a case study or pilot project to the achievement of citywide, regional, national and international goals?

b. Transferability: Can and, if yes, how can the findings, results and impacts of a study or project be repeated elsewhere?

c. Upscaling: What is needed at the local and other levels and what are indicators for measuring progress to replicate a local solution often enough to achieve citywide, regional, national and international impacts on goal achievement?

3. Visualizing: Apart from some nice drawings in studies and project reports there is only a limited understanding on how a sustainable and zero carbon metropolitan city would really look like, it’s housing, businesses, transport infrastructure etc. What would change in the physical footprint of let’s say Berlin, Nairobi or Hongkong when they are transformed to sustainability and climate resilience cities. Are there any model 'Master Plans' for entire cities?

4. Strategising: Many so-called strategies are just policies. Instead, a real strategy is not merely a policy but also a clear cut outline on how to achieve goals. It includes a plan and log frame covering objectives, necessary means, timelines, responsibilities and accountability to achieve long-term goals. Of course, it should include a review process to update a strategy but key is that not only policy goals but also the enabling environment and means of implementation become part of the strategy. Therefore, cities which want to achieve zero carbon by 2030 should be able to make now a strategic plan for actions in each of the remaining years.

5. Capacity building: One of the most inspiring conclusions by Charles Landry at the ISOCARP Congress was that ‘The Soft is the Hard’. He said that we know many technical solutions for current problems (the 'hard') but we are lagging the right culture, attitude and mindset to launch the necessary transformation (the 'soft'). Therefore, participation, education and capacity building are a precondition to think big about sustainable urban development.

6. Staying focused and supporting planning with an eye on the prize: It is important that the UN and other development organizations continue pointing to deficits and advocate goal achievement. It would help if these organizations not only would uphold the ultimate goals and provide collections of good practices, manuals and tool boxes. In addition, they should support strategising by providing guidance e.g. on how to use each year until 2030 to assure goal achievement.

7. Politicizing planning: Citizens ask for participation but even more they may expect service delivery by public institutions including planning departments. The time left for goal achievement needs to be used carefully and planners who prefer waiting until they are called may waste precious time. At the ISOCARP Congress it was suggested (see annex below) that all urban planners, urban designers, architects, place-leaders and other urban and regional experts should creatively engage with communities and their local contexts searching for ways to co-create and collectively organize new modes of living and working. This may include politicizing planning in the sense that it asks planners to not only keep an eye on t he prize but also to stand up for what is needed and possible to achieve goals.

Climate resilient and sustainable cities won't happen by chance through some invisible hand. They have to be build and it will need integrated, inclusive and participatory planning. Looking at the learning process city builders went through over the last two centuries of Industrial Revolution I am confident that urban planning can grow up also to current challenges without repeating the mistakes of the past.

Note: Please read also the attached ISOCARP Congress Declaration.

Annex: ISOCARP Congress Declarations

Current Challenges for Spatial Planning

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Wed, 28 Sep 2022 08:13:48 GMT

Current Challenges for Spatial Planning Profession and Education in Transition

Core Requirements for Planners` University Education

Does a more effect- and impact-related planning need more pro-active and engaged planners?

Trying to sum up the discussions I followed at recent national and international conferences on sustainable urban and territorial planning the following points and expressions come to my mind:

- In general, there is not lack of knowledge but a lack of implementation and transformation

- We have to think bolder, bigger and put peer pressure on leaders

- Cities are more agile than nations and can react faster

- Cities have to be economically, social and environmentally more resilient

- In future, cities will either be sustainable or they will not exist

- Planners have to make up the case for integrated planning more clearly and effectively

If there is one characteristic which distinguishes urban and territorial planning from most other professions it is its cross sector, multi stakeholder and multi level approach for both, plans as documents and processes of joint decision-making. That should be an asset in these times of crises.

But how comes that in these dynamic times of crises the public and decision-makers rarely turn to planers and instead, fall back into the habit of case by case, sector oriented and often short sighted muddling through and decision-making? Could it be that planers are too shy and prefer waiting to be called instead of being more proactive? Could it be that already in their education planners should learn more about how to engage more actively and effectively in planning processes and urban governance? How proactive should planers be to increase the effect and impact of integrated sustainable planning on development?

I am glad that I am invited to speak and discuss with other panellists at the ISOCARP World Planning Congress on 5 October 2022 on ' Current Challenges for Spatial Planning Profession and Education in Transition'. If you can, please come to Brussels and join the Special Session.

Concept of the special session and contributors

The special session was proposed for the ISOCARP World Planning Congress in Brussels by

Zeynep Enlil , ISOCARP,GR/58thWPC General Rapporteur, GPEAN, Chair, Yıldız Technical University, Turkey
Maros Finka , AESOP, President, SPECTRA CE EU at STU, Slovakia

Discussants at the panel moderated by Zeynep Enill will be

Elisabeth Belpaire Congress Director, ISOCARP

Simin Davoudi Professor of Planning and Co-Director of Centre for Researching Cities, Newcastle University

Maros Finka President, AESOP/STUBA

Ulrich Graute ISOCARP Scientific Commitee
Zeynap Gunay ISOCARP Board, ISOCARP Board / Istanbul Technical University

Ana Peric Senior Researcher, ETH Zurich

Newly demanded quality of spatial development and transformation processes towards sustainable, digital knowledge based, innovation oriented and above all towards a healthy, equitable and just society appears to be the mandate of our turbulent times. The multitude of crises exacerbated by the COVID19 pandemics, pose multiple substantial and procedural challenges for planning practice and education. Meeting new demands and requirements on spatial development is not possible without strengthening the position of spatial planning in the society, but at the same time the changes in the profession of planners. They need to be reflected in the profile of professionals involved in the planning processes and their education. The academic society jointly with the representatives of spatial planning professionals needs to exchange on the fundamentals or core requirements of planning education reflecting on the specifics of different planning cultures, positions of planners in professional practice and of educational systems.

The session brings together the representatives of planning schools (GPEAN, AESOP and others) and of professionals (ISOCARP, ECTP) on exchange about core requirements for planners` university education. The discussion will be based on the outputs of the work done by the AESOP working Group in planning education to update the minimum requirements on planning curricula.

It will also build on the discussion and results of the special session on "Planning Education and Practice in Transition" in the Virtual Pre-Congress of ISOCARP, which brought practitioners and educators together to reflect upon the challenges ahead of us and to co-create a new agenda for planning education and practice with urban health, socio-spatial justice and climate resilience in mind.

Congress website: https://isocarp.org/58th-wpc-brussels-2022/

And now everybody! Sustainable Development is a Joint Effort says German Council

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Mon, 26 Sep 2022 15:39:12 GMT

Launching a website is no big thing in these days - unless organisers use it to send a powerful political signal

Sarah Ryglewski, State Minister at the Federal Chancellery (stepping in for the Chancellery due to his Covid-19 infection) and Hendrik Wüst, Chairman of the Conference of Prime Ministries of German Länder (Regions) launch the Platform 'Gemeinschaftswerk Nachhaltigkeit' at the 21st Annual Conference of the German Council for Sustainable Development. Picture: André Wagenzik/Florian Bolk © RNE

The German Council for Sustainable Development (RNE), an advisory body to the Federal Government on issues of sustainability policy, has held its 21st Annual Conference an 26 September 2022 in Berlin. The Internet platform 'Gemeinschaftswerk Nachhaltigkeit' ('Joint Action of Sustainable Development') was launched during the Conference by Sarah Ryglewski, State Minister at the Federal Chancellery (stepping in for the Chancellor after his Covid-19 infection) and Hendrik Wüst, Chairman of The Conference of Federal State Prime Ministers as the committee formed by the sixteen States of Germany (Bundesländer) to coordinate policy in areas that fall within the sole jurisdiction of the Länder.

One has to be a bit careful with conferences organized by the German government or close to government bodies in Berlin. They are usually well staged and supported by public relati on experts who assure that the programme is interesting but not disruptive. The conference 'Tackle transformation. Creating Future. Sustainability through Joint Action' of the Council of Sustainable Development was different. It began already with the moderator Mitri Sirin who underscored that there are only 8 years left to reach the Sustainable Development Goals. Werner Schnappauff explained that the world is at a decisive point where the course is set for the future and that the multiple crises and especially the climate and energy crises should be seen as a chance to foster transformation.

The first panel was dedicated to the perspective of young people. In Germany 6 million children and youth are organized and their representatives at the Conference explained that they often have diverging opinions but that there is no doubt about their common position that sustainable development is needed.

Youth delegates handing over their demands to State Minister, Sarah Ryglewski and to the Chairman of the Council, Werner Schnappauff

Sabine Nollinger, chairwoman of the German CEO Alliance for Climate and Economy admitted that time was wasted in recent years and that now a lot more speed is needed. Now many things have to be done in parallel and fast. Vast amount of renewable energy and many new ideas are needed. She hopes that the platform can help to exchange ideas and examples of good practice. Constantin Terton representing the German skilled crafts association ZDH also underscored how decisive the current situation is to set the course for the future and that it will need many many skilled crafts men and women to build the sustainable future.

Markus Lewe, President of the German Association of Cities and Towns DST recalled the importance of the local level for the realization of sustainability. Cities are more agile and faster than governments. He said: 'Cities will be more sustainable or they will not be.' He urged that its needs a thinking more focussed on impact and goal achievement.

In a panel discussing that sustainable Germany has to be part of a wider global frame presentations included those by the UN Secretary General António Guterres and by Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, Nobel Peace Laureate and former President of Liberia. Sirleaf inspired to be bolder, to think bigger and to put peer pressisure on leaders. Interesting was also the proposal by Heidemarie Wieczorek-Zeul, a member of the German Council and former minister who sees a higher likeliness in establishing a global Sustainability Council than a reform of the Security Council. The new Council should be composed of Financial Institutions, ECOSOC, G20 etc.

Jennifer Morgan, a former CEO of Greenpeace and now State Secretary in the German Foreign Office, looked to the upcoming COP27 climate conference in Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt and on options to scale up the global climate alliance: 'We have to think anew on how to do things.'

What all speakers discussed is how the new website 'Gemeinschaftswerk Nachhaltigkeit' can serve as exchange platform for information, inspiration, activity and coming together. Behind the simple and not so new idea of a exchange platform is the deeper understanding that 'Sustainability is the key to the door of our future but we all have to go through this door' as Werner Schnappauff said. And it's important that he explicitly stated that our social responsibility calls us to leave nobody behind. And here was the most important message: Sustainability cannot be expect from the government alone. Now all. We all have to contribute - and the website can help to find ideas.

Well, if that works it will be fine but what if the website doesn't turn into a great success? The Council didn't talk about that option and what should be done then. So, the Council bets on a website.

Werner Schnappauff, Chairman of the German Sustainability Council and Jennifer Morgan, German Foreign Office

Link to the website Gemeinschaftswerk Nachhaltigkeit: https://gemeinschaftswerk-nachhaltigkeit.de/

Link to the website of the German Council: https://www.nachhaltigkeitsrat.de/en/events/21st-annual-conference/

Saving the world in style!? Hard facts, good mood and some missed opportunities at the 15th German Congress for National Urban Development Policy

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Mon, 19 Sep 2022 14:41:13 GMT

Source: BMWSB / HGEsch

The venue of the Congress was an old mail railroad station in inner city Berlin. After basic renovation it serves now as a splendid event location which can put any event in the right light. The food was great (though handed out in small portions). Above all, there were about 1200 participants from across Germany and the world. The mood was good, discussions were open and only the representative of the right-wing party in the parliament received some boos. One could describe the Congress with the German word ‘gediegen’, as a sterling congress, or leaning on the words used by prof Schellnhuber as a congress 'in style'.

Under the title “Shaping Transformation – Achieving Urban Resilience” the Congress assembled prominent speakers including

Klara Geywitz, Federal Minister for Housing, Urban Development and Building
Toshiyuki Hayashi, Vice-Minister for Land and Hokkaido Development Affairs, Japan
Maimunah Mohd Sharif, Executive Director of UN-Habitat
but most outspokenly by the keynote speaker Prof. Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, Director Emeritus of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Research (PIK).

Unfortunately, Q & A possibilities were channelled through an online submission taking away the option for spantaneous discussion and the surprises of an open mike.[1]

Prof Schellnhuber is the famous German atmospheric physicist and long-standing member of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change IPCC, which was jointly awarded the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize. In his presentation with the title ‘Saving the world in style’ he summed up the global situation by pointing to the dangerous tipping points of global climate change and the increasing share cities and rapid urbanization own in causing emissions. He went on presenting a table with main emitters of CO2. It included countries but also concrete as no. 3 emitter globally and metals and plastics as no. 4. Schellnhuber appealed to reduce emissions and repair our system and to prevent human extinction. Nonetheless, he ended his speech on a positive note hoping for a new ‘Cyberorganic Age’ in which wood and other renewable and CO2 absorbing materials would become the major source for construction.

[1] For a report on the Congress by the Federal Minister for Housing, Urban Development and Building in German language go to

https://www.bmwsb.bund.de/SharedDocs/pressemitteilungen/Webs/BMWSB/DE/2022/09/bundeskongress-nsp.html

Pictures: Prof Schellnhuber and his presentation

A Congress with style but considering the multiple crises it also missed some opportunities

A Congress with the Executive Director of UN-Habitat, representatives of OECD and national governments and local authorities attending would have allowed for an intensive and public multi-level discussion on how the policy levels could support each other in practice.

If the Congress would have followed the scheme of the National Urban Policy Programme (OECD, UN-Habitat) it would have used the diagnostic presented by Schellnhuber and other speakers to discuss policy formulations with clear and result based actions aiming at risk mitigation and goal achievement. Instead, panellists mainly presented their own activities and the government presented the Urban Greenspace Federal Prize 2022 awards. No doubts, this is all important: Political dialogue is part of opinion formation in a democracy and the Prize is a gratification for achievements and at the same time it inspires future action. However, by the soft and sterling approach the linkage to the hard facts of the diagnosis got lost. Participants left without knowing what needs to be done by them.

On the day before the Congress the German government hosted i n the nearby city of Potsdam the first-ever G7 Ministerial Meeting on Sustainable Urban Development. The Communiqué of the meeting doesn’t include major new commitments but the fact of the first-ever event itself and the fact that Japan, next year’s G7 Chair will continue the work of the German chairmanship can be considered a success. In that respect, the German government organized –with style– two successful meetings within one week. But, if the achievements are ambitious enough for ‘Shaping Transformation and Achieving Urban Resilience’ is a different story.

On the day after the Congress German newspapers weren’t full with reports about the congress. Instead, Berlin’s leading daily ‘Tagesspiegel’ published a double interview with Franziska Giffey and Anne Hidalgo, the mayors of Berlin and Paris. Both did not attend the Congress and were not invited to attend the G7 Ministerial Meeting. They met in the same week in Berlin at ‘Q Berlin’a conference of metropolitan cities. There they discussed their future cooperation including climate change as a key challenge for their cities. Wow, they discussed the same subjects as the Congress and G7! Something must have gone wrong in multi-level communication and cooperation if two prominent mayors like Ms Giffey and Ms Hidalgo meet in Berlin separately from important national and international meetings addressing their cities' challenges.

Working myself in supporting multi-level cooperation betwee n local, national and international levels I know that many efforts are needed but it's worth the investment because it can lead to more effective and efficient multi-level cooperation.

Source: Tagesspiegel, 17 September 2022

Navigating uncertainty to expand human development

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Tue, 13 Sep 2022 07:17:56 GMT

The 2021/2022 Human Development Report published by UNDP in New York in Sept. 2022

https://hdr.undp.org/content/human-development-report-2021-22

A new uncertainty complex is emerging

As to be expected, the new 2021-2022 Human Development Report (HDR) of the United Nations (UNDP) provides bad and challenging news including the warning that multiple crises halt progress as 9 out of 10 countries fall backwards in human development. But that is mainly in Part I 'Uncertain Times, unsettled lives'. More enlightening and forward looking is Part II 'Shaping our future in a transforming world'

Who thinks the HDR is more a statistical handbook to argue for increases in deve lopment assistance is wrong. The HDR is and was always based on a broad socio-economic and political analysis of the situation in the world. Surprising is that the authors of the new HDR look far beyond usual indicators and identify a new 'uncertainty complex' in the world. This complex points to these three new kinds of uncertainty which interact and form the new uncertainty complex (see figure below):

- Dangerous planetary change of the Anthropocene

- The pursuit of sweeping societal transformations

- Widespread, intensifying polarization

A very important change is that the Report at least in parts is leaving the traditional distinction between developed and developing countries. Instead it states that in a sense all countries are developing countries, charting a new planetary course together, regardless of whether they work together to do so . And indeed, even developed economies are not prepared for current crises and have to search and test what works and what doesn't - often using the approach of trial and error.

"The question is no longer simply how some countries get from point A to point B; instead, it is how all countries start moving from wherever they are to points N, T or W—or letters in some new alphabet—and then course correct along the way. Development is perhaps better seen as a process characterized both by adapting to an unfolding unknown reality and by purposefully transforming economies and societies to ease planetary pressures and advance inclusion." (HDR 2021/22, page 27)

Indirectly, this questions the dominance which is often given to economic development indicators like the GDP. Instead, the attention turns to the readiness of humans to grow up to the challenges related to the new complex. While money remains important for human development the Report makes clear what's at the centre:

"The hero and villain in today's uncertainty story os one and the same: human choices." (HDR 2021/22, p. 176)

As stated by Achim Steiner, Executive Director of UNDP stated in the foreword of the Report

"... invites us to take a hard look at ossified and oversimplified assumptions about human decision-making. Institutions assume away people’s messiness—our emotions, our biases, our sense of belonging—at our peril. As with its predecessors, the Report also challenges conventional notions of “progress,” where self-defeating tradeoffs are being made. Gains in some areas, as in years of schooling or life expectancy, do not compensate for losses in others, as in people’s sense of control over their lives. Nor can we enjoy material wealth at the expense of planetary health." (HDR 2021/22, p iii)

Shaping our future in a transforming world

After the analysis of the first part of Part II of the report is titled 'Shaping our future in a transforming world'. It is forward-looking and asks

What's standing in the way of our acting together?

- Uncertain times, divided societies

- Polarization harms public deliberation

- Breaking the bold of uncertainty on collective action

How can we advance human development in uncertain times?

- Technological innovation opens new opportunities

- The COVID-19 pandemic as a window into a new reality

Based on the discussion of these questions and based on the three layers of uncertainty chapter 6 of the Report outlines a two-tier framework to embrace uncertainty.

The first tier is about what to do, with a focus on concrete transformations on three fronts: investment, insurance and innovation.

Investment, in the capabilities people will need to enable socioeconomic and planetary conditions for human flourishing.
Insurance, to protect people from the unavoidable contingencies of uncertain times, safeguarding their capabilities, including their fundamental freedoms (enhancing human security).
Innovation, to foster capabilities that might not exist today.

The second tier is about how to generate the broader social and contextual conditions for change to take hold, acknowledging the role of culture as described in chapter 3 of HDR.

Education, to strengthen agency and encourage people to shape their own future.
Recognition, to acknowledge human rights and respect for people’s identities and values to change scripts and narratives that build hope in society.
Representation, to amplify the power and voice that strengthen representation and agency.

The recognition of the uncertainty complex shifts the focus from financial aspects like Official Development Assistance ODA and the role of development agencies to human choices and the need of everybody to adapt to the uncertainty and to work with others at all levels on the search for solutions - while the uncertainty persists and even develops. As social scientist and governance experts I support this shift to participative governance and the requirement for capacity building by each one. Well, but it is also humbling what a big challenge we are facing: Embracing uncertainty and transforming the world we live in at the same time. It is a bit as if you're on a boat in rough waters on open see and have to invent and build for your own survival a new kind of boat without a dry dock in a safe harbour. What makes it worse is that the Report doesn't say that governments or the UN will solve the problems but that it primarily needs each and everybody to join forces. So, this Report is addressed not only to governments but to all of us.

At this point the Report starts discussing how people can be made more secure and what are important accompanying cultural changes related to education, recognition and representation (see figures below).

As part of this the chapter also includes these inspiring spotlights:

Principles like flexibility, creativity, solidarity and inclusion to be cultivated to navigate uncertainty (page 192)
How local communities confront rapid environmental change (p. 194)
How volunteerism, inclusion and deliberation can work as insurance (p. 195)
Addressing mental distress: Capabilities for people and policymakers (p. 196)
Social media misinformation and freedom of expression (p. 198)
Collective action and social movements shaping culture and coping with uncertainty (p. 200)
Feminist mobilizations defying gender social norms (p. 204)

The 2021/2022 may not be an easy read because of the new perspectives formulated but it is worth reading. It is full of food for thought and advice on embracing uncertainty and transformation at the same time. Let's hope that it inspires needed action and further research all around the world.

Urban October 2022 – A firework of UN and other activities on urban sustainability

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Thu, 08 Sep 2022 12:26:04 GMT

Urban October – A firework of activities on urban sustainability

While the UN and its Member States will hold in September centralized in New York its 77th regular session of the UN General Assembly (UNGA) [1], UN-Habitat and partners organize each year in October a month of activities, events and discussions on urban sustainability. All this generates a firework of events which is called Urban October.

Urban October is an opportunity for everyone to be part of the conversation about the challenges and opportunities created by the fast rate of change in our cities and towns. Each October, everyone interested in sustainable urbanization from national and local governments to universities, NGOs and communities is encouraged to hold or participate in activities, events, and discussions.

The month begins with World Habitat Day on the first Monday of the month, and ends with World Cities Day on 31 October. Activities take place on those specific days or at any time during the month. UN-Habitat will celebrate World Habitat Day 2022 in Balikesir, Turkiye on 3 october and World Cities Day on 31 October 2022 in Shanghai, China.

The UN-Habitat Scroll of Honor award is one of the highlights of the World Habitat Day global observance. The award, a plaque engraved with the name of the winner, is presented to the selected winners during the global observance.

By engaging all stakeholders, cities can harness transformational change and ensure a better life for all in an urbanizing world. [2]

It is a big advantage that Urban October is supported by the engagement of UN-Habitat, the United Nations official Human Settlement Programme. Unfortunately, scheduled after the General Assembly Urban October seems to be positioned within the UN more like a side event and receives only limited support from other UN System organizations and the General Assembly. Understanding the ‘UN as One’ (as it is proclaimed by the UN) the activities of Urban October could be a pillar feeding e.g. into the Global Goals Week planned by the UNGA in late September. I am sure there will be here and there a side event organized by UN-Habitat and urban networks during that week but there are no signs that the UN would be exploring and exploiting the full potential of cities for the achievement of sustainability goals. And without that there is a lot parallel work and only limited synergy.

[1] See Ulrich’s post on 77th General Assembly https://www.ugraute.de/united-nations-77th-general-assembly also on LinkedIn https://www.linkedin.com/posts/graute_united-nations-77th-general-assembly-is-looming-activity-6973197487452942336-SUXx?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop
[2] https://urbanoctober.unhabitat.org/

Urban October gets its drive from partners around the world - but there are many many often independent international conferences on urban issues in the same period

Good as the engagement of UN-Habitat is the global outreach gets its strengths from support of other organizations which use Urban October to cluster own events within this period. Just have a look at this non inclusive list of planned international events organized by UN-Habitat partners this October:

58 ^th ISOCARP World Planning Congress ‘From Wealthy to Healthy Cities

3 ^rd – 6 ^th October 2022 in Brussels, Belgium

https://isocarp.org/58th-wpc-brussels-2022/

2022 Daejeon United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG) World Congress

10 - 14 October 2022 in Daejeon, Korea

https://daejeon2022uclg.kr/eng?FAIRMENU_IDX=15569&hl=ENG

EURegions Week 2022, European Week of Regions and Cities

10th – 13 ^th October Brussels, Belgium

https://europa.eu/regions-and-cities/

Daring Cities – The Global Virtual Forum for Urban Leaders Taking on the Climate Emergency; organized by ICLEI and the City of Bonn

3 ^rd – 7 ^th October 2022 in Bonn, Germany

https://daringcities.org/

World Metropolitan Day on 7 October 2022 is a global campaign led by Metropolis and UN-Habitat promoting collective action to build more equitable and prosperous metropolises.

https://www.metropolis.org/world-metropolitan-day-2022

If this is not enough of a firework for you, you can find many more independent international conferences on urban issues during October on the website Urban Conferences 2022/2023/2024

https://conferenceindex.org/conferences/urban

The listed conferences and those on conferenceindex.org provide a breathtaking picture on the many conferences related to urban sustainability during the time of Urban October.

It is good that there are so many activities on promoting urban development. The choice in the side of participants. However, one can attend (in person) only one event at a time and considering climate and multiple other crises drawing our resources and time I wonder if the multitude of international conferences is a sustainable approach. At least, alternatives should be explored to make Urban October and urban activities around the year and the globe most effective, efficient and sustainable .

Urban Conferences 2022/2023/2024 https://conferenceindex.org/conferences/urban aragraph

Urban Conferences 2022/2023/2024 https://conferenceindex.org/conferences/urban

United Nations 77th General Assembly is looming – Same procedure as every year although there would be an alternative

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Wed, 07 Sep 2022 08:25:51 GMT

UN Photo/Manuel Elías UN General Assembly Hall (file)

Let me begin with a praise: Yes, we are in times of big trouble around the globe with a global climate crises, COVID-19 pandemic, several on-going wars (Russia/Ukraine, Tigray, Yemen…) economic instability, lack of equality and struggles for freedom in many countries. But in this troubled time it is a little sign of comfort that UN routine mechanisms like the traditional annual summit at the beginning of the new annual session of the UN General Assembly (UNGA) are still functioning. They do this since 1945 without interruption and this keeps governments talking with each other. Well, this doesn’t prevent wars and suffering but it is a possible starting point for a better future. That alone is good and important. Thus, I am glad that the 77th session will take place between 12 and 27 September (https://www.un.org/en/ga/77/meetings/)!

I also would like to thank the Secretary General António Guterres. In his speeches and reports he described very clearly threats and challenges and appealed to member states. If things go wrong in the world nobody can say the UN wouldn’t have warned (https://www.un.org/sg/en/content/sg/secretary-generals-speeches).

However, the existing structures and procedures are not used to renew institutions and politics for goal achievement. Member states picked UNGA chair Hungary, a country which is not really known to be a frontrunner for democracy, international cooperation, inclusion or sustainability. And so is the programme of the GA!

During the Assembly there will be an ‘SDG Moment’. The Assembly is scheduling not more than 90 minutes for the Sustainability Agenda! Wow! Of course, there will be also a nine days ‘Global Goals Week’ but that is more a festival of events highlighting actions and solutions. This is good as a Thank You to all active people and organisations but in front of the challenges it is distracting. It serves more as what in the Roman Empire was called Panem et circensis (Bread and circuses). It is informing and even entertaining but is not linked to any decision-making and clear follow-up.

What would be the alternative? The answer is simple: Discuss the reports and speeches of the Secretary General, evaluate the input to be given during the Global Goals Week and adapt UN policies and actions accordingly. Also, read the new report of the Club of Rome. 50 years after its first report on the Limits of Growth it published -just in time for the GA- its new report ‘Limits of Growth 50+ Global Equity for a healthy planet'.

The book promises to deliver a survival guide for humanity. Isn't that what is needed? Isn't it worth to change routines of the Assembly? In a changing world one has to grow up to challenges to stay true to ones own values. I am glad that the United Nations General Assembly keeps working but I doubt that business as usual is the way to grow up to current challenges.

Info by the Club of Rome https://www.clubofrome.org/

Ahead of significant political events such as UNGA and COP 27 Earth4All is launching Earth for All: A Survival Guide for Humanity, which presents the results of a two-year research project, that brought together leading scientists, economic thinkers and a team of ‘systems dynamics’ computer modelers.The book builds on the common mantra from social movements calling for “Systems Change Not Climate Change” and “People Not Profit”. It lays out what economic systems change really means for civilization and proposes five extraordinary turnarounds that provide a framework for a fair, just, and affordable economic transformation. The book tackles the fierce debate between advocates for “green growth” and supporters of “degrowth” economies.

Sandrine Dixson-Declève, author and co-president of The Club of Rome said, “Our economic and financial systems are broken, and we are reaching dangerous levels of inequality. Do we want to create the first trillionaire or do we want to create functional, fair democratic societies? Ultimately, Earth for All is about building societies that value prosperity for all rather than profit for the few on a finite planet fit for the 21st century. Let’s be clear, a more equal society benefits everyone, even the very rich.”

The book explores two scenarios beginning in 1980 and ending in 2100. These scenarios entitled Too Little, Too Late and The Giant Leap explore how population, economies, resource use, pollution wellbeing and social tensions might change this century based on decisions made this decade.

'World and City' - How blogging on urban and regional development cooperation can be highly rewarding

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Wed, 31 Aug 2022 09:57:46 GMT

In this blog post you'll read how I learned to use the internet and social media marketing in the relative small field of urban and regional development. I write about efforts needed and how it increasingly generates benefits.

Please visit also the full blog 'World and City' on my website www.ugraute.de.

Using the internet over the years as a window to the world

When I logged in for the first time in 1993 it took me more than an hours to dial into the Internet via a telephone line of the network knot (gopher) at Dresden Technical University. The screen was black and I had to type all commands using computer codes. Their were no websites and no World Wide Web. However, the access opened a window to reach out to colleagues around the globe while staying at the Leibniz Institute for Ecological Urban and Regional Development (IÖR) in Dresden, Germany. It was amazing. Within short we established a network of spatial research institutes in Central and Eastern Europe. Thematic list servers like URBAN-L, CERRO or ONE-L allowed the exchange of texts and I could contribute to the first open online discussion of US President Bill Clinton's President's Council on Sustainable Development.

Blogging on 'World and City'

Today I have my own blog 'World and City'. It is on sustainable development of cities and territories and I am especially interested in the conditions, actors, instruments and processes that make sustainable development possible across the local, national and international level. Cities don't exist in silos. Instead, they are interrelated and interdependent of the larger world and its societies.

Investing time in a niche market

Through my LinkedIn network I share the posts of my website (ugraute.de) with a growing community of more than 3000 followers. Compared to e.g. Elon Mask who has over 100 million followers on Twitter this is nothing but that is the wrong comparison in anyway. Do you remember the the Lockdown during the early phases of COVID-19? I was sitting alone in my hone office. Email, zooming, Skype and blogging allowed me not only to continue working but to extend my network, develop my professional profile and to stay in touch with friends.

I am spending everyday some time either working on a blog post or exchanging with colleagues about my or their own posts. To be clear, this time invested in a small thematic field is no guarantee to generate contracts and income. It's a niche and a niche market. One should do it only if one likes to share, exchange and cooperate. Only then you can enjoy it and it may also pays out in other ways. Knowledge is something if you give it away you end up having more!

However, I am also observing that as consultant and after blogging for 1 1/2 years it is now more and more often the case that clients find me before I submit an offer or even find their tender/vacancy. By risking to expose myself with own posts and interesting content to the public I make it easier and more attractive for others to find me.

Overall, using the internet turned into an indispensable tool throughout my career. But yes, it's just a support tool and it flies only if filled with quality content and used in the spirit to share and cooperate. Otherwise it is just a burden and waste of time.

For further info, have a look for instance on my blog posts of this summer where I wrote e.g. a training for urban planners in Saudi Arabia, the World Urban Forum in Katowice or the World Cities Report of UN-Habitat. Just follow this Lin to my blog www.ugraute.de/blog-1 .

Peer reviewed paper of 1995 published in Raumforschung und Raumornung on the use of wide area computer networks in spatial research.

In 1994 I had written a first manual on how to enter the Internet. On these two pages I explain how the dial-in process to the internet started. Source: 'IÖR-Texte 46' was a first Internet manual for colleagues at the IÖR in 1994.

Riyadh Training 2022: Sustainable and Inclusive Urban Development

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Mon, 15 Aug 2022 08:59:50 GMT

The team of trainers (Frank D'hondt. Ulrich Graute AcSS, ISOCARP and Youssef Diab) put a focus on self-learning and co-learning of the 27 planners who attended both modules. The attached report tries with its text and pictures to feature how the new generation of urban planners in Saudi Arabia is getting ready for a more sustainable urban development. The report also includes a summary of the evaluation of the training.

The Training was organized by MOMRAH and delivered by UN-Habitat and UNDP in June 2022 in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

Building Resilience for Sustainable Urban Futures (World Cities Report 2022, Chapter 10)

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Wed, 13 Jul 2022 09:28:06 GMT

One more post before I take a summer break: What makes a city resilient?

Resilience against the challenges of the often unfriendly or even hostile environment was always a subject of urban policy. Even the internationally open trade City of Hamburg with its important harbour and global network has in its court of arms until today a castle and cathedral to demonstrate its strength and resilience. More modern is the image of the Development Bank of Latin America CAF and the Resilient Cities Network who apparently understand resilience more as a combined effort of interrelated and mutually supportive urban and even some rural functions. But no worries, there is no final answer yet on the question what defines resilience for sustainable cities. The search is still ongoing and so it is timely that the World Cities Report 2022 (published by UN-Habitat at WUF11 in Katowice in Poland) closes with a chapter on Building Resilience for Sustainable Urban Futures (pages 301-328).

Resilience doesn't happen - it needs to be build

In the World Cities Report 2022 (WCR) the chapter on resilience for sustainable development reads like a continuation of the chapter on urban governance for future cities. Right in the headline the chapter says why: Resilience doesn't happen it needs to be build:

' Building resilience for sustainable urban development requires integrated linkage of the various pillars of the global sustainable development agenda.`And 'building urban resilience is a multisectoral, multidimensional, multi-stakeholder process that requires a clear change of trajectory from previous paths .`

This is an important message to all who hope that the big problems of our time could be solved by just market forces, a strong leader at the top and/or IT/AI. Important is also that it is not about building back better but about building back differently.

' From this mindset, it follows that poverty and inequality are incompatible with sustainability and resilience since they undermine the basis of urban stability and potentially the fabric of society.' 'Accordingly, here urban resilience is framed as coping with and recovering from a shock by "bouncing back differently" to emphasize the need for substantive change in view of the urgency of meeting the various targets of the SDGs by 2030 and attaining net zero emissions by 2050 at the latest. '

In reference to the IPCC and other recent reports the WCR recalls that progress to date has been inadequate and that incremental progress is no longer sufficient and more substantive urban transformations are now required.

Policy Points for policymakers, governments and other governance stakeholders

The following list of Policy Points also highlights that building resilience is mainly a governance and cooperation challenge.

Searching optimistic scenarios for urban futures

The chapter Building Resilience of the WCR discusses in the following aspects of defining, understanding and measuring resilience, challenges and opportunities related to economic resilience, social resilience, environmental resilience and institutional resilience. These subchapter represents such a diversity of challenges but also responses that I cannot repeat them in this brief blog post.

What I especially like about this and other chapters of the report is that after an thorough analyses they end with an optimistic and forward looking attitude:

As outlined in chapter 1 of the WCR the author of chapter 10, David Simon, reiterates

' Urban futures can go in any number of directions and the duty of urban actors is to steer our cities toward
the most optimistic future, as outlined in the Sustainable Development Goals and the New Urban Agenda. Cities can continue on an unsustainable path of widening income inequality, worsening air quality, continuous urban sprawl, and growing slums and informal settlements that do not provide safe, adequate housing. Or they can change course and chart the path of well-planned, managed, and financed
cities that create better becomes for all of their residents, including the most vulnerable.'

(...) ' Substantive gains can be made under broadly existing arrangements, promoted by appropriate champions among officials and elected representatives, without demanding unrealistic institutional reinventions as a prerequisite. This can be achieved through a set of interventions targeting continuous transformational change, which can be grouped as follows:

provide the basic conditions to enable small steps or wins, which are easier to conceptualize and implement with existing momentum;

amplify small wins through sense-making, coupling and integrating—activities that explain the changes
and their significance in relation to transformational change, linking the changes to cognate ones in other departments or levels of institution, and connecting these changes and experiences to existing institutions so that they benefit and participate in the ongoing transformations; and

unblock stagnations by confronting social and perceptual obsessions with innovative and counter-intuitive interventions that demonstrate the potential of alternatives, provided that officials and elected
representatives are willing to engage critically, learn and adapt procedures and behaviours.'

There is just one suggestion for future chapters and WCR: The report and its chapters are generally based on the assumption of a dominance of good willing citizens and leaders. That is nice and honourable. However, looking at the reality of our world I miss more ideas on what to do when the good will doesn't prevail. The unblocking of stagnation as mentioned above is certainly an important aspect. Another aspect is upscaling: A lot is done already in form of pilot projects. This makes activists happy and reduces pressure on political leaders but it should not distract from the fact that often the technical solution is not missing but the political will and public support for a real transformative change in cities. Yes, and that brings us back to the observation that building resilience is less a technical than a challenge for governments, governance and all stakeholder groups. As an example the closing paragraphs of the chapter include Five climate action pathways to urban transformation.

The full World Cities Report 2022 published by UN-Habitat can be downloaded here: https://unhabitat.org/wcr/

_____

The UN-Habitat Team and Authors of the World Cities Report 2022 with David Simon as author of chapter 10 as second from the right side (Source: UN-Habitat)

According to the Acknowledgements the UN-Habitat Core Team and Authors includes:

UN-Habitat Core Team
Neil Khor (Division Director); Ben Arimah (Chief of Unit and Task Manager); Raymond Otieno Otieno; Matthijs van Oostrum; Mary Mutinda; Judith Oginga Martins

External Authors
Godwin Arku; Vanesa Castán Broto; Merlin Chatwin; Lewis Dijkstra; Simon Joss: Ayyoob Sharifi; Alice Sverdlik; David Simon; Pietro Florio; Sergio Freire; Thomas Kemper; Michele Melchiorri; Marcello Schiavina; Alfredo Alessandrini; Fabrizio Natale; Daniela Ghio; Olivier Draily; Linda Westman; Ping Huang; Enora Robin; Hita Unnikrishnan

Rethinking Urban Governance for the Future of Cities (World Cities Report 2022, Chapter 8)

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Mon, 11 Jul 2022 14:09:06 GMT

One of the strengths of the World Cities Report (WCR) published by UN-Habitat at WUF11 is that it is well structured into ten very informative chapters. In addition, each chapter is well structured. A chapter on Key Findings and Messages of each chapter introduces the report and at the beginning of each chapter the reader finds a summary of Quick Facts and Policy Points as discussed in the upcoming chapter. As an example please find below those facts and points relevant for chapter 8 on Urban Governance.

Writing the report happened mainly during the COVI D-19 pandemic and it's probably because of this that each chapter is seen through the lens of the pandemic and public health. The chapter draws lessons like

Shocks disproportinatly impact vulnerable communities
High-quality individualized data matter for public health measures
Beyond response: preparation and prevention

In the following the chapter reiterates the importance of governing for, and with, new digital technology and the need to improve multilevel governance. It increases the quality of the report a lot that the chapter has a differentiated view on these aspects.

For instance, digitalization is not simply described as a must with all its advantages but also with respect to possible pitfalls of technologically-mediated future cities. Such risks are described with respect to 'Smart City' technologies or facial recognition algorithms. Fortunately, the report also describes how such pitfalls can be prevented.

Towards the end the chapter asks if decentralization (and with that indirectly also democracy) can survive global pandemic and climate change? The answer is yes, provided that the share of people who trust their government can be increased.

But how much urban democracy and participation citizens really want?

I support the need to address the trust equation as suggested by the authors. I also understand that the UN as a value driven organization and many planners based on their own experience highlights the need of democracy, decentralization, participation and accountability as success factors of urban governance. Personally, I am very supportive.

However, the chapter doesn't ask and certainly it doesn't answer how much democracy and participation citizens want in urban governance to express their voice! This is a deficit because the call for more urban democracy and participation is not everywhere and always clear and loud. Do all citizens really want to have a say on everything local? What seems to be louder is the call for effective and efficient service delivery. People want to be heard where they feel ignored but above that they want that the city with its urban services simply functions and delivers. It seems to me, where urban governments (democratic or autocratic) deliver excellent or at least good enough urban services the call for more local democracy and participation is not so strong.

With the above, I am not saying that democratic, decentralized and participative forms of urban governance are not the better ones but in the chapter this position is not supported enough by evidence. The report should be more clear at this point. If there is no clear finding it should be mentioned as such.

_______

P.S.: The World Cities Report 2022 is a heavy weight

The printed version with its 387 pages weighs 1272 grams, almost three times the weight of an iPod or about nine times that of an iPhone. Yes, I consider myself a lucky one because I got a printout ad the World Urban Forum 11 in Katowice, Poland. I like to thumb through a book. I know there is on the downside among others the need to produce paper from trees but on the upside is the fact that a book doesn’t need for its production rare earth like a computer does. It also doesn’t need the electricity for the device and possible clouds all the time while reading it. Overall, I work more and more with electronic versions, and that is fine. However, ones in a while I enjoy reading in a printed report with all its texts, tables and maps.

The full report published by UN-Habitat can be downloaded here: https://unhabitat.org/wcr/

Turning 60 today and having the most exciting professional phase still ahead – it’s possible and even likely!

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Tue, 05 Jul 2022 21:23:20 GMT

Ulrich Graute - Since 6 July 1962

When people turn 60 – like me today on 6th of July – some are already retired, others get ready for retirement and again others are afraid of not keeping up with the dynamism of the world of work. I don't. My father used his 60th birthday to organize a great party with all friends and relatives in his bakery (his workplace). I can’t do that because I am an international urban and regional development expert and my friends and relatives are spread across Germany, Europe and the entire world. The carbon footprint of such a party would be unacceptable. But I am lucky, I just returned form a training on sustainable urban planning in Riyadh, met many of my friends and colleagues at the World Urban Forum in Katowice, Poland and went right afterwards to the 30th anniversary party of the IÖR in Dresden. As I write these lines I just returned from another dinner with nice local friends here in Berlin. So, I am doing good and I’ll keep my birthday celebration small and contemplative.

Yesterday, I discussed with my family and a visiting friend, Zainab Al Mansour from Saudi Arabia the question when does a junior become a senior professional. The main line of argumentation was that it would be somewhere between five and ten years but that there might be exceptions according to professions. And, of course, some call themselves already senior after two or three years. The truth is we are all juniors if we look at what is ahead of us! Mitigating climate change, overcoming wars and inequality, fostering sustainable development and designing the future of work where all of us find their place and decent income. That scale of interrelated challenges is new to all of us. We’re not prepared for this and signs are mounting that the dynamic gets disruptive. Disruption brings risks but also tremendous opportunities.

When I left university in September 1989, I had no clue that just weeks later the Berlin Wall would fall. That was a disruption nobody had expected and nobody was prepared for. Political systems, economies and societies of former socialist countries imploded. And there was no UN (or other) handbook, guideline, toolkit or software to help. People had to muddle through on their own. In May 1990 I was sent to Dresden in the still existing German Democratic Republic to support democratic institution building, local and regional development in those districts that should form the new State of Saxony, a regional state within the enlarged Federal Republic of Germany. Well, I didn’t meet Vladimir Putin but I know that he worked in the same city and at the same time as a young KGB officer. It was a wild dynamic time. Later the EU asked me to use the experience from those dynamic times to manage programmes on urban and regional cooperation in support of EU Eastern enlargement. And after that the UN assigned me with similar tasks at UN Headquarters and in the Global South. Always working along and across borders of countries, systems, disciplines and policy levels - and sometimes I didn't fit into traditional boxes of professions.

The support that I delivered in those earlier years as ‘junior’ to cities and regions was based on both, the knowledge that I had gained at university, a lot of improvisation and the approach of trial and error. Not a perfect starting condition, but nobody was prepared! We were all juniors! In spite of the challenges, it was an exciting and fulfilling time. It formed me for my professional life ever since. I learned to life and work in a dynamic environment, to keep learning, to be ready for the unexpected and to support institutions and cooperation in a context of instability.

Something similar and even more challenging may lie ahead of us due to the need to decarbonize the way we live, to adapt to the changing world of work etc. To think about current risks and threats can be scary but since I lived through something similar before, I see more the opportunities to improve urban and rural life and to develop a more just, inclusive and sustainable world. It won’t be easy. It never was.

I would have loved to invite you all to a great birthday party but I am glad to stay in touch with you all at training courses in Saudi Arabia, the World Urban Forum in Katowice, a party in Dresden, a dinner in Berlin, via my LinkedIn Network, my website and blog (www.ugraute.de) or in whatever way you prefer.

We have to grow up to the challenge but if we really try we can make it and even have fun while doing it. And yes, for me it indeed means that -provided I stay healthy enough- the most exciting phase of my professional life may still lie ahead of me. And the experience of my early years of my career may even serve as an asset. That sounds good. Let's go for it.

Selected LinkedIn posts in addition to this and other blog posts on this site

Posts on the training in Riyadh: https://www.linkedin.com/posts/graute_class-of-2022-successfully-ends-transformative-activity-6945775530159828993-ivOd?utm_source=linkedin_share&utm_medium=member_desktop_web

Post on the World Urban Forum in Katowice: https://www.linkedin.com/posts/graute_president-of-un-ecosoc-and-heads-of-g7-express-activity-6947863205578735616-bo_j?utm_source=linkedin_share&utm_medium=member_desktop_web

Post on the party in Dresden https://www.linkedin.com/posts/graute_happy-birthday-herzlichen-gl%C3%BCckwunsch-activity-6948611396158803968-sF1G?utm_source=linkedin_share&utm_medium=member_desktop_web

Graute Family tree since 1496 - Farmers, construction workers, bakers and one international consultant

The World Urban Forum 2022 as a sign of hope and progress!

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Thu, 30 Jun 2022 06:51:50 GMT

Ulrich and others at the ISOCARP Training Event The Planning System we Need on 28 June 2022 at WUF11 in Katowice, Poland Picture Naomi Hoogervorst

The Habitat III conference in Quito, Ecuador marked the end of the preparatory process of the New Urban Agenda. It was not the fulminate kick-off of its implementation as many cities had hoped for. Instead, motivation often faded soon after Habitat III and UN-Habitat embarked difficult years with an evaluation followed by an internal restructuring and on-going budget reduction. Then came Covid-19 and the lockdown as additional troubled waters for the already stressed United Nations Human Settlements Programme, UN-Habitat.

However, this eleventh session of the World Urban Forum on 26 – 30 June 2022 in Katowice, Poland (the flagship conference of the United Nations and UN-Habitat in the field of urban development) turned out a success and sign of hope that the future might be brighter:

First of all, it was the first big conference after the outbreak of the pandemic and as such it was literally a re-union of 9000 representatives, experts and urban practitioners in Katowice (in total 20.000+ registered online and in place attendees). The attached pictures give an indication how the re-union was visible in the city.

Second, in addition to statement by the UN-Habitat Executive Director, Ms. Maimunah Mohd Sharif it was the presence at many WUF11 events by the President of the United Nations Economic and Social Commission (ECOSOC) and Ambassador of Botswana, H.E. Collen V. Kelapile which was welcomed as a sign of clear support for urban sustainability and the future of UN-Habitat. If his work and that of a newly established group of Friends of UN-Habitat (currently 41 member states) leads to an increase of the institutional financing of UN-Habitat (as the President declared as goal), the programme will be in a better position to achieve development goals including SDGs and the New Urban Agenda.

Thirdly, in spite of on-going pandemic, the war of Russia against Ukraine, climate and multiple other crises the presence of 9000 participants from national and local governments, academia, professional organizations like ISOCARP and grass root groups was a clear sign that international, national and local governmental and non-governmental actors stay focussed on the need of ‘Transforming our Cities for a Better Urban Future’ and the prominent role the UN and UN-Habitat can play in this process as facilitator, coordinator etc.

WUF11 was a happy re-union and place of intensive exchange. Congratulations to UN-Habitat!

But now let’s not loose the momentum of these days and intensify our work. I know the New Urban Agenda is for UN-Habitat and programme for the period until 2036 (when Habitat IV may approve a new agenda) but it’s a political compromise and not a practical guidance document. National and local authorities, civil society and other stakeholders still need to go the ‘last mile’, i.e. to bridge the often unknown territory between the UN agendas, toolkits and global advice and the needs of the practice.

I just returned from conducting with Frank D’hondt and Youssef Diab a UN-Habitat Transformative Training Course on Sustainable Urban Planning in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. We know that a lot can be done. Our resources may be limited but the ‘little’ we can do can have a major impact – if we really do it.

Spaceship WUF11: Politicians striving for a sustainable urban future

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Wed, 29 Jun 2022 05:54:24 GMT

The International Conference Centre is placed like a specship between skyscarper and the inner city of Katowice

The 11th session World Urban Forum (WUF11) has some god news for all those engaged in the transforming of cities for a sustainable urban future. The WUF with its 14.500 participants (online and in-person) from 153 countries in 2022 is usually mainly a nice get together of politics, experts and others engaged in urban development but 2022 is different.

On 28th June I attended the Ministerial Roundtable. It brought together Ministers and senior representatives of national governments and regional political bodies to elevate the debate on sustainable urbanization to accelerate the implementation of the New Urban Agenda to support the Sustainable Development Goals and other global agendas. It showed the support of Member States for UN-Habitat and the engagement of the Executive Director to achieve the goals of the New Urban Agenda.

The President of the Economic and Social Council ECOSOC, His Excellency Collen Vixen Kelapile described at the Roundtable efforts of the UN to provide more support to the important subject of sustainable urbanization. He listed ECOSOC meetings on sustainable urbanization on 21 April 2022 and on the New Urban Agenda on 28 April 2022. On 21 June 2022 followed the official launch of the Group of Friends of UN-Habitat, Sustainable Urbanization and the New Urban Agenda. Such country groupings of friends are at the UN important facilitators for change and the ECOSOC President underscored that the Presidents of both, the UN General Assembly and of ECOSOC in cooperation with the forty Member States of the Group of Friends aim at strengthening UN-Habitat and that explicitly includes increasing the general budget of UN-Habitat - which currently is lacking sufficient funding for goal achievement.

Ms. Maimunah Mohd Sharif, Executive Director of UN-Habitat clearly asked Member States to present in near future answers to these guiding questions:

From regional and cross-regional perspectives and a few months after the High-Level Meeting on the Progress of Implementation of the New Urban Agenda, what are key strategies available to accelerate the implementation of the New Urban Agenda?
Which urban legal frameworks, urban and territorial planning frameworks are being developed in your country, to guide the transformation of cities and human settlements towards a sustainable urban future?
How does your government/regional/sub-regional mechanism intend to facilitate investments to support the transformation of cities and human settlements for a sustainable urban future?
Which steps have been taken by your government to empower local and subnational authorities in this process?
What more could be done by your government in the next two years to keep and increase political momentum for the implementation of the New Urban Agenda?

I learnt to abserve carefully political UN meetings and distinguish between nice speeches and the reality. However, after the Ministerial Roundtable it seems that the General Assembly and ECOSOC have undestood that achieving ambitious sustainability goals while withdrawing funds from UN agencies simply don't go alomg well.

In addition, I hope and in part got the impression that the Executive Director, Ms. Maimunah Sharif understands that goals like sustainable urbanization in the cities of the world won't be achieved by political softtalk. They need a clear political strategy in a dynamic environment full of conflicts and compeeting interest.

The President of ECOSOC (centre), the Executive Director of UN-Habitat and a minister of Poland at the Ministerial Roundtable (Source: UN)

Please find the full documentation of the Ministerial Roundtable on UNTV: https://media.un.org/en/asset/k12/k12xou8xov

COVID-19 as a Crisis of Governance and a Stimulus for Research Cooperation

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Fri, 17 Jun 2022 16:37:58 GMT

Developing new forms of research cooperation during the pandemic

During the Corona pandemic most of my usual forms of work like field missions, conferences and working meetings didn't work and so I looked for new forms of networking and cooperation. Inte rested in governance as I am I was glad that I could join two online discussion groups on the SDG 16 Hub (sdg16hub.org) of the UNDP Oslo Governance Centre (UNDP OGC):

Civic engagement and civic space: Moderated by Cristina Ordóñez (Grupo FARO) and Emanuele Sapienza and Julia Kercher (UNDP), with contributions from Emmanuel Justima (MODRICENIR), Gazbiah Sans (USAID), Ana Patricia Muñoz (Gropo FARO), Thomas Davies (City University of London), Mandeep Tiwana (CIVICUS), Elizabeth Lockwood (CBM), Sondre Nave (Norwegian Forum for Development and Environment), Sone Osakwe (CSEA), Gabriell Duarte (ASIES), John Romano (TAP Network), Ulrich Graute (International Affairs Consultant), Pytrik Dieuwke Oosterhof (O-Land Consulting), Saranbaatar Bayarmagnai (OHCHR), Dian Kuswadini (UNESCO) and Joan Mudindi Vwamu, Alice Wadstöm, Sarah Rattray, Cat Botto and Priya Sood (UNDP).

Transparent, inclusive and responsive public service delivery: Moderated by Adedeji Adeniran (CESA) and Zoe Pelter and Aseem Andrews (UNDP), with contributions from Joseph Ishaku (Kwakol), Sone Osakwe (CESA), Oluwole Ojewale (ISSAfrica), Ulrich Graute (International Affairs Consultant) and Charlene Lui, Gichung Lee and Joan Mudindi Vwamu (UNDP).

I wasn't aware of it but according to the acknowledgement in the study our discussions were valued and feed into a joint report by the United Nations Development Programme’s Oslo Governance Centre and Southern Voice which was published in late May under the title: "COVID-19 and the Crisis of Governance: The impact of the Pandemic on Peace, Justice and Inclusion (SDG 16)".

The report addresses the subject in five chapters featuring each one of the world regions:

AFRICA : Opportunities for a robust COVID-19 recovery grounded on SDG 16

ARAB STATES : Overcoming the fragilities of governance systems for sustainable recovery

ASIA : Reversing inequalities in power distribution to achieve SDG 16

EUROPE & CENTRAL ASIA : Investing to rebuild trust in public institutions and local and national levels

LATIN AMERICA : Reinforcing democratic institutions to achieve peace, justice and inclusion

The production method of this report was driven by the limitations of the pandemic but offers also interesting insight on hybrid forms of research cooperation. Certainly, we didn't cover all related aspects in our online discussion groups. That was delivered by many more experts in form of regional roundtable discussion groups. However, I am amazed that the key conclusions of the report feature main aspects of our group discussion. I don't know if it was done by purpose or not but it seems that the online discussion groups functioned like a reference group which contributed through their own discussion on the SDG 16 Hub to the findings of groups. The policy briefs for the final report were then compiled by Adedeji Adeniran (Centre for the Study of the Economies of Africa); Natasha Palansuriya, Thamindri Aluvihare and Minuri Perera (Center for Poverty Analysis); Carolina Tchintian, Manuel Bertazzo and Gerardo Scherlis (Centre for the Implementation of Public Policies for Equity and Growth); and Ulrika Jonsson (UNDP OGC), Hassan Krayem (UNDP Amman Regional Hub) and Irakli Kotetishvili (UNDP Istanbul Regional Hub).

Executive Summary of the Report with key findings and recommendations

The COVID-19 pandemic has had significant health and economic consequences worldwide and is presenting unprecedented challenges to governance systems. In many contexts, the social contract between the state and its population is being strained, with diminishing levels of trust in governance systems; democratic political processes are being disrupted as the pandemic is used as a means of centralizing and consolidating power; and accountability and the rule of law are being undermined. Alongside the health and socio-economic effects of the pandemic, its impact on governance has been corrosive and is likely to require a longer time frame for recovery.

In this context, the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, with its ambition to achieve more peaceful, just and inclusive societies (SDG 16), has become even more relevant. With less than a decade left to achieve the 2030 Agenda, there is a real urgency in working towards achieving the goals and targets – many of which have faced setbacks because of the COVID-19 pandemic, but which can be the basis upon which to “build forward better”. This is especially relevant in terms of SDG 16 and the need to embed the principles of SDG 16 in COVID-19 recovery processes, whether this means inclusive and quality delivery of services, reducing violence or ensuring better access to justice for all.

COVID-19 HAS REVEALED THAT THE APPROPRIATE DISTRIBUTION, USE AND OVERSIGHT OF POWER IS THE CORNERSTONE FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT. Power dynamics are at the heart of the emerging trends on SDG 16, including the relationships between citizens and state, between different arms of government, between state and non-state actors and between states at the global level. In many contexts, the social contract between the state and its population is under strain, with diminishing levels of trust in governance systems, and democratic political processes are being disrupted as the pandemic is used to centralize and consolidate power. To recover from the COVID-19 pandemic and to “build forward better” and more equitably, we must put people at the centre and reinforce the aspirations for peace, justice and inclusion articulated in the 2030 Agenda.

THE ROLE OF THE PUBLIC SECTOR IN MANAGING THE PANDEMIC AND FACILITATING ACCESS TO SERVICES IS FUNDAMENTAL TO AN EFFECTIVE RESPONSE. The need for investment in effective and responsive governance in order to facilitate more equitable access to health, education, social protection and other public services has been highlighted by the pandemic. The role of local government and investment in the systems that provide accessible and quality services is crucial to building resilience to future pandemics. The pandemic has demonstrated that a failure to address bottlenecks such as corruption and mismanagement of the public sector can result in devastating loss of lives.

THE PANDEMIC CANNOT BE AN EXCUSE TO ABUSE STATE POWER AND RESTRICT CIVIC SPACE. COVID-19 policies have accelerated some authoritarian trends that existed prior to the pandemic and have been used to undermine dissent, target human rights defenders and the media, and erode oversight institutions, including the judiciary and legislative and national human rights institutions. While states have responsibility for exercising their powers to manage the pandemic, there is concern across all regions that in some cases states have abused the use of emergency laws to actively close civic space. At the same time, the pandemic has also brought about new forms of collaboration among civil society actors, inspiring social movements and promoting solidarity to resist the abuse of state authority. Government willingness to collaborate with civil society has been key to a successful strategy to respond to the pandemic.

SOCIAL EXCLUSION HAS BEEN INSTRUMENTALIZED AS A POLITICAL STR ATEGY. Inequalities and social exclusion have increased over the last two years due to uneven responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. This is in part due to policy decisions that have disenfranchised some communities and disproportionately affected them. This includes inequalities in access to social protection programmes and other social services, enabling corruption at all levels and promoting political fragmentation. Exclusion and marginalization have been active strategies to perpetrate everyday violence on poor and marginalized populations. For example, overzealous enforcement of pandemic measures disproportionately affects those who live in the margins of poverty, including migrant workers, day labourers and indigenous peoples. Particular attention needs to be paid to the brand of politics that has silenced opposition voices and attacked minority rights.

THE FALLOUT FROM THE PANDEMIC IS HITTING WOMEN ESPECIALLY HARD. Gender-based violence has increased worldwide during the pandemic – justice systems have struggled to provide the necessary access to legal services, and access to comprehensive social services has also been limited due to pandemic restrictions. It is also important to look at how the repercussions of the pandemic on women, in particular their increased burden of labour, have affected their participation in the economy and in public life. At the same time, wome n have been at the forefront of many of the protest movements calling for accountability and social justice. The impact of the crisis on women and their role in leading responses and recovery at local and national level needs to be further recognized and supported.

THE CURRENT RISE IN INEQ UALITY AND POVERTY CAN BE ROOT CAUSES OF FUTURE CONFLICTS. There have been reversals across the board on targets related to peace, justice and inclusion, especially in crisis settings. While in some cases there are signs of both resilience within communities and a reduction in violence, there are high levels of mistrust of governments, which can lead to social unrest. These remain potential drivers of future conflict, as some communities may be disproportionately affected by the pandemic, and the government is not able to respond to those communities’ priorities.

THE RAPID MOVE TO ONLINE SPACES DURING THE PANDEMIC HAS HIGHLIGHTED THE ENORMOUS POTENTIAL OF DIGITALIZATION, BUT ALSO THE ASSOCIATED RISKS. Digital spaces have become an alternative, yet potent, tool for political participation. Young people, in particular, have been able to effectively use the digital sphere and social media to politically mobilize and to take part in the political discourse. Although the digital space can be used to improve transparency and access to information and services and to promote debate, it can at the same time be used to promote misinformation or disinformation, to attack and target opposition, activists and civil society, particularly women, and to disempower and silence them. The digital divide remains a challenge, as it reinforces inequalities, pushing those who are furthest behind even further back, as difficulty in accessing technology acts as an additional stumbling block to accessing services and political participation.

Riyadh at 45 °C: Training on Sustainable Urban Development in Saudi Arabia

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Thu, 09 Jun 2022 14:41:08 GMT

The Class of 2022

Participants from around Saudi Arabia attend the Sustainable and Inclusive Urban Development Training in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, Module 1: 5 - 9 June 2022 and Module 2: 19 - 23 June 2022

Saudi cities are developping fast but climate crisis and the end of the age of fossil fuels announce a time of change

Travelling to Saudi Arabia regularly since 2008 the changes are dramatic. This is best visible in the fast growing cities of this Kingdom where already 86% of the population live in an urban environment. The country is building entire new cities (e.g. Neom) and in the already built environment of Riyadh a new Metro with five lines and altogether 85 stations is only one of the mega projects. Business centres, new neighbourhoods and cinemas are mushrooming in the big cities. Women don't depend on a driver anymore but instead they drive on their own on the way to their new jobs. A lot more could be listed.

Already in 2008 I had first discussions with the Chief Economist of the government about the need that Saudi Arabia needs to develop 'beyond petrol'. The Kingdom is trapped by oil and gas in two ways: Like many other countries Saudi Arabia got used to fossil fuels as basis for its industries, transportation and living standard. In addition, the selling of oil and gas generates a major share of national revenues. It is therefore no surprise that Saudi Arabia hesitated and still hesitates to face the fact that the oil and gas based business model of the country will soon come to an end. The necessary energy transition will affect every sphere of life. That the need for change comes together with the climate crisis only adds to the dramatic of the situation.

But what can fit better to this phase of new orientation than a intensive training with young planners from around the country on perspectives for sustainable and collaborative urban planning in support of the transition? The Ministry of Municipal, Rural Affairs and Housing MOMRAH understands this and launched a training programme together with UN-Habitat, supported by UNDP and with a trainer team composed of Frank D'hondt, Youssef Diab and myself.

Takeaways from Module 1

Time to change the way Saudi cities are planned

Saudi Arabia is just at the beginning of a transformative process towards more sustainable urban development. Financed by a wealth of oil and gas revenues the government still invests in a number of more traditional mega projects. Ambitious projects like the construction of the Riyadh Metro are impressive but it is astonishing how isolated these projects exist next to each other. For instance, the metro station next to the King Abdullah Financial District (another mega project) is designed by the famous architect Zaha Hadid Architects from the UK (see picture in the blog post). Unfortunately, it was planned and built without a bridge or any other crossing to the existing neighbourhood Al Ghadir. Brandnew international hotels in that neighbourhood promote their location as close to the Financial District but their guests can neither reach the Financial District nor the metro station without a car. Building a metro station not accessible from an existing neighbourhood is the best proof that planning needs to change from just thinking big to a more collaborative, integrated and inclusive planning at a human scale.

The Riyadh Metro with the design by Zaha Hadid (center) is linked for pedestrians to the King Abdullal Financial District in the background but not with the Al Ghadir neighbourhood in the front and the Hilton hotel from where the picture was taken.

A new generation of planners is getting ready

Saudi Arabia has invested heavily in education and has sent hundred thousands of its young citizens to study abroad. Many are returning home and some of them start working for urban planning departments, Royal Commissions or ministries. This is a unique opportunity to modernize not only urban planning but more generally public service delivery in the country. A more people than business centred planning and development may not promise a fast return for investments but it puts the seeds in the ground for a better integrated and sustainable development. That's where the training kicks in.

The first module of the training programme included in addition to lectures and working groups also walking excursions in several neighbourhoods of Riyadh. Doing that at 42-45 °C is an eye opener for what is needed for a more sustainable development of Saudi cities in times of climate change. Maybe the trainees learn from it and when the next big developper comes to their city they will invite the company to present their ideas also during a walking tour on the site and not only from a limousine or in an air condition of board rooms.

The Deputy Minister Adel Alzahrani and Dr Khaled Alnefaiy as Director of the Research and Studies Department of MOMRAH value the growing number of young planners in the country and both used the training as an opportunity for an exchange with participating planners. Following this, the Deputy Minister invited participants to visit the Ministry and to continue and intensify the exchange during Module 2 of the training programme.

Adel Alzahrani (left) is Deputy Minister of Urban Planning at the Ministry of Municipal Rural Affairs and Housing MOMRAH. Dr Khaled Alnefaiy (right) is Director of the Research and Studies Department at the same ministry.

UN cooperation as a chance for Saudi Arabia

Based on their global cooperation networks UN agencies like UN-Habitat and UNDP develop policies, strategies and guidance tools for integrated, inclusive and collaborative planning. Therefore, the cooperation with these agencies is a chance for the country to benefit from knowledge and experience available in these institutions.

The first Module of the training programme featured e.g. the UN's International Guidelines for Urban and Territorial Planning (IG-UTP) and the Guidance Framework for Urban-Rural Partnerships. Inviting experts from academia (Prof Youssef Diab) and the International Society of City and Regional Planners ISOCARP (Frank D'hondt and Ulrich Graute) as trainers provided the opportunity to inform about, discuss and explore new approaches for a more inclusive and sustainable planning. And of course, the growing number of women among trainees not only supports gender equality but also a more inclusive planning of cities.

The second module is scheduled to begin in Riyadh on 19 June 2022.

Group picture of the Deputy Minister, Trainers and Trainees

The Team of the training: Zainab Al Mansour, Frank D'hondt, Halima Mrabti, Youssef Diab and Ulrich Graute

Pictures: Ulrich Graute, Zainab Al Mansour, Ali Alghamdi and other participants

Transformative Training Course on Sustainable Urban Planning in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Tue, 17 May 2022 12:08:26 GMT

Trainings team

Frank D’hondt (Athens), Ulrich Graute (Berlin) & Youssef Diab (Paris) in cooperation with Ayman El-Hefnawi and Halima Mrabti of UN-Habitat in Riyadh

Introduction and Objectives

The United Nations Human Settle ments Programme, UN-Habitat, is the agency for human settlements. It is mandated by the UN General Assembly to promote socially and environmentally sustainable towns and cities with the goal of providing adequate shelter for all. UN-Habitat office in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) has been working in several projects to support the UN-Habitat mandates and to boost the implementation of the NUA and the SDGs especially goal 11 as well as support the implementation of the Saudi Vision 2030 and its different programs that corresponds with the mandate of UN-Habitat. The Saudi Arabia Office is affiliated to The Regional Office of Arab States (ROAS), which is responsible for the implementation of the UN Habitat Work Programme at Regional and at Country level for all domains of change under the UN-Habitat Strategic Plan (2020-2023). The KSA country programmes and projects are establishing a wide program to enhance UN-Habitat's capacity of delivery at the country level.

UN-Habitat has established a historical strong relationship with the Ministry of Municipalities, Rural Affairs and Housing (MOMRAH) through the 6 years successful program of the Future Saudi Cities Program (FSCP). Following this project, UN-Habitat jointly with UNDP have signed a two years new project titled “Support for National Spatial Strategy 2030 in Saudi Arabia”. This project has been designed to boost the capacity of the Government to achieve the objectives of the National Spatial Strategy (NSS) along with their alignment with the Vision 2030. The project envisages the support to the NSS implementation Office established inside the deputyship of town planning with specific focus on the following outcomes:

Improved capacity for the Implementation of the National Spatial Strategy (NSS) 2030;
Improved access to urban data between line ministries in NSS 2030 platform;
Improved localizing sustainable urban development at national, regional and local authorities.

In addition to these outputs, the project is designed to pr ovide advi sory services in novel areas of interest to the urban planning and management sector. The project, based on available budget, will provide technical assistance to various activities operated within the deputyship of Town Planning including the emerging urban planning issues within the deputyship mandate. Finally, the project will be mostly a follow up building on the lessons of the Future Saudi Cities Programme (FSCP) to enhance the urban planning practice in Saudi Arabia at national, regional and local levels.

The service delivery by the three training experts is mainly to support the above project, especially Outcome (3) on “Improved localizing sustainable urban development at national, regional and local authorities”, which is the responsibility of UN-Habitat.

The following two training modules - the be delivered in Riyadh, KSA - shall be provided for the “Sustainable and Inclusive Urban Development” thematic package:

Integrated Urban Spatial Planning;
Inclusive & interactive Planning Processes.

UN-Habitat and MOMRAH jointly agreed upon following dates for the two training modules:

Module 1: Sunday 5th to Thursday 9th of June
Module 2: Sunday 19th to Thursday 23th of June

Each module will entail both a theoretical part, aimed at building in depth conceptual understanding, and a practical part, aimed at equipping the audience with knowledge of specific tools, methods and/or protocols to enable the turning of theoretical knowledge into actions (check Annex).

The number of participants attending both Modules will be between 25-30 Participants.

The Terms of Reference of the Training Service includes the table below:

2. Introduction of the key trainers

The Training Course will be prepared and con ducted by:

Msc. Frank J. D’hondt

As Director of the Territorial Capital Institute, F rank has a proven track record in worldwide capacity building and training of local, regional, and national government officials to better perform their ‘sustainability planning’ objectives or tasks at hand, as well to engage and train urban and rural communities in the planning process and system at stake in their countries. Working experiences include Kosovo, Palestine, Afghanistan, East-Timor, China, Laos, Thailand, the Caribbean and West and East-Africa (Somalia). As voluntary Secretary General of ISOCARP (non-profit organization), Frank engages with public and private institutions seeking capacity building and training. Frank is also a recurrent ‘special matter expert’ to assess UAE public entities (from municipal to federal level) as part of the UAE Excellence Award Programme – most recently assessing the UAE Ministries of Housing, Urban Planning, Infrastructure, Energy, Environment and Climate Change. Frank is from Belgium but lives in Athens, Greece – within good reach of Riyadh.

Dr. Ulrich Graute

U lrich Graute is a social scientist, urban and regional development expert and has a keen interest in national and international policies for urban and regional development to achieve resilience and sustainable development. He is familiar with peer-to-peer learning, leadership advisory, advocacy and blogs on governance. Ulrich Graute has a strong record working in Saudi Arabia since 2008 with UNDESA, UN-Habitat and Oliver Wyman. His cooperation with the Ministry of Economy and Planning and with MOMRAH covered subjects like the more traditional Five Year Planning of the past. He was international editor and co-author of the study ‘Review of Regional Planning in Saudi Arabia’ and a first five days transformational training for urban planners in Riyadh. He is together with Frank D’hondt author of the UN Handbook ‘International Guidelines on Urban and Territorial Planning’ (IG-UTP, 2018). In 2020 Ulrich co-chaired a Private Sector Workshop on the ‘KSA Sustainability Roadmap - The Way Forward to Achieve the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGS) organized by the Ministry of Economy and Planning and Oliver Wyman. Ulrich is Fellow of the Academy of Social Sciences, AcSS (UK) and Member of the Scientific Committee of ISOCARP.

Prof. Youssef Diab

Y oussef Diab is a Professor of Urban Sustainable Planning in the University Gustave Eiffel in France. He is also in charge of prospective and Chairs development in the EIVP: Ecole des Ingénieurs de la Ville de Paris. A graduate school dedicated to urban and municipal engineering. This school is attached to the city of Paris and affiliated to the University Gustave Eiffel. He is also involved in graduate and applied research programs dedicated to urban Engineering in other European, Asian, Middle Eastern, and North American universities and international organizations. He was in charge for the city of Paris of the prospective research program: PARIS 2030.

This pictures was taken at a first UN-Habitat "Training Programme on the International Guidelines on Urban and Territorial Planning" 7-11 January 2018, Ryadh. The training team at the time included Remy Sietcheping, Andrea Oyuela and Ulrich Graute.

INTERREG 2021-2027 launched: Local and regional cooperation programmes across the borders, in and outside the EU will received almost EUR 10 billion

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Fri, 13 May 2022 08:29:40 GMT

S ince 1990, the European Union promotes cooperation between cities, regions and countries to help their economic and social development and tackle the obstacle of borders. Interreg Europe is a cooperation programme, co-funded by the European Union and strives to reduce disparities in the levels of development, growth and quality of life in and across Europe’s regions. Originally, Interreg was developed as a Community Initiative with a budget of just EUR 1 billion covering exclusively cross-border cooperation. Later, Interreg has been extended to transnational and interregional cooperation. Now, in spring 2022 is approving the first programmes of the funding period 2021-2027.

There is always a discussion about the value added of cooperation programmes which are not directly linked to major investments. The value of co-operation is difficult to measure in economic terms. Cooperation develops between individuals and institutions over time. But isn't it smart to stimulate cooperation at a smaller scale first to develop partnerships and ideas which then may lead to investments covered by other national or European programmes?

In 2021-2027 programmes aim at contributing to implement EU’s cohesion policy main priorities:

In 2021-2027 Interreg has 2 new specific objectives:

Interreg Specific Objective (ISO) 1 : A better Cooperation governance ;
To enhance the institutional capacity of public administrations,
To resolve legal and administrative obstacles in border regions,
To promote sustainable democracy,
To strengthen mutual trust among citizens.
Interreg Specific Objective (ISO) 2: A safer and more secure Europe
For actions in the fields of border crossing management, mobility and migration management, including the protection and economic and social integration of third-country nationals.
To support employment and labour market measures such as improving access to employment, encouraging life-long learning, promoting gender balance and fostering equal opportunities.

As cooperation is the essence of the European Union, the regulatory provisions establish a much stronger link between Interreg programmes and Macro Regional Strategies and Sea Basin Strategies.

This “embedding principle” means that any ERDF funded programmes should be able to support cooperation actions.

Today, this European Territorial Cooperation (Interreg) is organised under four strands to make cooperation
happening everywhere in Europe and beyond.

1. Interreg Strand A : Cross Border Cooperation

With a budget of 6.5 billion EUR, cross-border programmes are implemented within the EU and at EU’s external borders.

49 programmes in the EU, making sure to turn some border obstacles into opportunities between EU Member States.
10 Interreg IPA programmes, which are operating at EU’s border with IPA countries. They are mainly contributing to the enlargement policy of the EU.
14 Interreg NEXT programmes, implemented at the borders with Neighbouring countries of the EU

2. Interreg Strand B: Transnational Cooperation

14 transnational cooperation programmes will continue to support cooperation activities at larger scale in Europe and beyond.
4 transnational programmes, namely Interreg Baltic Sea Region, Interreg Danube Region, Interreg IPA Adrion and Interreg Alpine Space programme will directly support the Macro Regional Strategies covering their geographical area. 80% of their thematic concentration should be align with a Macro Regional Strategy,
Transnational programmes linked to Sea Basin Strategies, like Interreg Atlantic Area or Interreg NEXT Black Sea Basin also apply the thematic concentration
Transnational programmes can benefit from additional funding from ERDF, IPA or NDICI.

3. Interreg Strand C: Interregional Cooperation

The interregional cooperation strand aims at boosting the effectiveness of cohesion policy by promoting exchange of experiences, innovative approaches and capacity building between regions (Art. 3(3) ETC Regulation (EU) 2021/1059).

For the period 2021-2027, four interregional cooperation programmes will continue:

Allocation for this strand amounts to more than EUR 550 million.

The strand C programmes cover all 27 EU member states. Norway and Switzerland will continue to be part of the programmes, as for 2014-2020, with their own funds.

Moreover, URBACT will cover 5 IPA beneficiary countries (Serbia, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Bosnia-Herzegovina and Albania). ESPON will, next to Norway and Switzerland, include Lichtenstein and Iceland.

4. Interreg D : Outermost Regions Programmes

With the new regulation 2021-2027, the specificities of the Outermost regions are recognised trough a specific strand (Strand D)

It helps those regions to cooperate with neighbouring countries and territories in the most efficient and simple way.

Calls for proposals can be launched for combined funding under the ERDF, the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument (NDICI) established by Regulation (EU ) 2021/947 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

Strand D concerns 4 geographical areas:

Amazonia, Caribbean,
Middle Atlantic/Gulf of Guinea (MAC),
Indian Ocean,
Mozambique Channel.

The financial amounts represent 3.5% of the INTERREG amount or over EUR 280 million.

Watch promotional videos of the European Commission on INTERREG

Interreg for cooperation inside of the European Union

https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/videos/movie/interreg22/LR_I209944EN1W.mp4

Interreg for cooperation outside of the European Union

https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/videos/movie/interreg22/LR_I209943EN1W.mp4

Sources:

https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/en/policy/cooperation/european-territorial/

http://www.interreg.de/INTERREG2021/DE/Startseite/home_node.html

50 Years of Sustainable Urban Planning Policy - From the 1972 Stockholm Declaration to today's Meeting of the General Assembly

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Thu, 28 Apr 2022 07:51:50 GMT

Pathways for Sustainable Cities

The Earth Negotiations Bulletin of the International Institute for Sustainable Development published on 28 April 2022 a new policy brief on 'Pathways for Sustainable Cities'. The paper gives a good overview on what sustainable urban planning is about. What especially cached my eyes is how the author, Jennifer Bansard, described the efforts for sustainable urban planning and development as history which goes back at least fifty years to the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment held between 5-16 June 1972 in Stockholm, Sweden.

Pathways to Sustainable Cities. Still Only One Earth: Lessons from 50 years of UN sustainable development policy. Jennifer Bansard. International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD).

https://www.iisd.org/articles/deep-dive/pathways-sustainable-cities - accessed on 28 April 2022

Already in 1972 the Stockholm Declaration stated:

Towards the end the paper discu sses 'Key Trends in Sustainable Urban Development' and concludes with these two paragraphs:

As more and more people live in urban areas, coupled with worsening impacts from climate change and natural resource loss, the magnitude of the urban sustainability challenge and the need for decisive action is bigger than ever. As the world saw with the COVID-19 pandemic, overcrowding and poverty make it difficult to follow recommended measures such as social distancing and self-isolation. This calls for a holistic rethinking about how to make cities liveable for all while minimizing adverse impacts on the environment.

Striving for sustainable cities requires overcoming barriers between different levels of government as well as vested interests in preserving the status quo. It requires looking beyond the sphere of the urban to attend to urban-rural linkages, foster circular resource use, and decarbonize the energy, transport, and building sectors. Urban sustainability requires cross-sectoral planning and attention to the differentiated needs of all urban dwellers so as to leave no one behind in the necessary transformation. Sustainability pathways should be tailored to specific urban contexts. As such, there will never be one single model for what a sustainable city looks like.

The High-Level Meeting of the General Assembly on 28 April 2022

on the progress in the implementation of the New Urban Agenda

Reading the policy brief I became aware how limited the progress was over half a century since the 1972 Stockholm Declaration. And it happens that today (28 April) in New York the United Nations General Assembly convenes a meeting to discuss the implementation of the New Urban Agenda which was adopted at the Habitat III conference in Quito in 2016. The event website recall the opportunities for sustainable urban planning but it also states:

And yet, the New Urban Agenda is poorly represented in the global discourse and receives little attention by member states and other relevant stakeholders. The High-Level Meeting, convened by the President of the General Assembly offers an opportunity for Member States to take stock of actions taken and put forward new commitments to revitalize the implementation of the New Urban Agenda.

Source: https://unhabitat.org/hlm-new-urban-agenda

The aim is to strengthen the New Urban Agenda and to accelerate the achievement of SDG. Of course, that cannot be achieve in a six hours stocktaking even on 28 April 2022 but it is part of a multipronged approach leading to a Habitat Assembly in 2023 (see graphic below).

Jennifer Bansard mentions in her policy brief ' the magnitude of the urban sustainability challenge and the need for decisive action' which is bigger than ever.

Apparently, there is plenty of talk about the SDG, the New Urban Agenda and that they are no on track to achieve goals. What I miss in the policy brief but also on the agenda of today's meeting in New York are three elements:

Firstly, a sound estimation of additional costs occurring around the world if no sufficiently decisive action is taken.

Secondly, a proposal on types of decisive action to be taken at international, national and local levels.

Thirdly, a clarification on who is responsible and accountable for actions to be taken and costs to be covered.

It's good to hold regular dialogues and to take stock but member states and stakeholders have to be true to themselves. Nothing good will happen unless somebody does it.

Planning for Intergenerational Equity - Video documentation released from the World Town Planning Day 2021 Conference of the American Planning Association

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Tue, 12 Apr 2022 07:54:20 GMT

The American Planing Association (APA) released now the recording from the World Town Planning Day 2021 on 8 November 2021.

Please follow this link to the recording: https://international.planning.org/meet/wtpd/.

My presentation on Local and national planning for a climate neutral and sustainable future of Germany

begins at 1 hour and 5 minutes into the recording and lasts for about an hour. I hope you'll enjoy it.

PLANNING FOR INTER-GENERATIONAL EQUITY

The American Planning Association’s International Division invited planners, urban designers & placemakers to attend the 72nd annual APA World Town Planning Day virtual conference on November 8, 2021 on the topic of Planning for Inter-generational Equity.

As the world faces global crises like climate change and pandemics, planning for sustainable and equitable communities requires both long-term thinking and immediate action. Speakers from across the world will explore how Planners can be changemakers today and support intergenerational equity at the community, national and global scales in 3 Conference Tracks:

Track 1: Equitable Climate Adaptation

Track 2: Implementation + Accountability

Track 3: Representing the Future: Who needs to be at the table today?

2021 World Town Planning Day Conference Program

More Information on www.planning.org/international/worldtown/

11:00am-12:00pm EST

Local and national planning for a climate neutral and sustainable future of Germany

Speaker: Ulrich Graute, International Consultant for Sustainable Governance and Management

1-2:00 pm EST

Fast+Fun Series: Short Presentations from across the globe

3-4:00 pm EST

Young Planner Series: Short Young Planner presentations

5-7:30 pm EST

Evening Sessions: Presentations, including a 90-min session organized by the APA International Division's Climate & Sustainability Working Group.

Track 1: Equitable Climate Adaptation

Track 2: Implementation + Accountability

Track 3: Representing the Future: Who needs to be at the table today?

Please also visit the website of the International Division of the American Planning Association

https://international.planning.org/meet/wtpd/

Getting a full picture of city, state and regional climate actions and their impact

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Mon, 28 Mar 2022 12:01:03 GMT

Getting a full picture of city, state and regional climate measures and their impact

There is a growing sense of urgency of the need for real impact of climate measures by 2030. This growing sense is coming from reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), discussions at the last Conference of Parties (COP 26) in Glasgow in November 2021 and in preparation of COP27 which will take place in 2022 in Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt. In addition, the war in Ukraine also underscores the need especially of European countries to become independent of the import of coal, oil and gas. If this speeds up the transition to use renewable sources of energy this would reduce emissions and have a positive impact on climate adaptation. The good news is that climate policies have never been higher on the agenda and they also attract investments.

Beyond all the talk about climate change and the urgency to decarbonize and reduce emissions it is not easy to understand where cities and regions around the world stand with their efforts in response to climate challenge. There are reports on many single actions in individual cities (for instance, from Bolder, USA, to Bonn, Germany, and to Tshwane, South Africa) and there are hundreds if not several thousands of these actions under way to reduce emissions and adapt to climate change. Considering that climate adaptation and decarbonization is urgently needed all around the globe these figures are not too impressive but it is difficult to get a full picture of ongoing progress in cities and regions. There is not the one organization representing all cities and regions in the world. Instead, there are several membership organizations and city networks like the Global Covenant of Mayors for Climate & Energy (co-founded by UCLG)[1] or the Bloomberg Harvard City Leadership Initiative [2].

At COP26 in November 2021 leading climate change scientists came together with city and business leaders, global NGOs and national governments to announce a new initiative, the Summary for Urban Policymakers (SUP) that will present the latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) assessments in accessible and targeted summaries that can help inform action at the city scale [3]. For the time being, national and international governmental and non-governmental organizations and donors have their own partner and project networks and reporting systems. Thus, there is not the one and only source. Fortunately, in addition to COPs there are regional climate conferences and climate reporting tools which can help to get a sense of the broader picture.

Exploring climate change and sustainability data reported by more than 1,200 city and regional governments to the CDP Cities, States and Regions Open Data Portal

According to its website, “CDP is a not-for-profit charity that runs the global disclosure system for investors, companies, cities, states and regions to manage their environmental impacts. The world’s economy looks to CDP as the gold standard of environmental reporting with the richest and most comprehensive dataset on corporate and city action” [4]. CDP wants to see a thriving economy that works for people and planet in the long term. CDP focuses on investors, companies, cities and governments on building a sustainable economy by measuring and acting on their environmental impact. It want to motivate companies and cities to disclose their environmental impacts, giving decision makers the data they need to change market behaviour.

The reporting process is understood to encourage local and regional governments not just to report on what they did and are doing, but also to think about the climate risks that they’ll face in the future in their respective jurisdictions. In other words, it aims at helping to increase their climate-readiness and stimulates them to create comprehensive vulnerability assessments and action plans. The CDP-ICLEI Unified Reporting System goes one step further, enabling the reporting of indicators that evaluate progress in the realms of equity, resilience, and economic vitality, hence becoming a valuable tool to plan for a sustainable, equitable, and resilient urban transformation. This variety of data can also be used to generate buy-in from relevant stakeholders and communities, as well as identify economic opportunities.

Below is a snapshot of the reported data:

Source: CityTalk. A blog By ICLEI. https://talkofthecities.iclei.org/you-cant-manage-what-you-dont-measure-how-climate-reporting-tracks-progress-and-secures-investment/

Through their expertise and use of the Unified Reporting System, CDP and ICLEI can help subnational governments in any stage of their journey towards measuring, tracking, and managing their climate data, as well as set science-based climate targets to mitigate and adapt to a changing climate, ensuring buy-in from their communities and stakeholders. [5]

Impressive as the 1128 reporting entities and the represented population of the Unified Reporting System are, there are still major gaps. For instance, among the regional websites on cdp.net are no regional websites for Africa or for the Middle East and North Africa (MENA). Therefore, it remains indispensable to look at additional sources or to attend regional events like MENACW to get better insight.

Regional conferences like the Middle East and North Africa Climate Week 2022

This week the first-ever edition of the Middle East and North Africa Climate Week, MENACW 2022, will be held from March 28 to March 31 in Dubai, United Arab Emirates. It is likely to provide an overview and insights due to the number of organizers: The event is hosted by the Government of the United Arab Emirates Ministry of Climate Change and Environment, World Green Economy Organization and Dubai Electricity and Water Authority. It is jointly co-organized by core partners UN Climate Change, UN Development Programme, UN Environment Programme and the World Bank Group, with partners based in MENA – the UN Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia, the International Renewable Energy Agency and the League of Arab States Secretariat. The Climate Week 2022 will provide a platform for governments, cities, private sector leaders, financial institutions and civil society to discuss opportunities to build forward from the pandemic by identifying opportunities to enhance climate action. The event will bring together key stakeholders to take the pulse of climate action in the region, explore climate challenges and opportunities and showcase ambitious solutions. [6]

MENACW Workshop: New and radical spatial planning for systemic change in cities

On the opening day the climate week held a workshop on ‘New and radical spatial planning for systemic change in cities’. In this participatory virtual event, expert planners from different parts of the region exchanged ideas and explored priorities. Short presentations from different parts of the MENA Region included those by
Abbas el Zafarany, Faculty of Urban Planning, Cairo University, Egypt
Ali A. Alraouf, Professor Urban Planning Department Doha, Qatar

Huda Shaka هدى الشكعة Shaka, Sustainable Development Advisor, The Green Urbanista, UAE
Nasim Iranmanesh, Municipality of Tehran, Iran
Firas Mourtada, MCIArb Mourtada, President, Urban Planners Association, Le Consultant, Lecturer, Beirut

The advantage of conference and workshops like the MENA Climate Week is that they combine an overview on the region with deeper insights provided by speakers and discussants. E xpert planners from different parts of the region used their timeslots to exchange ideas and explore priorities.

Spatial planning systems are the main tool most countries have for managing urban environments. Unfortunately, the mostly arid countries in the Middle East had given up traditional approaches to take climate conditions and water scarcity into consideration of planning. In return this means, that there is now a tremendous potential in Iran, Lebanon, Egypt, Quatar, UAE and other parts of MENA to change planning in a positive direction and to make use for this endeavour traditional forms of urban and territorial planning.

The expected shift in planning was described as radical as it includes a paradigm shift from economy and prosperity to sustainability and resilience and as it requires a respective change of planning systems and its context.

The workshop closed with a panel discussion chaired by Martina Juvara as panel chair and ISOCARP focal point for climate change and by Dushko Bogunovich, ISOCARP Scientific Committee.

It's a bit a pity that time for presentations and discussions was very limited as it is typical for online workshops nowadays. Therefore I am looking forward to further deepen exchange and discussions at in place conference like the World Urban Forum in Katovice in June 2022 and at the ISOCARP World Planning Congress in Brussels in October 2022.

Source: Screenshots of slides from the presentations by Abbas el Zafarany and Ali A. Alraouf

[1] https://www.globalcovenantofmayors.org/ - accessed on 28 March 2022

[2] https://www.cityleadership.harvard.edu/ - accessed on 28 March 2022

[3] https://www.globalcovenantofmayors.org/press/new-summary-for-urban-policymakers-initiative-announced/ - accessed on 28 March 2022

[4] https://www.cdp.net/en/info/about-us - accessed on 28 March 2022

[5] CitiTalk. A blog by ICLEI: You can’t manage what you don’t measure. How climate reporting tracks progress and secures investment. https://talkofthecities.iclei.org/you-cant-manage-what-you-dont-measure-how-climate-reporting-tracks-progress-and-secures-investment/ accessed on 28 March 2022

[6] https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/resource/MENACW2022_InfoNote_180322.pdf - accessed on 28 March 2022; and https://unfccc.int/MENA-CW2022/daily-programme - accessed on 28 March 2022

Remaining optimistic about sustainable and climate resilient cities and territories while the world stumbles from crisis into crisis

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Wed, 23 Mar 2022 11:27:59 GMT

Writing about and with optimism in times of crises and divisions is a challenge but I consider it as important.

The gap is widening between the future oriented global agendas like the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG / 2030 Agenda; adopted in 2015), Paris Climate Agreement (2015), the New Urban Agenda (UN-Habitat 2016) and the crisis reality around the world. There are not only the wars in Ukraine, Yemen, climate crisis, hunger, inequality and multiple other crises around the world. These are interrelated and often reinforce each other. The grain not grown in Ukraine this year will worsen the food situation in countries like Yemen and Tunisia. And the currently ten million Ukrainian refugees (therefore of 3,5 million outside of Ukraine) will drain budgets across Europe. And who is proud about the fact that Germany is pursuing now a feminist foreign policy should also see that this innovation goes along with the government’s proposal to reduce the budget for development cooperation by 800 million Euros.* The ambitious and interrelated agendas for sustainable development and climate resilience were always difficult to achieve but probably nobody expected multiple additional challenges as the world faces today.

In the light of these developments and of other impacts not yet visible many pursue one of these paths: Some try to do business as usual by stoically implementing their ongoing projects; others are profoundly shocked and irritated by the many challenges and again others are at the brink of collapse and close to giving up all efforts. Understandable as doubts and weak spiritedness are, neither business as usual nor despair will help.

Some may dream now of a total revolution and to build up new systems from the scratch. But we have to be prudent: There is a high risk of uncontrolled chain reactions due to interrelations and interdependencies between different wars and other crises. Revolutions can be also destructive, eat their own children and end in new oppressive systems. In addition, the goals of the 2030 Agenda and Paris Climate Agreement are not wrong after all. Therefore, let’s not throw the baby out with the bathwater. Instead, what’s necessary to do is the same that every autopilot in a car does when a driver misses a goal: ‘… Recalculating route … New route…”. In this post I list a few suggestions on how to recalculate the route to goal achievement.

1 Reviewing the state of sustainability and climate goals

There are global review mechanisms. For instance, the United Nations High Level Political Forum and Sustainable Development is responsible to review the 2030 Agenda and SDGs while the Conference of Parties (COP) does the same for the Paris Climate Agreement. However, in the current situation with one member of the Security Council invading another UN member state and impacting many other UN member states the UN system is limited in its possibilities and thus, it is unfit to generate more than incremental changes and cannot solve any of the major problems.

With the international politics captured in its system and not able to initiate its own reform change can only come from the outside. Local government, civil societies and all non-state actors are not involved in decision-making but bear the main load of impact by war and other crises. Without them governments cannot achieve their goals and this, in return, should give them the power to review goals and initiate change. If you like the resistance of Ukraine against Russian aggression or not, the example demonstrates how powerful the people of a smaller country can resist the power of the largest country in the world. Imagine this power would be used to revisit the global goals of sustainable development and climate resilience and to recalculate the route to goal achievement - it may even find the support of governments!

2 Prioritizing Peace, justice, institutions (SDG 16) and international partnership (SDG 17)

The implementation of 2030 Agenda and the Paris Agreement depend on voluntary cooperation, lags behind and might get derailed completely. Is this the end of the SDG and climate goals? There is a real risk but it’s not inevitable. There is no causal link. So, let’s look for a way out. In practice, the 2030 Agenda and the Paris Agreement are not lost but to revive them and achieve their goals it’s necessary to prioritize two out of the Sustainable Development Goals:
• SDG 16 – Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels
• SDG 17 - Strengthen the means of implementation and revitalize the global partnership for sustainable development

All 17 SDGs are interrelated and interdependent and no hierarchy was intended for the 2030 Agenda. Nonetheless, the reality unfolding in front our eyes (or on our screens) tells us that without peace, justice, institutions (SDG 16) and international partnership (SDG 17) the 2030 Agenda and the Paris Agreement on Climate Change are ‘dead agendas walking’ – and that not only in Ukraine and Russia but everywhere. Therefore, I suggest that it is time to learn reading the 2030 Agenda from the back to the front, starting with SDG 16 and 17. Yes, I also suggest to prioritize these two SDGs because they provide the key to reconnect the entire 2030 Agenda, the Paris Agreement and possibly other development agendas with the dramatic and dynamic reality unfolding.

In all countries, be they democratic or autocratic there is a deal between the government and the people: The people accept the government as long as it delivers at least the public services of general interest (in German: Daseinsvorsorge) as expected by the people. And certainly, without healthy climate and a sustainable development people won’t survive. If governments are not able to deliver related services its power base will erode and eventually collapse. This needs to be discussed in all countries and it is a chance to realign governments and people on the need for action to assure climate resilience and sustainability. And the implementation begins as described by SDG 16 with building effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels. Based on that feasibility and diagnostic studies help to refocus and improve goal achievement.

3 Visioning sustainability and climate resilience inspired by a new narrative

In 2018, the United Nations through UN-Habitat sent me twice to Afghanistan to support the development of a National Urban Policy (NUP). In line with the National Urban Policy Programme of the UN and OECD I began with making the case for an NUP Afghanistan, i.e. by visioning the value added which an NUP might have for the people and the country. A lot of reasons were brought up against this approach and the main argument was that after so many years of war the need to provide basic urban services would be a lot more pressing than investing time and efforts in the visioning a long-term value added of a national urban policy. I couldn’t convince partners about the importance of visioning and a positive narrative to motivate especially young people to stay and invest in the future of the country.

We know what happened in summer 2021: After the withdrawal of the US and its NATO allies the country immediately collapsed and was retaken by the Taliban. I would never claim that a visionary NUP would have prevented that collapse. However, without a visionary narrative that outlines goals worth to engage for the government failed in rallying the people against the Taliban. Now in 2022 the world is surprised about the commitment of the Ukrainian people to defend their country against the power of the Russian aggression. But obviously in contrast to Afghan people, the Ukrainians share a vision of their own country and understand that it is worth to fight for it. Visions don’t substitute proper diagnostic and feasibility studies for future action but they deliver the inspiration needed.

Let’s learn from these examples and outline a new narrative for sustainability and climate goals. It certainly won’t be easy but our future and that of future generations are worth the effort. We are in the middle of a night and we stumble from crisis into crises but a new day may begin if we move along a new narrative, focus on peace, justice, accountable institutions and a recalculate the path to goal achievement. We can do it and I am glad if I can support the discussion e.g. with posts like this one.

* https://www.politico.eu/article/germany-turning-point-feminist-foreign-policy/
https://www.spiegel.de/ausland/humanitaere-hilfe-es-wird-zeit-dass-die-menschlichkeit-erwacht-a-4543972d-7d58-4288-a287-73b19e959cc1

Connecting the war in Ukraine and multiple other crises with the agenda for sustainable development. Impossible? Try prioritizing peace, justice, strong institutions and partnership (= SDG 16 and 17)

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Mon, 07 Mar 2022 16:04:57 GMT

The disconnect between the international development agenda and multiple crises/conflicts

Thinking about the aggressive invasion of Ukraine it deems difficult to imagine how the forward-looking rule based and cooperative international development agendas (2030 Agenda, Paris Agreement…) can be achieved in face of the reality unfolding in times of war in Ukraine, Corona pandemic and other crises around the world. The war is unfolding between the largest territorial states in Europe and it comes on top of many other internationally crises and challenges. Within just ten days 1,5 million people fled from Ukraine as refugees and the impact of the war starts reverberating across the globe. The implementation of 2030 Agenda and the Paris Agreement depend on voluntary cooperation, lag behind and might get derailed completely.

Is this the end of the SDG and climate goals?

There is a real risk but it’s not inevitable. There is no causal link. So, let’s look for a way out.

Key message of this post is that the 2030 Agenda and the Paris Agreement are by no means lost but to let them survive and achieve their goals it’s necessary to prioritize two out of the Sustainable Development Goals:

SDG 16 – Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels
SDG 17 - Strengthen the means of implementation and revitalize the global partnership for sustainable development

Reading the 2030 Agenda in reverse and connecting it with current crises

The common reading of the Sustainable Development Goals follows the numeric order starting with No Poverty (SDG 1), Zero Hunger (SDG 2), Good Health and Well-Being (SDG 3), Quality Education (SDG 4), Gender Equality (SDG 5) and so forth. The first goals are similar to the former Millenniums Development Goals agreed for the period 2000-2015 and became a kind of basis for the new agenda. Of course, there is no ranking among the SDGs and that may fall back on the 2030 Agenda now! There will be no poverty reduction, zero hunger, good health and well-being, quality education or gender equality without SDG 16 and 17.

All 17 SDGs are interrelated and interdependent and no hierarchy was intended for the 2030 Agenda. Nonetheless, the reality unfolding in front our eyes (or on our screens) tells us that without peace, justice, institutions (SDG 16) and international partnership (SDG 17) the 2030 Agenda and the Paris Agreement on Climate Change are ‘dead agendas walking’ – and that not only in Ukraine and Russia but everywhere. Therefore, with this post I suggest that it is time to learn reading the 2030 Agenda from the back to the front, starting with SDG 16 and 17. Yes, I also suggest to prioritize these two SDGs because they provide the key to reconnect the entire 2030 Agenda, the Paris Agreement and possibly other development agendas with the dramatic and dynamic reality unfolding.

Peace, justice, institutions (SDG 16) and international partnership (SDG 17) as ‘acupuncture points’ to safe the international development agenda

The war in Ukraine is in contrast with all development goals and it reverberates internationally. Ukraine is home to 25% of the world’s famously fertile black soils. The Russian Federation and Ukraine are responsible for 29% of the global wheat trade. Any serious disruption of production and exports from the region could push food prices beyond their current 10-year highs. This will erode food security for millions of people, especially those who are already under stress because of high levels of food inflation in their countries. [1]

In addition, many homes, schools, hospitals and infrastructures are already destroyed in Ukraine. Within 10 days 1,5 million people fled from Ukraine to neighbouring countries. Integrating refugees and rebuilding Ukraine will cost the country and international partners resources and years of work, and this again will reduce efforts otherwise available elsewhere. In addition, a further escalation of the war and its global impact cannot be excluded for the time being. The Russian President has decided to ignore international law, the freedom of Ukrainian and his own Russian people and to threaten that of others. If successful, this would put an end to the world as we know it and that without promising anything good to the world. The awareness about this is growing among UN member states and this explains the clear adoption of last week’s resolution of the UN General Assembly condemning Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

[1] https://www.wfp.org/news/wfp-ramps-food-operation-ukraine-and-warns-worlds-hungry-cannot-afford-another-conflict

UN General Assembly adopts resolution condemning Russia's invasion of Ukraine. 141 countries voted in favour Source: https://www.reddit.com

Looking for a positive way out of the situation I suggest prioritizing SDG 16 and SDG 17 and to consider them as a nexus (or as ‘acupuncture points’ as Ericka Toledo Zurita suggested in a LinkedIn discussion [2] ) for all other goals.

Good enough governance – yes, but it must be smart and robust enough to prevent a collapse or high jacking of development agendas

When I worked at the UN Secretariat in New York between 2008 and 2013 we had repeated discussion about the role of governance. Especially, the Assistant Secretary General for Economic Development in UN DESA and prominent Malaysian economist Jomo Kwame Sundaram argued against what he calls a ‘good governance trap’. He argued from an economist point of view that there is little evidence that implementing good-governance reforms leads to more rapid and inclusive economic and social development. In fact, the focus on governance reform – based on a wide variety of one-size-fits-all indicators – may actually be undermining developing countries’ progress. [3] According to Jomo,

“the World Bank, using well over 100 indicators, introduced a composite index of good governance, based on perceptions of voice and accountability, political stability and the absence of violence, government effectiveness, regulatory quality, the rule of law, and levels of corruption. By claiming that it had found a strong correlation between its governance indicators and economic performance, the Bank fuelled hope that the key to economic progress had been found.”

He argues that this governance-focused approach may have actually undermined development efforts and also complicated the work of governments unnecessarily.

“ Moreover, the required reforms are so wide-ranging that they are beyond the means of most developing countries to implement. As a result, good-governance solutions tend to distract from more effective development efforts.”

His conclusion is clear: the development agenda should not be overloaded with governance reform.

I quote him in this post because he has the important point that a focus on governance is not without risks and International Organizations are not immune to be high jacked by selected interests. However, the economist view on institutions, partnership and governance seems to be too narrowly focussed on economic aspects. I think, even Jomo would not question that the institutional and partnership framework must have a governance good enough to provide for peace, rule based and (just) economic development. And this framework is questioned by the Russian invasion of Ukraine and in its own interest International Organizations must prevent that from happening again. And one way seem to be to make peace, justice, institutions (SDG 16) and international partnership (SDG 17) nexus or acupuncture points for further implementation of 2030 Agenda and Paris Agreement. Peace, justice, strong institutions and partnership are indispensable as enabling environment for goal achievement. I think that the Russian President understands this very well and that it is not by chance that his fight against Ukraine especially targets peace, justice, strong institutions and their international partnerships.

[2] https://www.linkedin.com/posts/graute_video-message-from-the-mayor-of-kyiv-ugcPost-6905484161642299392-5hXq

[3] https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/governance-reform-development-agenda-by-jomo-kwame-sundaram-and-michael-t--clark-2015-06

Intergenerational Equity for Sustainable Development

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Fri, 04 Mar 2022 13:02:53 GMT

Virtual Workshop on the Promotion of Intergenerational Equity for Sustainable Development

I had the privilege to support the main author Frank D'hondt in preparing the CEPA strategy guidance note on long-term territorial planning and spatial development. The guidance note will be presented and discussed on 8 March at a virtual workshops by the United Nations Headquarters and the UN Committee of Experts on Public Administration.

On 8 March the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UN DESA) is organizing a virtual workshop on the promotion of intergenerational equity for sustainable development. The workshop forms part of a series to launch the Strategy Guidance Notes to operationalize the principles of effective governance for sustainable development which were developed by the Committee of Experts on Public Administration (CEPA) and endorsed by the Economic and Social Council. One of the principles is on intergenerational equity to ensure inclusiveness. The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the principle of intergenerational equity requires countries to be engaged with and aware of the various dimensions of impact assessment, long-term public debt management, long-term territorial planning and spatial development and ecosystem management. The virtual workshop will discuss these strategies for pursuing intergenerational equity and will attempt to share knowledge, raise awareness and provide a platform to connect participants with partners in other countries, the UN system and other organizations to take further concrete action-oriented activities.

Concept note for the workshop

Background

The Committee of Experts on Public Administration (CEPA) adopted 11 principles of effective governance at its seventeenth session. The principles, endorsed by the Economic and Social Council in its resolution 2018/12, highlight the need for pragmatic and ongoing improvements in national and local governance capabilities to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals. The principles are designed to ensure effective, accountable and inclusive government.

CEPA has developed a wide range of commonly used strate gies for operationalization of the principles. One of the principles is on intergenerational equity to ensure inclusiveness. To promote prosperity and quality of life for all, institutions should construct administrative acts that balance the short-term needs of today’s generation with the longer-term needs of future generations. The strategies for intergenerational equity are (i) impact assessment; (ii) long-term public debt management; (iii) long-term territorial planning and spatial development; and
ecosystem management.

Ensuring the full success of laws, policies and strategies which balance long- and short- term needs remain a challenge in many countries. The profligacy of living generations severely limits the options for future generations, and short-term calculations continue to dominate policymaking. Accounting for the interests of future generations requires strengthening capacities to understand and assess the future, building long-term thinking into important
policies and decision-making, and ensuring that interests of future generations at all levels of governance are integrated into institutions. The 2030 Agenda and the principle of intergenerational equity requires countries to be engaged with and aware of the various dimensions of impact assessment, long-term public debt management, long-term territorial planning and spatial development and ecosystem management.

The Department of Economic and Social Affairs through its Division for Public Institutions and Digital Government (DESA/DPIDG) has engaged experts to prepare guidance notes and provide content to the four strategies designed to give effect to the principle of intergenerational equity. One of these notes is the above mentioned CEPA strategy guidance note on long-term territorial planning and spatial development.

The notes were crafted in global consultation with other specialized experts in the field. The notes include information on how Governments can both assess the current status and measure progress to ensure that governance systems address long-term challenges. The notes outline the strategies, assess the extent to which they are being or have been adopted in other countries, and highlight the methods of implementation, opportunities to engage in peer-to-peer learning and research, and pursue further international development cooperation in accordance with country needs.

The notes are available on the website at:
https://publicadministration.un.org/en/Intergovernmental-Support/CEPA/Principles-of-
Effective-Governance

Virtual facilitated workshop
Using the completed notes as a main point of reference, DESA/DPIDG plans to hold an online facilitated workshop on 8 March 2022. The workshop will attempt to share knowledge, raise awareness and provide a platform to connect participants with partners in other countries, the UN system and other organizations to take further concrete action-oriented activities on intergenerational equity. The workshop will:

(i) provide a platform to share knowledge and guidance on how to promote inclusiveness
and intergenerational equity for sustainable development;
(ii) increase understanding and awareness of the competencies and skills needed to apply
the principle of intergenerational equity with an emphasis on institutions at all levels;
(iii) link participants with peer- to- peer learning opportunities and research networks in
specific practice areas; and
(iv) identify action-oriented and concrete activities and capacity building initiatives to
enhance the principle of intergenerational equity that can be undertaken with the
support of the UN system and other organizations.

The workshop is intended to benefit policymakers in centres of Government, key line ministries,
and public administration, particularly in developing countries. Relevant United Nations
organizations, regional organizations and professional and academic communities, together with
all relevant stakeholders, are invited to attend.

The workshop will be held on 8 March 2021; (8 am to 10 am (EST) please check local time).

Workshop Registration: https://bit.ly/3HyM9KH

Programme of the workshop

Acknowledgements

The strategy guidance note was authored by Frank J. D’hondt (Director Territorial Capital Institute and Secretary-General of the International Society of City and Regional Planners). During its preparation, consultations were carried out with the following international experts: Cliff Hague (Emeritus Professor of Spatial Planning, Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh and former President of Royal Town Planning Institute and Commonwealth Association of Planners), Elisabeth Belpaire (Vice President of ISOCARP), Juanee Cilliers (Planning Professor, University of Sydney), Ulrich Graute (member of the Scientific Committee of ISOCARP), Marco Kamiya (UNIDO), Reza Pourvaziry (Urban Economy Forum), Remy Sietchiping (UN-Habitat), Thomas George, Soumen Bagchi and Han Yang (UNICEF).

Link to the CEPA strategy guidance note

https://publicadministration.un.org/Portals/1/Strategy%20note%20territorial%20planning%20and%20spatial%20development%2010-02.pdf

Committee of Experts on Public Administration

https://publicadministration.un.org/en/CEPA

So also Ulrich's much viewed post on the first anniversary of this blog

http://ugraute.de/first-anniversary-of-the-blog

The Russian-Ukrainian crisis has many implications across Ukraine and Europe ... and the recovery from it should include a review of EU Cohesion Policy

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Wed, 23 Feb 2022 13:32:01 GMT

In the middle of the night begins the new day

Primarily, what is happening in Ukraine is a violation of international law and as of today (23/2/22) it may easily turn into a major fratricidal warfare with far reaching consequences for the entire continent. However, it would be wrong to think that this is the moment for military strategists and warfare only. Diplomacy too has to reboot its activities and in addition this is an important moment to review and prepare EU policies like the EU Cohesion Policy for the future. We (that means everybody including urban and regional development experts) should begin now in this dark hour to prepare a possible recovery from crisis on a new day.

The inward-looking EU Cohesion Policy is ignoring interrelations and interdependencies in the wider Europe and generates blind spots in itself

The regional policy of the European Union (EU), also referred as Cohesion Policy, contributes to strengthening economic, social and territorial cohesion in the European Union. This internal policy aims to correct imbalances between countries and regions. It delivers on the Union's political priorities, especially the green and digital transition. [1]

Well, but why should this policy aiming at cohesion inside the European Union be reviewed in reference to a war which began already in 2013 in Eastern Ukraine, i.e. outside of the Union?

The answer is not only linked to Ukraine. It can be learned also from climate crises (Paris Agreement) or from the United Nations 2030 Agenda with its 17 Sustainable Development Goals: There is no single country and certainly no regional group which can exist on its own. And the European Union is certainly no block surrounded by cliffs separating it from its neighbours. In addition, there are a lot of development challenges interrelated and interdependent across border of sectors and countries. Therefore, these challenges need to be addressed in a coordinated and integrated way. Countries need to look beyond their own borders. While this is agreed in principle by EU member states it is rather old fashioned how the EU compartmentalized politics and applies a strong if not strictly inward-looking approach in its EU Cohesion Policy and Report.

Of course, it has to be acknowledged that EU member states have their own foreign policies and cooperation and that the Union is in the process of developing a common foreign policy. In addition, for cooperation with its neighbours the EU has developed already years ago the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) [2] . ENP was launched in 2004 to support and foster stability, security and prosperity in the EU`s neighbourhood. Cohesion Policy and ENP run in parallel but that seems to generate blind spots.

[1] https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/en/2021_2027/

[2] https://ec.europa.eu/environment/international_issues/eu_neighbourhood_en.htm

Source: Wikipedia

The blind spot of the EU Cohesion Policy and Report

In February 2022 the European Commission launched the 8 ^t ^h Cohesion Report on economic, social and territorial cohesion. It

“presents the main changes in territorial disparities over the past decade and how policies have affected these disparities. It highlights the potential of the green and digital transitions as new drivers of EU growth, but argues that without appropriate policy action new economic, social and territorial disparities may appear.” (From the introduction of the Cohesion Report)

No doubt, the report is an important flagship report for internal policy development and a reference document for the allocation of the Cohesion Fund’s EUR 392 billion budget.

The problem with the Report begins already with the title ‘Cohesion in Europe towards 2050’ [ 3 ] . It refers to Europe without a geographic distinction but in the report the focus is exclusively on cohesion in the EU. The report is blind towards the rest of Europe including its Eastern neighbours. In spite of Ukraine’s population of 44,13 million inhabitants (2020), a Gross National Product of 155,6 billion USD (2020) and although Ukraine borders four EU member states the country is not mentioned at all in the entire report. The same is true for Belarus, Moldova and Georgia, three other countries of the EU’s Eastern Partnership. The reality looks different. For instance, Germany is not bordering any of them directly but just go to an interstate like the A2 linking Berlin with the Ruhr Area and you can see how many trucks from Ukraine and Belarus transport goods from and to the EU. Nonetheless, the Cohesion Report pretends as if there would be a cliff separating the Union from its neighbours and that they don’t matter for EU cohesion.

Experts may want to correct me at this point by indicating the European Territorial Cooperation (ETC) programmes which are part of the Cohesion policy and which include provisions for at least a limited cooperation with Eastern neighbours. Yes, they exist but they are administratively more complex and have smaller budgets than initiatives within the Union only.

The main deficit that there seems to be in current Cohesion Policy is that is doesn’t have the full mindset and therefore, the new Cohesion Report of the European Union doesn’t promote the mindset that Eastern neighbours are in any way relevant for economic, social and territorial cohesion of the EU.

No surprise, now it hits many by surprise that the escalating conflict in Ukraine and its fallout (political and economic costs, large numbers of refugees etc.) could disrupt life and politics and eventually even cohesion within the EU. The truth is, neighbours matter when it comes to cohesion.

[3] https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docoffic/official/reports/cohesion8/8cr.pdf

Forward-looking remarks

It is understandable and therefore not questioned by this post that EU Cohesion Policy as an internal policy and its Cohesion Reports have a predominately inward-looking focus. However, in view of international interrelations and interdependencies Cohesion Policy including ETC should be reviewed aiming at strengthening Cohesion Policy, including urban and regional cooperation. The EU should begin with this process now in parallel to the conflict to be ready to act when the current military confrontation comes to an end and new needs and opportunities for cooperation e.g. in relation to climate crises and sustainability appear.

First and most importantly, EU Cohesion Policy and European Neighbourhood Policy need to be better integrated to cover interrelations and interdependencies. In doing this, the Cohesion Report of the European Commission should be amended by a neighbourhood dimension. It needs to be better understood what are the strengths, weaknesses, challenges and opportunities of cooperation with all its neighbours from the UK to Ukraine and with respect to cohesion of the EU itself. Certainly, it would be a mistake to build this neighbourhood dimension mainly on the comparison of economic indicators like the GDP. Economic, social and territorial cohesion should be all analyzed in a way that also considers relevant interrelations and interdependencies between EU and neighbouring countries.

Secondly, it would be also important to value the importance of political, cultural and environmental cooperation for cohesion in the EU and the wider Europe. Another 44 million European living in a non-democratic, economically weak and environmentally damaged country cannot be in the interest of the EU and could also become a challenge for coherence in the EU.

Thirdly, based on the amended dimension of Cohesion Policy existing financial interventions supporting a cooperation between partners from EU and neighbouring countries should receive more attention and, as appropriate, should receive more funding.

Fourthly, cities and regions inside and outside of the Union should be encouraged to intensify their exchange and cooperation. Advisory services, peer to peer learning and joint search for common solutions to mitigate climate change and to generate sustainability could help to reduce the gaps between EU and its neighbours (grinding the cliff) and strengthening cohesion in all Europe towards 2050 and beyond.

Cooperation between EU member states and neighbouring countries are not just a decorative complement to EU policies. Instead, they are part of the enabling environment to foster cohesion within the EU and the wider Europe. Of course, in all related activities it’s important that partners from EU and neighbouring partners work on eye level to allow true partnership and to increase the sentiment of cohesion. Last but not least, the EU Cohesion Report should reflect how EU Cohesion is embedded in the necessary cohesion of the wider Europe.

Note: Having worked since the German unification process in 1989 on cooperation across borders of countries and policy sectors including urban and regional planning I am interested in further working on the above subject e.g. in form of consultancies.

State of Global Environmental Governance 2021 - The challenge to achieve the 1.5℃ goal with pinkie promises and patchwork pledges

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Wed, 16 Feb 2022 10:49:41 GMT

Global environmental governance is vulnerable to free-riding

Comparing the global processes for Climate Resilience (Paris Agreement) and Sustainable Development Goals (SDG, 2030 Agenda) the first seems to be better organized and governed. Under the 2015 Paris Agreement, nations agreed to hold global warming to well below 2℃, and preferably limit it to 1.5℃, compared to pre-industrial levels. And many scientists and the Conference of Parties (CoP) monitor goal achievement. The 2030 Agenda doesn't have a comparable single goal. Instead, there are 17 goals and 169 targets and these are interrelated, interdependent and the monitoring through the National Voluntary Reviews (NVR) presented by member states to the High Level Political Forum HLPF is no effective tool.

The State of Global Environmental Governance 2021 is an important report published by the International Institute for Sustainable Development and the Earth Negotiations Bulletin. It puts a critical eye on the fact that to achieve the Paris Agreement there is an ongoing prominence of voluntary pledges:

Whether known as "pledges," "contributions," "voluntary commitments" or "compacts," flexibility is central. Those making the pledge choose the content, with little or no oversight. (page 5)

In addition, sometimes new pledges are just repackages of existing actions.

There is a well-developed framework for transparency, implementation, and compliance of nationally determined contributions (NDCs) but not for the various other initiatives announced at the Glasgow Climate Change Conference in 2021. This applies e.g. to the Food Summit and Energy Dialogue or the Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework. Transparency is even more difficult when companies, cities, and civil society pledge.

Despite these well-known questions, the allure of pledges evidently remains strong.
For many, they still hold the promise of catalyzing political will into action,
creating new partnerships, enabling broad participation, and allowing for agile
mobilization. In 2022, we may yet see more evidence of pledges’ popularity—and of
whether pledges lead to positive change for the environment. (page 9)

Mapping the need for a renewed multilateralism

The report rightly states that global environmental governance does not happen in a vacuum but in a world of socioeconomic disparities, geopolitical tensions, and broader equity issues that amplify environmental injustices and outcomes. In addition, hybrid conference, such as the Glasgow Climate Change Conference were also less inclusive than past climate conferences. For some the Corona pandemic offered an opportunity to advance discussions while biodiversity loss, chemical pollution, and the illegal trade of endangered species have not stopped for the pandemic, indicating that more time may not necessarily better.

After two years of pandemic (and postponed meetings), there is a backlog of conferences and upcoming events in 2022 may bring relevant outcomes for the process.

Embracing the full challenge

The report calls for a renewal of multilateralism without specifying this. Instead, the report ends with these optimistic words:

The pandemic fragmented our world. 2022 holds the potential to bring people together (literally and figuratively) to galvanize action for a green recovery. It could be an annus mirabilis. A year of marvels. (p20)

The report with its focus on global environment environmental challenge is very important and insightful. However, it reconfirms the two blind spots which are related to global environmental policy processes since the 1990s and are continued with the Paris Agreement:

The thematic focus is mainly on biodiversity, chemicals, climate, land and oceans. But -as the report itself states- global environmental governance does not happen in a vacuum. It is interrelated and interdependent and therefore, it needs to be better coordinated with other internationally agreed goals including the 2030 Agenda.

The focus of the report is on Global environmental governance. While it generates valuable insight on the state of global governance it should also look at the interrelations with national and subnational (environmental) governance. Why? Because global environmental governance is meaningless without national ad local application and achievement of goals.

While the thematic and global focus have its advantages a better cross thematic and multilevel analysis is necessary to assess the full dimension of the state of global environmental governance.

_________________

Note:

The full report can be downloaded directly from the website of IISD following this ling

https://www.iisd.org/publications/state-global-environmental-governance-2021

CEPA Strategy Guidance Note on Long-term Territorial Planning and Spatial Development

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Mon, 14 Feb 2022 09:11:55 GMT

United Nations Headquarters and ECOSOC/CEPA publish first strategy guidance note on territorial planning and spatial development

The Charter of the United Nations doesn't mention territorial planning and spatial development among its responsibilities. That's the reason why the new guidance paper might be the first such note ever issued by the Committee of Experts on Public Administration (CEPA) which is a subsidiary body of Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC), one of the 6 principal organs of the United Nations System established by the UN Charter in 1945.

The new guidance note doesn't diminish the work of UN-Habitat and other UN agencies in relation to urban and territorial planning and the development of the New urban Agenda of 2016. Instead, the publication acknowledges the growing importance of goals like SDG11 to make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable.

Having worked at the UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UN DESA) as senior advisor from 2008-2013 and supported the work of CEPA I recall that at the time no real attention was paid to urban, regional and rural planning. As a matter of fact, in preparation of the 2030 Agenda stakeholders from development agencies and city networks searched in vain for a unit at the UN Headquarters in New York that would be in charge of urban and territorial affairs. In those days this subject was almost exclusively affiliated with UN-Habitat in Nairobi and thus, of the screen in New York. This changed with the 2030 Agenda and its Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) who foster the understanding that a more integrated planning and use of the territory is needed. And since the territory is the stage where almost all economic, social, environmental and political development leave their physical footprint the need to think and act in support of a coordinated urban and territorial development became common knowledge.

Before CEPA had developed with support of the U N DESA a set of principles of effective governance for sustainable development. The essential purpose of these voluntary principles is to provide interested countries with practical, expert guidance on a broad range of governance challenges associated with the implementation of the 2030 Agenda. CEPA has identified 62 commonly used strategies to assist with the operationalisation of these principles. The new guidance published in December 2021 addresses long-term territorial planning and spatial development in association with the principle of intergenerational equity. CEPA underscores that planning can contribute to strengthening the inclusiveness of institutions. It is part of a series of such notes prepared by renowned experts under the overall direction of the CEPA Secretariat in the Division for Public Institutions and Digital Government of the UN DESA.

Link to the CEPA strategy guidance note

https://publicadministration.un.org/Portals/1/Strategy%20note%20territorial%20planning%20and%20spatial%20development%2010-02.pdf

Committee of Experts on Public Administration

https://publicadministration.un.org/en/CEPA

So also Ulrich's much viewed post on the first anniversary of this blog

http://ugraute.de/first-anniversary-of-the-blog

I made it! I have completed a first year of my Blog on 'Policies and Governance for Resilient and Sustainable Cities and Regions'!

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Fri, 11 Feb 2022 10:04:28 GMT

I started blogging in January 2021 in reaction to the lockdown of the Corona pandemic. I just wanted to stay in touch with friends, clients and partners. But soon the blog developed into an attractive platform for exchange and discussion. Alone over the last six months more than 60.000 people have viewed the blog posts, more than 800 clicked as sign that they like it and I counted more than 70 contributions to the discussion. In total my 50 blogs posts have reached more than 100.000 viewers. Of course, not all views count for a full read but the many likes and comments demonstrate a strong interest. With this post I want to say thank you to all readers and discussants!

Policies and Governance for Resilient and Sustainable Cities and Regions

I am a social scientist based in Berlin but with extended work experience at the United Nations Headquarters in New York and Nairobi and with the European Union across Europe. I have a keen interest in national and international policies for urban and regional planning and development to achieve resilience and sustainable development.

My blog is essentially looking for ways to develop cities and regions in a more resilient and sustainable way. What is special about my blog and my work in general is that, as a social scientist, I pay special attention to the political and administrative framework conditions and processes that exist at all political levels, from the international to the national and local level. Such a multi-level and cross-sector perspective is more complex and subject to greater dynamics than, for example, the already complex situation of local planning. However, it is a reality that all policy levels in a multi-level system interact with each other, and that this affects the development of cities and regions. The blog does not replace intensive research, but wants to contribute to the discussion.

A first highlight was a series of four blog posts on localizing the Sustainable Development Goals.

http://ugraute.de/localizingsdg1

Other highlights include two posts on 'Failure to plan in planning to fail'

http://ugraute.de/failure-to-plan-is-planning-to-fail-post-1-the-importance-of-vision

and posts on events to which I contributed, like the conference

Inclusive Cities Leaving No One Behind - Neither a Myth nor a Reality but Work in Progress

http://ugraute.de/inclusive-cities

Certainly, the 18 posts series on 'Sustainable Germany' was met with special interest.

http://ugraute.de/sustainable-germany-building-a-new-government-in-germany

More challenging are posts where I discuss political conflicts and what urban and territorial cooperation could contribute to de-escalating the conflict. However, my most recent post on the conflict in Ukraine found already about 1200 viewers.

http://ugraute.de/conflict-in-ukraine

I am very much interested in you feedback and suggestions. Please use the comment function or send me an email at ulrich.graute@ugraute.de.

The Conflict in Ukraine and the Potential of Urban and Territorial Cooperation to Contribute De-escalating it

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Tue, 25 Jan 2022 13:48:59 GMT

The conflict in Ukraine and the potential of urban and territorial cooperation to contribute de-escalating it

It sounds crazy to propose urban and territorial cooperation in support of peaceful and sustainable development in Ukraine while at the same time Russia is amassing troops which soon could invade Ukraine and launch a major war.

In reality, it’s not crazy and the basic idea is simple: Where there is communication and cooperation there is no war. And, where people on the ground cooperate with their neighbors across borders of regions and nation states something better than war develops: their own future. Using an example of the past and the Western Balkans the post demonstrates that urban and territorial cooperation don’t substitute diplomacy but can contribute to a peaceful development scenario. No illusions. The path there is not easy but still more promising than that of a war.

This post takes a perspective outside of the box of security experts and global politics which is more focused on military challenge and stability. The current danger of war and its aggressor is described elsewhere and shouldn’t be ignored. Nonetheless, it is important to dig deeper and to search for alternatives contributing to long term stability and peace. And that won't work without cooperation of cities and territories.

A peaceful scenario for conflicts like the one in Ukraine needs the input from outside of the small community of security and foreign policy experts and lobbyists

When confl icts between countries heat up the public dialogue often narrows down to the perspective of a rather small and mostly male group of security experts and lobbyists. Where creativity and empathy would be necessary the cold analysis of defence experts and some political gamblers moves into the frontline.

For citizens its increasingly difficult to distinguish truth from fiction. And it doesn’t help if those governments sceptic towards sending weapons to the conflict zone don’t have better ideas than donating a field hospital to Ukraine. Yes, this flat idea comes from the German government.

Obviously, to develop an alternative scenario to that of a war in Ukraine it needs fresh inspiration from outside of traditional foreign and defence politics. And you won’t believe it but practitioners in urban and territorial cooperation are among them and they have already gained experience in response to international conflict.

Europe pre pared cross-border and transna tional cooperation of cities and regions in the midst of the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia in 1999

It was the most bizarre and maybe one of most important conferences I attended so far: The INTERREG III conference held on 9th and 10th April 1999 in Grado (Italy).

Organized by the European Union with the support of the Region of Friuli-Venezia Giulia in Grado close to the Italo-Slovenian border the three interregional organizations in Europe – the Assembly of European Regions (AER), the Conference of Peripheral Maritime Regions (CPMR) and the Association of European Border Regions (AEBR) – adopted in Grado a common position on the Community Initiative, Interreg III . Somebody must have forgotten to cancel the conference since in those very days the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) carried out an aerial bombing campaign against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia during the Kosovo War. But everybody came: There were participants from all across the European Union, from Yugoslavia and all other parts of the Western Balkan. The airspace over Italy was blocked for commercial flights but standing outside of the conference venue in Grado I could see at the sky the bombers originating from NATO airfields on their way to Belgrade and Novi Sad.

The war wasn’t much discussed at the conference. It was almost a tabu but you could see people starting to cry at the lunch or dinner table after receiving phone calls from home. The war was present but didn’t split the audience. Instead, all participants longed for a prospect of peaceful cooperation in the region and the wider Europe. I remember how Prof Borislav Stojkov, the outstanding spatial planner from Belgrade lamented that he was born in Serbia when it was part of a Mediterranean country but as consequence of the division of Yugoslavia he is now living in a landlocked country. In this situation European interventions like the Community Initiative INTERREG offered hope and an opportunity to build cross-border, transnational and interregional bridges. Important, at the time of the conference the hunger for these bridges of cooperation was bigger than the interest in related funds. The close presence of the war guaranteed that the conference never lost track of the deeper purpose of such cooperation. And it was the region Friuli-Venezia Giulia that helped to keep up the mood up with its generous hospitality (for meals participants were shuttled to numerous restaurants and vineyards across the Italian-Slovenian border region).

Certainly, neither the conference nor INTERREG with its fun ds and administrative requirements could overcome all problems in the region. It still needs diplomatic work and progress. However, the conference in Grado in the middle of the last of the Yugoslavia wars marked a starting point for cooperation in a divided region. And without such starters there would be just the war.

Connectivity and cooperation as a new form of change through rapprochement’?

One of the inspirations for this post comes from Para Khanna. Khanna is an Indian American specialist in geopolitics and globalization but his passion is the future of global civilization. He argues in his bestselling book ‘Connectography’ (2016) that connectivity in the form of transportation, energy and communications infrastructure has brought about a "global network revolution" in which human civilization becomes reorganized according to cities and supply chains more than nations and borders. Also important, 2019 he analyzed in ‘The Future is Asian’ the shift in global power location from the West to Asia.

In response to the conflict in Ukraine and challenges by Iran and North Korea the Singapore based social scientist Khanna published on 21 January 2022 a paper title ‘Invade Russia, Iran and North Korea – With Connectivity’ . In the paper he discusses security challenges and defense efforts and proposes a Grand Strategy of Connectivity:

China’s grand strategy is as much about advancing its connectivity as modernizing its military. Its checkbook diplomacy thwarts Western soft power at every turn. If the West is serious about not ceding any more ground, it needs to offer real alternatives. As the U.S. girds for a new Cold War with China, its strategy must resemble that era’s: winning countries over through incentives ranging from trade and investment to immigration and education. China puts its money where its mouth is. The West must do the same.

Parak Khanna doesn’t expect that Russia, Iran and North Korea would ever become like the West but that engagement can minimize conflicts. With respect to Russia, he analyses Russian challenges related to a growing influence of China and to demographic and ecological challenges for Russia. And he sees these challenges as entry points where cooperation on a level playing field could open the door for a new cooperation. Certainly, urban and territorial cooperation and development can be important facilitators when it comes to subjects like transport, energy and infrastructure and to a cooperative approach which at the end is not too far away to the older approach of ‘change through rapprochement’.

Advantages of urban and territorial cooperation to foster peace and sustainable development

1. Shifting the attention away from the tunnel perspective of war to a more positive and constructive

scenario

Looking at urban and regional development in a territory affected by conflict is usually nothing global strategists are interested in but it has the important effect that it shifts the attention not only to the people potentially affected by war but also to the opportunities for an alternative scenario.

Just imagine for a moment stakeholders would organize a major Black See workshop where people from all countries around the Black Sea would come together and discuss challenges and opportunities which cooperation along and across Black Sea offers to their future development. In a similar way, cities like L’viv, Kiev, Kharkov, Volgograd, Saratov etc would meet and discuss economic, environmental, social and cultural opportunities of a city network in the region. These are small steps but if you want to understand the potential of the region you have to go local, start visioning and developing future scenarios. The first steps are likely to be small but they could lead to a peaceful and promising scenario not only to reduce conflicts but also to stimulate new links and cooperation.

EU, UN and national agencies developed tools and guidelines on how to organize such cooperation.

2. Giving the affected people a voice and identifying win-win options

In the current debate about the crisis in Ukraine the people living there have no voice and at the international stage not even the Ukrainian government is included in direct talks between Russia and USA on Ukraine. And those politicians and experts who think that it would be waste of time to go local should admit that they don’t really care for the people.

Giving the affected people a voice is not only an act of dignity and empowerment. It also has the positive side effect that it allows exploring the full potential of cities and territories. National statistics or analytic work by secret service agencies usually don’t focus on the potential for innovation of a region or how it can be fostered. Not engaging the people on the ground risks major and possibly costly misjudgments. Instead, engaging citizens in visioning, diagnostic and policy development can lead to win-win scenarios for all stakeholders.

3. Cities and rural areas as the stage for all development

What makes the place-based approach of cities and territories so important is that the territory is the stage for all economic, social and environmental development. Thus, beginning with urban and territorial development makes it easier to launch a comprehensive and integrate development approach.

A classic Roman phrase says ‘If you want peace, prepare for war’ (Si vis pacem, para bellum). Unfortunately, the phrase didn’t generate a world of peace. Instead, the last two thousand years were full of wars with the peak phase including two World Wars in the 20th century. Today, the world is in multiple crises. Peace, prosperity and sustainability won’t happen by chance. They need to be prepared and they require many efforts and perseverance to build up over time. That’s why we have to prepare peace and sustainability now - if we want to reach it in future. And maybe Russia and Ukraine find through such cooperation the long term security they both ask for. One thing is sure: Adding another war is just not affordable, not for them and not for the world.

The author chairing a first conference on sustainable territorial development in the Black Sea Region. Odessa, Ukraine, 11-12 November 1996

EU Cohesion Policy and Spatial Planning need Cross-fertilisation and for that it needs Communication, Coordination and Cooperation

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Mon, 17 Jan 2022 17:59:27 GMT

A new ESPON Policy Brief elaborates on the need for integrated policy through cross-fertilization of cohesion policy and spatial planning

If you live in Europe or elsewhere doesn't matter but efforts for integrated urban and territorial planning often end where selected sector policies dominate. And the lack of coordination may generate high costs. The European Union cohesion policy and spatial planning both have the common goal of territorial cohesion but often they stand like sector policies on their own and prevent synergy.

In December 2021 the European Territorial Observatory Network ESPON published its Policy Brief: Cross-fertilisation of cohesion policy and spatial planning . ESPON describes the two policies as complementary with a (not yet used) high potential for interrelation:

"EU cohesion policy and other EU sectoral policies provide funding to strengthen economic investment, employment and innovation; to promote more sustainable development; to enhance resilience to shocks and the impacts of climate change; to widen accessibility to services; and to build institutional capacity at all levels. Spatial planning employs strategy, policy and regulation to shape the spatial development of territories; to coordinate and combine investment in the most appropriate places; to protect sensitive environmental and cultural assets; to enhance the liveability of urban and rural environments; and to ensure all citizens have access to the opportunities and services they need." (page 7)

The paper argues that "spatial planning tools can play a key role in ensuring that in the countries and regions that receive cohesion policy funding the combined territorial impacts of cohesion policy and other sectoral policies are positive. Spatial planning in countries and regions is too often poorly prepared to assist with the territorial coordination of investments." The policy brief describes that the call for more effective coordination of sectoral policies had been long-standing but steps taken haven't been successful. A closer look is paid at the situation in Hungary and Czech Republic, followed by information on the changing relevance of cohesion policy and spatial planning in EU Member States.

The ESPON policy brief is in line with other EU documents like the European Spatial Development Perspective (1999) or the Barca Report (1999). It also can be seen as complementary to the United Nations New Urban Agenda and the International Guidelines on Urban and Territorial Planning. In addition, with new place-based tools like community-led local development (CLLD) and integrated territorial investment (ITI) the European Commission opened already the door for combining different funds and objectives across sectors.

Steps and actions that can strengthen cross-fertilisation

Following the above described analysis the policy brief proposes and outlines as key activity cross-fertilization to solve the problem. Cross-fertilization is understood as the interaction between sectoral policy decision-makers that creates complementarity increases efficiency through synergy and avoids the costs of non-coordination.

Seven practical steps are described as relevant to all countries, but especially where cohesion policy makes up a large share of territorial investments of the Union and Member States. The seven steps are not mandated but rest on the willingness of the main parties to cooperate for mutual benefit. They can be implemented with only minimal cost and much of this could be covered by cohesion policy. According to ESPON, experiences around Europe suggest that the resources needed are most certainly outweighed by the potential benefits.

The responsible parties should prioritise the following steps.

Resolve unfavourable conditions that will hinder measures to strengthen cross-fertilisation, ensuring inclusive good governance practices and challenging the dominant ‘policy silo’ mindset through institutional and individual capacity building .
Know the territorial impacts of cohesion polic y by making use of territorial impact assessment (TIA) and consultation with stakeholders to evaluate and monitor the combined impacts of policies
Test the complementarity of investments made by cohesion policy and other sectoral policies with spatial planning strategies, identifying and mapping inconsistences and proposing actions to foster more consistency
Lift communication barriers that stifle joint working, by promoting the use of the same key terms, territorial units, indicators and data sets in policymakin g, and set out priorities and responsibilities for action on harmonisation.
Champion joint working in territories where it is a priority to strengthen the efficiency of investment, at first through voluntary cooperation , and, if needed, through statutory ad hoc agencies that can take on a leading role in joining up policies and actions.
Promote place-sensitivity in cohesion policy by ensuring that the territorial dimension is given more priority by the managing authorities, including the spatial effects of investment and its relationship to existing spatial planning objectives.
Customise spatial planning tools for cross-fertilisation to create more responsive spatial strategies and plans that get to grips with investment opportunities, and align the rhythm of strategy and plan reviews with cohesion policy to achieve temporal integration.

To make cross-fertilization happen it requires communication, coordination and cooperation

We are living in times where parties often aim at solving a problem by a technical fix: Be it a simple app, a major data base or a comprehensive digitization effort. ESPON also contributes to this dialogue and just published this the working Potential and challenges of digitisation in planning practice [1]. Necessary and appropriate as these activities are in many contexts it is refreshing that the ESPON policy brief on cross-fertilization underscores the importance of human action and especially of communication, coordination and cooperation.

Just have a look at the seven steps towards enhanced cross-fertilization (Figure above). From strengthening good governance, facilitating capacity building, evaluating performance, voluntary cooperation and place-sensitivity to the customizing of planning tools it is predominately about communication, coordination and cooperation between experts, citizens, stakeholders and policymakers. That doesn't exclude the supportive use of technical tools but it gives a clear indication that integrated planning doesn't happen neither by chance nor by algorithm but needs active engagement by parties.

As far as I know this approach is not just an academic position for ESPON but it is experience based. Instead of founding a European institutionalised Spatial Observatory ESPON began its history twenty years ago as a network of national spatial observatories. They all came from their own background with own traditions and statistical methods. In those early days compiling national data in a European data base and producing maps could be an administrative nightmare. ESPON experienced on its own the nitty-gritty struggle of integrating diverse sets of data and information. So, they know what they are talking about. Today the ESPON programme and European Grouping of Territorial Cooperation include governments and planning institutions from 32 (not only EU) countries. By own experience they understand that cross-terilization of cohesion policy and spatial planning needs not simply a technical fix but communication, coordination and cooperation.

[1] ESPON Working Paper: Potential and challenges of digitisation in planning practice, 17 January 2022

https://www.espon.eu/working-paper-potential-and-challenges-digitisation-planning-practice

Note: The key source serving as background for this post is this policy brief of ESPON EGTC:

Policy Brief: Cross-fertilization of cohesion policy and spatial planning

https://www.espon.eu/cohesion-policy-and-spatial-planning

The ESPON EGTC is the Single Beneficiary of the ESPON 2020 Cooperation Programme. The Single Operation within the programme is implemented by the ESPON EGTC and co-financed by the European Regional Development Fund, the EU Member States and the Partner States, Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway, Switzerland and the United Kingdom.

This policy brief draws on the findings from a set of ESPON research activities:
•   “Comparative Analysis of Territorial Governance and Spatial Planning Systems in Europe” (ESPON COMPASS project, 2018)
•   ESPON COMPASS ‘interactive dialogue’ with spatial planning and cohesion policy experts from the ESPON programme countries which took place during 2021 and which consisted of several phases, culminating in an online event held on 9 April 2021. The event was attended by 45 different experts from 11 countries (see the summary report below).
•   Case study report “Cross-fertilisation between spatial planning and EU Cohesion Policy in the Czech Republic” (2021) which developed a survey and held interviews with the key planning and Cohesion Policy stakeholders in the Czech context, complemented by insights from an online ‘interactive dialogue’, a workshop with Czech and international experts, all held in 2021 (see the Case study report below).

Sustainable Germany (18): Germany's Green Makeover won't be Green but Colourful instead. And that may be for the Better.

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Thu, 02 Dec 2021 18:12:11 GMT

Germany's Green Party fought for a climate government during the election campaign last summer. What Germany is getting now won't be a climate government but maybe something even better: a government focused on sustainability as a chance to stick together in spite of conflicting party interests.

How would that work?

There will be a coalition government as a composite of the Social Democratic Party (SPD), the Greens and the Liberals (FDP). Yes, it is not a love marriage. The Liberals adopted freedom and especially the free market as one of their key priorities and that doesn't match easily with some of the tax hungry social politics or the call for an increase of minimum wages of the SPD. In addition, there is the readiness of the Greens to accept much higher debts to finance the decarbonization of the economy. But the participation of citizens through the general elections in September generated a situation where there is not real alternative to a coalition of these three parties.

Of course, international conflic ts may bloc some developments. There is also the risk that internal disputes may destroy the coalition. Yes, but there is also the positive option of a win-win situation if the coalition parties take the election result as an opportunity to modernize the economy and social systems with a keen interest in more climate resilience and intergenerational equity. For the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development this could be a stroke of luck: Although the SDGs were sidelined during the election campaign the new coalition in Germany could turn into a champion for sustainable development because its the 2030 Agenda where the interests of the parties could meet and support achievement of these internationally agreed goals.

The Sustainable Development Goals point to a promised land - why are we hesitating?

Looking at the 17 Sustainable Development Goals one may wonder why the governments and people of the world are not fighting a lot stronger for it. No poverty, quality education, gender equality, resilient cities, peace, justice and partnership. Who could be against these goals and the governments already agreed on these goals.

So where is the problem?

The problem is that the goals are just like a light at the horizon while the way to reach the horizon and to achieve the goals leads through a possibly deep and rough sea. Rich countries may lose their assets while poor countries may lack the necessary resources to catch up. Most people hesitate to enter shallow waters (see picture) and so do most politicians.

Germany is one of the richest countries of the world but the election of the Federal Parliament and regional governments (e.g. in Berlin) comes at a time of multiple crises. The traffic light coalitions of SPD (red), FDP (yellow) and Greens (guess what colour?...) is faced by the fourth corona wave, climate change, inflation, international conflicts and divisions within the society. Calling for a climate government corresponded to the preparation of COP26 but disregarded other challenges.

As an expert on sustainable governanc e and management I would add that the call for a climate government also ignored the needs expressed in the much broader 2030 Agenda for sustainable development of the UN. The reality now forced political parties to sit down and to compile a government programme (Koalitionsvereinbarung) which is more realistic and covers a broader spectrum of goals.

Thomas Plaßmann: Die Ampel steht. Der Spiegel, 28 November 2021

Play of colours as a chance for more sustainability

Berlin gets two new coalition governments: a new chancellor (most likely Olaf Scholz) and a new Governing Mayor (most likely Franziska Giffey). While at the federal level the Liberals will join the coalition it will be in the Citystate of Berlin the party Die Linke (red) which has its origins in the socialist party of the German Democratic Republic. Due to the different programmes of these parties it is likely that the federal government will cover even more aspects of the sustainability agenda. In anyway, we'll have two new coalition governments in Berlin where party interests generate competitions and offer the opportunity (not more and not less) to integrate more policies into a more sustainable development. Climate resilience will be a cross-cutting issue for both governments but they have other similarities too: affordable housing, unbureaucratic child security, digitalization and digital education and at both levels climate protection has an urban dimensions.

The old government under Angela Merkel was also based on a coalition (of two parties) but without the same mix of political interests. Ms Merkel was always engaged in climate policies. She chaired COP1 in 1995 as the German minister for the environment and attended COP 26 as the German Chancellor. But probably she too had too much respect of the shallow waters and proceeded very carefully. Angela Merkel was a great compromise generator but over the years Germany lost its edge in the fields of climate and sustainability policy. The new compromise coalition can generate a stronger drive to become a champion in these fields - and may it be just as a by-product of a three party coalition looking for survival in a challenging political environment. I wouldn't bet that this will happen but I certainly hope for it.

Picture above: The new coalitions for governments at the federal and the level of the city-state of Berlin presented the draft coalition agreements in late November. After approval by the parties it is expected that Olaf Scholz will be elected by the German parliament (Bundestag) as new Chancellor in early December and that Franziska Giffey will be elected as Governing Mayor of Berlin about a week before Christmas.

Sustainable Germany (17): The Green Makeover in Developed Countries - The Case of Germany

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Thu, 25 Nov 2021 16:17:29 GMT

I am thrilled to be invited by the Habitat Professionals Forum (HPF) and the International Society of City and Regional Planners (ISOCARP) to speak at the Urban Thinkers Campus ' The Great Green Makeover ' on 30 November 2021 on the subject ' The Green Makeover in Developed Countries - The Case of Germany '

Website of the Urban Thinkers Campus (UTC)

https://www.worldurbancampaign.org/urban-thinkers-campus

Sustainable Germany (16): Planners, politicians and citizens are not ready for a total transformation towards climate resilience and sustainability

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Tue, 09 Nov 2021 10:02:47 GMT

Afraid of one's own courage

The hesitation of so many decision-makers to support more ambitious measure to limit global warming to 1,5 C and to achieve the 17 Sustainable Development goals may have two simple reasons: fear of the unknown and unpreparedness for the long and unsecured passage towards climate resilience and sustainability.

In my recent work including a series of block posts on Sustainable Germany ( www.urgaute.de/blog-1 ) and a presentation at the American Planning Association (APA) on 8 November 2021 I analysed the readiness of Germany for the ‘total transformation of the way we live and work, the way we produce energy and approach mobility’ as Germany’s Acting Chancellor Angela Merkel called for at COP26 in Glasgow on 1 November 2021.

While further research is needed to reveal the full truth there are clear indications for this:

- The challenge to achieve the climate is not technical because most experts say it is still doable

- Instead, the main obstacles are the fear of the unknown and the lack of preparedness.

In this post I summarize main arguments of my presentation at American Planning Association.

Climate Paths 2.0 – A Program for Climate and Germany's Future Development in German and in English please visit the website of the Federation of German Industries (BDI) https://bdi.eu/themenfelder/energie-und-klima/klimapfade/

1. Climate resilience and sustainability

The goals agreed in 2015 and enshrined in the Paris Agreement and the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development have all a very positive notion. They aim at improving the life for all and assuring that the same quality of life will be available for future generations. The achieved goals would be a win-win for everybody. But if experts say that the goals are achievable there must be something else which keeps planners, politicians and citizens from stepping up their activities.

2. Fear of the unknown

If Angela Merkel is so strongly in favour of a total transformation why hasn’t she done more for it in the past? Let’s recall that she chaired already COP1 in 1995 as German Minister for the Environment. Looking for reasons there are two search directions: On the one hand a rich and highly industrialized country like Germany has a lot to loose and the government of Germany is committed to prevent any damage from the German people. On the other hand there is the unknown territory or unknown open see between our situation today and a climate resilient and sustainable life. Most politicians, planning experts and citizens are not used to faced such large scale and dynamic challenges and are thus not experienced in doing so. We learnt during the Corona pandemic how difficult it is for politicians to foresee dynamic developments and to always take the right decision to fight COVID-19. It can be expected that it will be even more difficult to lead the people of a country or the entire world through the transition period where all our lifelines have to be switched from fossil sources to renewable sources of energy. And this is only one of the big challenges and these challenges are expected to develop in a dynamic way in relation to interrelations and other emerging issues. Who will guarantee that commitments once made will be reliable throughout the entire process? And will there be enough mechanisms to prevent and mitigate hardships of those who will be temporarily losers of the transition process? These and more questions seem to have prevented an open discussion and positioning of politicians during the last election campaign. Climate change was the elephant in the room but no party presented an action plan to achieve the 1,5 C goal. Such a plan was not considered as helpful to win the elections.

3. Unpreparedness

The third argument is neither pleasant for politicians nor for experts and citizens: we are all not prepared for a total transformation.

To give one example: In Germany, the National Climate Initiative alone carried out 35.900 climate projects since 2008. However, Burkhard Jung, Lord Mayor of Leipzig and President of the Association of German Cities asks for more support for cities. And the German Association of Industries revealed in its report Climate Paths 2.0 – A Program for Climate and Germany's Future Development that currently the energy-efficient building renovation rate is at 2,1 % only. That not only means that more than 97 % are still to be renovated or substituted but that for this we need building materials, trained construction crews and planners to prepare and implement projects.

And the latter point is where the currently on-going negotiations for a new coalition government are trapped. As the Berlin daily newspaper Der Tagespiegel wrote on its front page on 6 November the Social democratic, Green and Liberal parties are trapped. Speeding up climate policy implementation requires preparatory work not done by the last government:

The balance between climate and nature protection needs to be rebalanced.
Public administration (including urban and territorial planning departments) and courts need additional staff to cope with the expected wave of projects and law suites. Many of these experts still need to be trained at universities and other schools - which needs time.
Energy networks need to be modernized e.g. to transport electricity from offshore wind parks to cities. E-mobility requires charging stations. The public transport needs to be strengthened etc etc.
Voluntary measures need to be negotiated with stakeholders and that needs time. Authoritarian top down decision may be taken faster but the result may be worse if top down decisions take the wrong direction and don't meet intergenerational needs.

In Germany, especially the Green Party is under pressure to deliver more for climate resilience but tasks ignored by former governments are likely to remain as a burden for the new one. Catching up may take time and resources. In addition the piecemeal approach of thousands of uncoordinated projects didn't generate the progress hoped for. Therefore it seems to be time for more robust and result based strategies for goal achievement.

4. Conclusions

Leaning on Angela Merkel’s call from Glasgow “What we need is a total transformation of the way we live and work, the way we produce energy and approach mobility” I finished my APA presentation with the following conclusions.

To overcome the fear of the unknown path and to embark on a total transformation it needs robust strategies including these components:

- A confidence booster to overcome the fear of the unknown

- An enabling environment for large scale transformation

- Accountable leadership at all policy levels

- Scaling up of projects into result based programmes covering all cities and territories

- Mixed set of financing instruments

- Socio-economic mechanisms to cover (multi annual) hardships of individuals or entire cities and territories

- International solidarity to leave no country, city and individual behind

- Capacity building at an unprecedented scale to provide technical and administrative support for necessary

large scale programmes

- Review and accountability mechanism

I am happy to discuss and further elaborate my thesis.

Sustainable Germany (15): Local and national planning for a climate neutral and sustainable future of Germany

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Thu, 04 Nov 2021 16:52:42 GMT

Invitation to speak at the World Town Planning Day 2021 on Sustainable Germany

Thrilled to be invited to speak on a subject related to this blog series at the American Planning Association World Town Planning Day conference on November 8, 2021!

Ulrich Graute

Local and national planning for a climate neutral and sustainable future of Germany

11:00 am-Noon EST, Track 3

Germany has compared globally a top-ranking GDP. Policies including the German energy transition already triggered a significant structural change in the energy system. Germany already in 2001 established a Council for Sustainable Development advising the government and producing a sustainability strategy. In addition, many local governments embarked on a path towards planning for climate neutral and sustainable development. However, while there are many good willing actors the progress achieved so far is limited.

The session will look at the development in Germany over the last years and at the current situation where a new government is in the making. It will discuss local planning in several German cities but this will be done in an integrated way with a close eye on national policies as an important part of the enabling environment for a climate neutral and sustainable urban development.

Registration required

https://planning.zoom.us/meeting/register/tJwtceyvqD8pH9YhLn5FG9wartBFhpVJvI1J

2021 World Town Planning Day Conference Program

The American Planning Association's International Division invites planners, urban designers & placemakers to attend the 72nd annual APA World Town Planning Day virtual conference on the topic of Planning for Inter-Generational Equity.

As the world faces global crises like climate change and pandemics, planning for sustainable and equitable communities requires both long-term thinking and immediate action. Speakers from across the world will explore how planners can be changemakers today and support intergenerational equity at the community, national and global scales.

Track 1: Equitable Climate Adaptation
Track 2: Implementation + Accountability
Track 3: Representing the Future: Who needs to be at the table today?

Early Sessions

Presentations spanning planning in Ethiopia, the United Sta tes, and Hong Kong:

10-11:00 am EST

Track 3: Building Equitable Engagement Into Modern Street Design

Speakers: Celeste Frye, AICP, CEO at Public Works Partners | Kethia Joseph, Senior Manager at Public Works Partners | Christopher Hrones, AICP, Director of Strategic Transit Initiatives, NYC Department of Transportation | Mike Flynn, AICP, Principal & National Director Transportation Planning, Sam Schwartz Engineering

11:00 am-Noon EST

Track 3: Local and national planning for a climate neutral and sustainable future of Germany

Speaker: Ulrich Graute, International Consultant for Sustainable Governance and Management

Track 1: Averting Famine: Tigray's Ecological Miracles Through Peace, Local Management, and Resilience

Speakers: Marta Woldu, Master's of Community Planning, University of Maryland-College Park | Haileselassie Ghebremariam Araya, PhD Candidate at the University of Nairobi and Graduate fellow at International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI), Nairobi, Kenya

Afternoon Fast Presentation Series

Quick presentations providing diverse and global planning perspectives from both experienced professionals & young planners:

1-2:00 pm EST

Tracks 1-3: Young Planner Series

Mildred Warner, United States | Brenda Muduwa, Uganda | Axel David Murillo, Colombia | Aubrey Toldi, Italy

3-4:00 pm EST

Tracks 1-3: Fast+Fun Series

Evening Session

6-7:30 pm EST

Track 1: APA International Division's Climate & Sustainability Working Group Presents: Inclusively Resilient Urbanism
Speakers: Jessica Schmidt, World Bank | Linda Shi, Cornell University | Jana El-Horr, World Bank | Zach Postone, Arup | Kate Holmquist, AICP, Principal Planner and Landscape Architect, WerkSTADT Urban Planning

About World Town Planning Day

World Town Planning Day is celebrated in 30 countries on four continents each November. It is a special day to recognize and promote the role of planning in creating liveable communities.

World Town Planning Day presents an excellent opportunity to look at planning from a global perspective, and APA encourages its members to consider planning challenges and solutions around the globe on that day.

The American Institute of Certified Planners (AICP) endorses World Town Planning Day as a strategy to promote a broad-based awareness, support, and advocacy of community and regional planning among the general public and all levels of government through activities in recognition of American accomplishments on World Town Planning Day of each year.

Source: https://www.planning.org/international/worldtown/ - accessed on 4 November 2021

Sustainable Germany (14): Mannheim's Local Green Deal and the Mannheim Message of European Mayors

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Tue, 02 Nov 2021 13:53:28 GMT

Achieving Climate Neutrality by 2030

World leaders are currently gathering in Glasgow for the 26th UN Climate Change Conference of the Parties (COP26). Hopefully, they will commit to more ambitious climate action and find answers to the worrying global impacts of climate change. However, much of the response will have to be at the local level. Cities are where both the concrete impacts and the local capacity to find solutions come together. Cities have the power to unlock the potential for ambitious local climate action for a carbon-neutral and socially just future.

Therefore, it is good that cities and regions are present in Glasgow. ICLEI and the Scottish Government in cooperation with Cities and Regions in the UNFCCC processes joined up and host a Multilevel Action Pavilion @ UNFCCC COP26 [1] . On 2 November 2021 the City of Mannheim organized at the pavilion a session 'The Local Green Deal – Achieving Climate Neutrality by 2030 with Mannheim's Innovative Governance Approach'. It explored Mannheim’s innovative Local Green Deal and how the model could be applied in other cities around Europe and the world.

Leitbild Mannheim - guiding principles for the City of Mannheim

The City Council of the City of Mannheim adopted in 2019 a Leitbild Mannheim 2030 describing seven focus areas for its future development. [2]

Picture: Cover of the guiding principles for the City of Mannheim 'Leitbild Mannheim'

Mannheim understands by Leitbild this:

An endeavor to describe what life will be like in Mannheim in the coming years and what it means to be a native of Mannheim; it is regularly checked and updated;
Something to tackle; a tool to enable urban society to participate meaningfully in the future of the city;
A guideline to address a range of measures in such a way that the short-term achievements enable the implementation of long-term goals;
No plan to replace all other strategies; we acknowledge that, in addition to the model, other strategies are being implemented in the city administration and together we ensure that these are in line with the model;
It will be particularly effective if the city community commits itself to acting consistently in accordance with the 17 sustainability goals;
No bureaucratic stop sign and will not stop innovation and other work in the city.

Leitbild Mannheim 2030, page 6.

Strategic goals

At the centre of the Leibild are seven strategic goals

Mannheim guarantees educational equity and prevents poverty. The social and cultural participation for all Mannheimers (i.e. the people living in the city) is ensured.
Mannheim offers an exemplary urban quality of life with high a standard of security as a basis for a healthy, happy life for people of each age and through which the city gains the support of the people.
Mannheim's urban society is shaped by solidarity and it is for other metropolises a model for living together. Assured are the equality of the sexes and the recognition of diverse human identities and life designs.
Mannheim is characterized by a strong urban society and good administrative management. The Mannheimers make active use of possibilities to engage in the development of their city through democratic and transparent processes.
Mannheim as a digital and innovative metropolis provides the requirements for companies of all sizes to realize diverse and sustainable value added value as well as to attract talents and specialists.
Mannheim is climate-friendly - and in future will be a climate-neutral - and resilient city serving as an example for environmentally conscious life and action.
Mannheim is a role model for them international cooperation of cities. Communal development policy and responsible consumption contribute to global justice and sustainable international politics.

The city administration of Mannheim undertakes to implement the above goals in financially sustainable way without spending more than it collects. All decisions by the City Council and the Mayor must be made taking into account financial consequences. However, to make best use of available financial resources the mission statement is considered as providing an apropriate framework.

The Mannheim Message

With the Mannheim Message, the mayors and decision-makers of Europe’s cities and regions are responding to the European Green Deal. Launched in the context of 'Mannheim2020 - the 9th European Conference on Sustainable Cities and Towns', 30 Sept-2 October 2020, the document builds on the legacy and principles of the Aalborg Charter (1994), the Aalborg Commitments (2004) and the Basque Declaration (2016) and reflects the aim of integrated sustainable urban and regional development, as supported by the Leipzig Charter. Today, one year since its launch, 54 cities or region, 61 organisations, and 127 individuals have endorsed the Mannheim Message [3] .

Mayors endorsing the Mannheim Message sign up to this:

"We, mayors and decision-makers of European cities and regions, actively support the European Green Deal by developing and implementing Local Green Deals together with our local communities. Our Local Green Deals will bring together our citizens and stakeholders around a strategy aligned with the goals, priorities and principles of the European Green Deal and the New Leipzig Charter."

An they therefore propose that both their Local Green Deals and the European Green Deal be built upon the following five core systemic changes, for which the signatories commit to take action:

✪ Transformation of our current local infrastructure and systems

We will apply agile and innovative solutions to transform our local infrastructure and service systems for a post-carbon society, including smart digital technology and green and blue infrastructure, to improve the quality of our public spaces, support adaptation to climate change, enhance biodiversity, and support public health and quality of life.

✪ Local development beyond growth and competition

We will create local and regional economies that prioritize the protection of the climate, natural resources, biodiversity and ecosystems in economic development, and put the health and quality of life of current and future generations at their centre.

✪ Cooperation, solidarity and inclusion

We will build urban and regional communities on principles of participation, transparency, inclusion and non-discrimination that make our cities and regions attractive, safe and healthy homes for all residents.

✪ A lifestyle and culture of sufficiency and optimisation

We will ensure that our infrastructure, services, production methods and business models do not primarily support efficiency and maximisation of output, but circularity, sufficiency and optimisation, maintaining the value and utility of our assets in support of the quality of life for all. In this we note that culture is an important driver and supports dialogue and cohesion in the development and implementation of local sustainability strategies.

✪ Re-orientation towards the common good

We will implement a local and regional governance model that strengthens the common good with the help of co-creation and social innovation, and supports social economy approaches and new forms of social enterprises and investment, as well as public private people partnerships. In this we increase the resilience of our local economies and communities in line with our sustainability agenda.

Interested mayors may sign up to the Mannheim Message following this link:

https://conferences.sustainablecities.eu/mannheim2020/mannheim-message/

Mannheim's mayor on the Mannheim Message and Mannheim's Green Deal

Mannheim regards itself as pilot city to implement of the Local Green Deal (LGD). ICLEI interviewed Mannheim's Mayor, Dr. Peter Kurz, to reflect on how the Message – and its call to localise the EU Green Deal – has been implemented, and how he sees Mannheim’s sustainable future. [ 3]

Since last year’s conference, the City of Mannheim has taken great strides to localise the European Green Deal. What do your local “Mannheim Green Deals” look like, and how have you gone about crafting and implementing them?

Fortunately, we had already begun our transformation before the Mannheim Message was launched, so we weren’t starting from scratch. In fact, we have long been a “city of transformation”. However, the logical next step immediately after Mannheim2020 was to begin aligning our strategic mission statement, which is based on the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals, with the EU Green Deal targets.

Today, we are acting as a Local Green Deal (LGD) pilot city. This is a dynamic process – we see an LGD as a framework for concrete municipal and community action, and as a recovery and resilience plan to help transform our city and local economy towards sustainability and climate neutrality.

The first step in translating this vision into concrete action was to establish our Local Green Deal Office, which was charged with exploring the potential for tailored LGDs associated with each of our urban projects in the areas of climate, zero pollution, clean and circular economy, ecosystems and biodiversity, mobility, sustainable food, clean energy, and energy-efficient buildings. These tailored LGDs also had to incorporate the three cross-cutting themes of citizen and stakeholder participation, just transition, and knowledge transfer and innovation.

We then assessed the potential of LGDs for all departments’ and city enterprises’ projects, identified gaps in strategies and goals, and brought together ideas, projects and actors in a coordinated way.

The municipal council recently adopted an initial LGD and we set out new targets: Mannheim aims to reach climate neutrality by 2030.

Mannheim is an industrial city, so large companies play an important role in making their own relevant and visible contributions to this ambitious goal.

As such, they are central to our next step: the twenty companies that make up the Mannheim Climate Protection Alliance will present their proposals for climate action by the end of October.

How have the Mannheim Message’s five core systemic changes and nine policy shifts shaped your approach to Local Green Deals in Mannheim?

For readers’ context, those systemic changes are: 1) transformation of infrastructure, 2) development beyond growth, 3) cooperation and inclusion, 4) a culture of sufficiency, and 5) reorientation toward the common good. The nine policy shifts are: 1) safeguarding public income, 2) shifting taxes away from labour, 3) sufficient financial support, 4) local value chains, 5) integrated land use, 6) new use of urban space, 7) needs-driven research, 8) replacing products with services, and 9) guaranteed living income.

Our Local Green Deal brings together and concretises sustainability and climate goals, focuses on socially just transformation, uses funding and financing opportunities in a targeted manner, and integrates international commitments and networks. As such, the LGD is poised to catalyse best practice examples and projects which make the principles in the Mannheim Message a reality.

Organising and managing a programme as comprehensive as Mannheim’s Local Green Deal is quite ambitious. Clear communication, transparent policies and an enabling administration are decisive– the Mannheim Message has laid the groundwork for that.

Please find the full interview here: [4]

[1] COP26 Multilevel Action Pavilion https://app.hopin.com/events/cop26-multilevel-action-pavilion/reception - accessed on 2 November 2021

[2] Stadt Mannheim: Leitbild Mannheim 2030

https://www.mannheim.de/sites/default/files/2019-09/MA_Leitbild_final_barrierefrei.pdf - accessed on 2 November 2021

[3] Mannheim Message

https://conferences.sustainablecities.eu/fileadmin/user_upload/_temp_/Mannheim2020/Message/Mannheim-Message.pdf - accessed on 2 November 2021

[4] ICLEI interview with Mannheim's Mayor, Dr. Peter Kurz

https://iclei-europe.org/news/?c=search&uid=dDql6oLF - accessed on 2 November 2021

Sustainable Germany (13): Testing the climate neutral city of the future in Görlitz instead of flying blind into transformation

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Wed, 27 Oct 2021 10:04:00 GMT

‘Risks’ as a justification for evading dynamic development processes means flying blind into an inevitable transformation

Efforts to implement the Paris Agreement on climate change often focus on science, technology and plenty of money. For instance, the German Advisory Council on Global Change published in July 2021 a policy paper “Beyond Climate Neutrality” which discusses climate neutrality predominately as an engineering challenge. [1] But how realistic is it that alone by financing science and technology problems can be solved which were generated by the way humans live? As part of the solution, wouldn’t it be as important or even more important to transform the way we live in our cities and societies? Without ignoring the importance of science and technology this post stresses the need of more social science research and learning by doing, i.e. practical testing of climate neutral life.

Almost everybody in the world can agree on the expectation that the fight against climate change and for sustainable development will transform economies and societies, but nobody knows exactly how the world will look like after the transformation and at what cost it will come. There is some talk about the need for a new social contract but there is no blueprint of its text and without that we don’t know what the world is heading for. Therefore, the world is flying blind into the transformation and related risks and uncertainties are often used as a justification for evading dynamic development processes. Humans prefer dealing with single issue problems rather than embarking on complex, interrelated and dynamic change processes. What could help in this situation are opportunities to test the life after the transformation. And they exist!

[1] German Advisory Council on Global Change, Policy Paper no 12, July 2021 https://www.wbgu.de/fileadmin/user_upload/wbgu/publikationen/politikpapiere/pp12_2021/pdf_und_ebook/wbgu_pp12_navi_en.pdf - accessed on 27 October 2021

Testing the future before it arrives - Görlitz as a living and working experiment for a climate neutral city

Photo: IOER-Media

In the City of Görlitz at the Polish border in Germany it is possible to test the city of the future. Until March 2023, a total of 18 households can live in Görlitz for three months on a trial basis. "The participants not only test living in the city, they can and should also actively shape Görlitz by contributing their ideas and expertise on the topics of sustainable urban development and climate neutrality," explains project manager Prof. Dr. Robert Knippschild.

According to information provided by the Leibniz Institute of Ecological Urban and Regional Development (IÖR) [2] , the institute and local partners launched the new project "Testing the City of the Future - A living and working experiment for a climate neutral city of Görlitz". Until the end of 2021, the first three participants can try out Görlitz as a place to live, work and live. During their three-month stay, they will support the city with their ideas and expertise on the path to climate neutrality and more sustainability. A total of 18 of these trial stays are planned until March 2023.

So far, the IÖR project team at the Interdisciplinary Centre for Transformative Urban Regeneration (IZS) in Görlitz has received around 60 applications to participate in the project "Testing the City of the Future ". Households with one and two persons are among them, as well as families with children. Many city dwellers - especially from Berlin and Dresden - are interested in participating. However, applications were also received from other regions of Germany as well as from Poland, Austria, the USA and Brazil.

Participants will not only test living in the city, they can and should also actively shape Görlitz by contributing their ideas and expertise on the topics of sustainable urban development and climate neutrality. According to the project manager Prof. Dr. Robert Knippschild "That's why the application also required them to submit a project outline and indicate which institutions or actors in the city would be conceivable to collaborate with." One of the decisive factors in the selection of participants was whether the project idea could contribute to the ambitious goal of the city of Görlitz to become climate neutral by 2030. "We received some very interesting applications," says Robert Knippschild. "Many promise to bring real added value to the city of Görlitz, even beyond the trial stay of three months. However, some applicants cannot realise such a long stay. Unfortunately, we could not take them into account in the selection process.”

The project is funded by the Federal Ministry of the Interior, Building and Community (BMI)/Federal Institute for research on Building, Urban Affairs and Spatial Development (BBSR) as part of their “National Urban Development Policy” [3] . The Leibniz Institute of Ecological Urban and Regional Development (IOER), represented by the Interdisciplinary Centre for Ecological and Revitalising Urban Transformation (IZS), is implementing the project. Project partners include the City of Görlitz, several municipal enterprises, the University of Applied Sciences Zittau/Görlitz and the Siemens Energy Görlitz Innovation Campus. Flats of the municipal housing association KommWohnen are available free of charge for the participants. Companies and research institutions are hosts for a temporary work stay. In addition, various local initiatives provide space, for example for artistic-creative stays.

The trial stays are scientifically accompanied by the IZS. Among other things, the researchers are looking into the question of how far urban development oriented towards climate neutrality and sustainability can contribute to attracting qualified workers to smaller and medium-sized cities. Further questions are: What role can targeted in-migration play in the shift towards more sustainable ways of living and working in these cities? How do the potential newcomers influence the urban society with their commitment to climate neutrality and sustainability?

Most of the places in the project have been taken. For a few free places in the later project phase, applications are still possible until 31 October 2021. A requirement for the application is the submission of a project outline. Applications can be made online via a form on the project website:

http://stadt-der-zukunft-auf-probe.ioer.eu/

Contact at the IZS

Prof. Dr. Robert Knippschild (project management), e-mail: R.Knippschild@ioer.de
Constanze Zöllter (project processing), e-mail: C.Zoellter@ioer.de

[2] Leibniz Institute of Ecological Urban and Regional Development (IÖR), press release 10/04/2021

http://ioer.de/en/press/news/testing-the-city-trial-stays-start - accessed on 27 October 2021

[3] Federal Ministry of the Interior, Building and Community (BMI)

https://www.nationale-stadtentwicklungspolitik.de/NSPWeb/EN/Home/home_node.html;jsessionid=D2173F083F5C2979170E7F55AA7AD48C.live21302

Photo: IOER-Media

Sustainable Germany (12): The industry's plan for a climate-neutral Germany in 2045

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Fri, 22 Oct 2021 08:24:49 GMT

The powerful Federation of German Industries (BDI) published a program for climate and Germany's future development

On 21 October 2021 Social democrats , the Greens and Liberals officially opened negotiations for the building of a new government. In Berlin twenty thematic working groups started searching for common ground for the future governmental programme. It's quality is expected to reveal if the new coalition will meet at the lowest common denominator or if it aims at a big hit transforming the country and its economy towards climate neutrality.

Now that the likeliness of a new government with a strong climate policy is growing all stakeholder groups speak up to impact the outcome. Certainly, in a modern and highly industrialized country like Germany the Federation of German Industries (BDI) is among the most powerful voices. The BDI is wo rking to ensure that Germany remains an industrialized country, one that is export-oriented and innovative. Germany's economy is based on a strong industrial core. Its success hinges on deep-rooted industrial value chains with more than 100,000 large, medium-sized and small companies from all sectors of the manufacturing industry, which together employ more than eight million people. Almost a quarter of Germany's gross domestic product (GDP) is generated by German industry. If industry-related services are included, this goes up to around one-third of GDP. Together with industry-related services, industry forms the growth core of the German economy. (source: english.bdi.eu/)

The BDI is not known as a frontrunner supporting the transformation of the German economy towards climate-neutrality. But times are changing. With major industries like the energy sector and automotive industry already in full swing entering the transformation climate neutrality is becoming key to keeping German industries competitive. Already the last Merkel government updated the Climate Change Act in 2021 raising significantly the country's climate targets to limit the effects of climate change. And now that a new federal government in Berlin may take include a 'climate government' the BDI as the most important lobby organization of German industries has to jump on the boat if it doesn't want to be left behind.

More than 150 experts of the Boston Consulting Group, the Federation of German Industries, and around 80 companies and associations contributed between March and September 2021 to the process leading on 21 October to the launch of the study 'Climate Paths 2.0 - A Program for Climate and Germany's Future Development'.[1]

The most important aspect about the study is that now all relevant stakeholders in the country take a goal oriented implementation of the Paris Agreement as a serious option and formulate not only their won option bus also practical proposals. This is not a guarantee for success but it is a precondition for a constructive solution oriented dialogue.

[1] https://english.bdi.eu/publication/news/climate-paths-2-0-a-program-for-climate-and-germanys-future-development/ - accessed on 22 October 2021

While the full text of the study is available in English and German following the above link I document in this post three illustrations.

The first illustrations summarizes an outlook on major changes needed by 2045 to make Germany climate-neutral (sources page 6-7).

The second illustration lines up steps to be taken as part of the Climate Path 2.0

For instance, the implementation of climate protection measures will require additional investments of around 860 billion euros by 2030, which the state, citizens and companies will have to raise. That corresponds to around 100 billion euros per year. Germany must undertake its greatest transformation in its post-war history. That is a lot but according to the BDI it is a path that can lead Germany to goal achievement.

The third illustration taken from the report lists instruments needed in addition to existing instruments (source: page 22-23).

For the full documentation of the study Climate Paths 2.0 – A Program for Climate and Germany's Future Development in German and in English please visit the website of the Federation of German Industries (BDI)

https://bdi.eu/themenfelder/energie-und-klima/klimapfade/

Sustainable Germany (11): Aligning modernization of state and socio-ecologic market economy with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) of the United Nations

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Fri, 15 Oct 2021 13:59:29 GMT

Political parties recommend negotiations for a new German coalition government between the SPD , Greens and Liberals

A traffic light near the Reichstag (Bundestag) in Berlin showing red, green and yellow at the same time

Source: https://www.tagesschau.de/inland/ampel-sondierungen-115.html

The German Social democrats, Greens and Liberals are the winners of the federal general elections of 26 September 2021. Together they published on 15 October 2021 the outcome of their exploration of a possible cooperation in the next German government. As a result they published a paper and recommend to their parties to approve the launch of official negotiations for a coalition government. The paper is so important because it proposes milestone for the programme of the new government. For the future climate and sustainability policy this means it needs to be enshrined to the new programme to have a chance to fly. Party bodies will meet over the weekend and negotiations could take of later next week.

Pillars for the future German governmental programme

The government in the making won't be dominated by environmental, social policy or economic policy. Instead, the three parties aim inline with the principle of sustainability at an integrated economic, social and environmental policy which could be titled: Aligning modernization of state and socio-ecologic market economy with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) of the United Nations

These are the titles of the chapters of the paper:

Modern state and digital awakening
Climate protection in a socio-ecological market economy
Respect and opportunities in the modern world of work
Make social security citizen-friendly
Opportunities for children, strong families and the best education for a lifetime
Promote innovation and achieve new competitiveness
Offensive for affordable and sustainable construction and living
Freedom and Security, Equality and Diversity in Modern Democracy
Investments in the future and sustainable public finances
Germany's responsibility for Europe and the world

And in the following I compile a few quotes from the document to provide you with a an idea about the direction the new government may take with respect to climate and sustainability. The fast translation of the German text into English has been possible thanks to support by Dr Google. :)

However, I cannot guarantee for its correctness. In case of doubt please cross-check with the German original which is available under: https://www.spd.de/fileadmin/Dokumente/Sonstiges/20211015_Ergebnis_Sondierungen.pdf

Modern state and digital awakening

From the introduction

The next few years will be decisive in order to strengthen Germany and Europe - for the major challenges such as climate change, digitization, securing our prosperity, social cohesion and demographic change. The basis for this is a comprehensive renewal of our country. SPD (Social democrats), BÜNDNIS 90 / DIE GRÜNEN (the Greens) and FREIE DEMOKRATEN (LIBERALS) see that Germany needs a new start. We feel committed to progress together. We are united by the fact that we see opportunities in change.

From chapter 1

We want a fundamental change towards an enabling, learning and digital state that works proactively for its citizens. It's about making life easier. State action should become faster and more effective and promote economic and social innovation processes. We want to establish a new culture of cooperation, which is also fed by the strength of civil society.

Climate protection in a socio-ecological market economy

Man-made climate change is one of the greatest challenges of our time. We have to tackle the climate crisis together. This also offers great opportunities for our country and Germany as an industrial location: New business models and technologies can create climate-neutral prosperity and good work. We see it as our central joint task to bring Germany on the 1.5 degree path, as dictated by the Paris Climate Agreement and the decision of the Federal Constitutional Court.

We will continue to develop the Climate Protection Act consistently in 2022 and launch an immediate climate protection program with all the necessary laws, ordinances and measures. All sectors will have to contribute: transport, construction and housing, power generation, industry and agriculture. We will check compliance with the climate targets on the basis of a cross-sectoral and analogous to the Paris climate agreement. We make it our common mission to drastically accelerate the expansion of renewable energies and to remove all hurdles and obstacles. To this end, we will significantly accelerate the planning and approval process. We want to strengthen the decentralized expansion of renewable energies.

Promote innovation and achieve new competitiveness

We want to increase the competitiveness of Germany as a business location as the basis for sustainable growth, prosperity and high employment in a socio-ecological market economy. We will support companies and employees as best we can, promote innovation and create new confidence in entrepreneurship, innovation and entrepreneurship. To this end, we are strengthening start-up and start-up funding and reducing the bureaucracy involved in promoting and financing innovation.

Offensive for affordable and sustainable construction and living

We want to create more affordable living space. To do this, it is imperative to build significantly more apartments. Our goal is to build 400,000 new homes a year, of which 100,000 publicly funded apartments. To this end, we will invite all key players an “alliance for affordable housing”. In this context, we guarantee planning security for the construction industry to build up construction capacities.

We will reduce the costs of housing construction through serial construction, digitization, de-bureaucratisation and standardization. We will strengthen climate protection in new buildings and accelerate the energetic renovation of existing buildings in order to achieve the climate targets in the building sector as well.

Freedom and Security, Equality and Diversity in Modern Democracy

Germany is a modern country with a great diversity of society, in which different life plans, living conditions and origins come together. We see this diversity as an opportunity and want to organize fair participation in all areas and clearly oppose discrimination.

We want to adapt our legal system to social reality. To this end, we will, among other things, adapt citizenship law, family law, the right of parentage and the transsexual law as well as the regulations on reproductive medicine and, for example, make communities of responsibility or a pact for coexistence possible

Investments in the future and sustainable public finances

We want to turn the 2020s into a decade of future investments. To this end, we are pursuing a policy that significantly increases investments - both private and public.

We will safeguard the necessary future investments within the framework of the constitutional debt brake, particularly in climate protection, digitization, education and research as well as infrastructure. In order for the funds made available to be used, planning processes and approvals must be significantly accelerated; investment security must prevail. Capital collection points should be better able to invest in future technologies.

Germany's responsibility for Europe and the world

Germany is facing up to its global responsibility. As a country, we cannot cope with any of the major tasks of our time on our own.

We will strengthen the European Union (EU) to meet our responsibilities. We will make our foreign, security and development policy more value-based and more European. We want to increase Europe's strategic sovereignty.

(...)

Our security and the protection of our livelihoods require global cooperation, a strengthening of the United Nations and a rules-based international order. We support and strengthen initiatives such as the Alliance of Democracies. The transatlantic alliance is a central pillar and NATO is an indispensable part of our security. For us, Israel's security is a matter of state.

(...)

Looking from different perspectives, we want to develop a common understanding of Germany's role in the world. In future, German foreign policy should act from a single source and develop joint strategies across departments. The aim is multilateral cooperation in the world, especially in close connection with those states that share our democratic values. It is also about systemic competition with authoritarian states and dictatorships. We want to present a national security strategy and align our international actions with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDG). We want to ensure that Germany fulfils its international obligations in the area of development cooperation and international climate finance.

What's missing is, for instance, the mentioning of the or a new German sustainability strategy plus governance mechanism. Well, this is just the end of the exploration. Negotiations about the new government may begin later next week after approval of the conclusion through bodies of the three parties.

Source: The text produced by the three parties in German language can be downloaded from the Internet:

https://www.spd.de/fileadmin/Dokumente/Sonstiges/20211015_Ergebnis_Sondierungen.pdf

Sustainable Germany (10): Dresden as a champion of the Local Agenda 21 in a beautiful landscape but politically challenging environment

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Wed, 13 Oct 2021 09:37:59 GMT

Dresden is one of the few cities in Germany and the world where city administration and citizens are committed over thirty years to their local agenda for sustainable development. This is even more remarkable because Saxony, the region of which Dresden is the capital, is also the home of many nationalists and right-wing populists. Their main political party, the Alternative for Germany (AFD) gained 25 per cent of the votes during the German general election of September 2021. But that also means that 75 per cent stood up against right-wing populism. What Sustainable Germany looks like in this local environment is subject of this blog post.

Source: Fridays for Future trotz Corona–Kreativer Umweltprotest in Dresden. Dresdner Neueste Nachrichten, DNN, 24. 4. 2020

Local Agenda 21 Initiatives were called for at the UN Conference in Rio in 1992

The slogan ‘think globally, act locally’ became popular in the 1970s. It urged people to consider the entire planet while taking action in their own local environment. The slogan was picked up and further developed at the UN Conference on Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, in June 1992 (UN, 1993). Agenda 21, a principal outcome of the conference and an action plan to implement the Rio declaration, might be best known for its 5000 Local Agenda 21 initiatives which were launched around the world in the years following the conference. Nonetheless, Agenda 21 had a global partnership approach and encompassed all aspects of policy-making. It called to strengthen people’s participation and responsibility at the local and other levels. The role of Major Groups of stakeholders including women, young people, indigenous people, local authorities and academia should be enhanced so that all aspects of policy-making can benefit from the wealth of experience of local, national and international non-governmental organizations (NGOs) (UN, 1993, p. 171). Therefore, Agenda 21 was not limited to a call for local action, but also called for international engagement of local authorities and other stakeholders as part of the global partnership. Many of the initiatives disappeared, others changed their name and structure but continue pursuing a local agenda for sustainable development. Only a few continuously work as Local Agenda. It is unclear why member states in 2015 didn’t link the adoption of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development with a similar or even stronger call for local action.

Ulrich Graute (2016): Local Authorities Acting Globally for Sustainable Development, Regional Studies, 50:11, 1931-1942, DOI: 10.1080/00343404.2016.1161740

The Local Agenda 21 in Dresden

“The diversity of life on our planet is an indispensable basis for human existence, well-being, and economic activity,” says Dresden’s Deputy Mayor and board member of the Logal Agenda 21, Eva Jähnigen, at the 75 ^th Anniversary of the UN.

Like not many other big cities, Dresden is embedded in a richly structured environment along the river Elbe in Saxony. The meeting of different geological formations has produced a variety of landscape characteristics. The people of Dresden have been looking for centuries to integrate the structural development harmoniously and to preserve the richness of this special natural environment.

Environmental groups have a long tradition in Saxony and eastern Germany. Some of them go back to the times of the socialist German Democratic Republic and their call against environmental pollution was prominent and contributed to the peaceful revolution in 1989. After the unification local initiatives got new inspiration e.g. through the Conference in Rio in 1992 and Local Agenda 21 initiatives mushroomed across Germany.

The Dresden Local Agenda 21 began as a more informal process and became officially registered in 1998 as ‘Lokale Agenda 21 für Dresden e.V.’. Its board includes early activist like Klaus Gaber but also Eva Jähnigen as current Deputy Mayor and Environmental Mayor of Dresden. Other board members include representatives of municipal companies, environment and culture initiatives. This composition underscores the action-oriented approach of the initiative. Well, the staff of the initiative could to be a bit more gender balanced. There is currently not a single man working in the team!

Main topics of the Dresden initiative are:

· Sustainable business

· Sustainable and regional nutrition and consumption and procurement

· Sustainable culture and tourism

· Sustainable mobility

Projects in these fields are closely linked to the 17 Sustainable Development Goals SDG of the United Nations and they are always locally anchored.

In addition, the Initiative is engaged e.g. in the following political cooperation and networking projects:

Update of the integrated Energy and Climate Concept Dresden 2030
Future Strategy for the Inner City of Dresden
Dresden Mobility Plan 2035+
Environmental Commission of Dresden Technical University
Sustainability Strategy Saxony

For more detailed information in German language please visit the website of the Local Agenda:

https://la-dresden.de

Interactive Mindmap Sustainable Dresden

One of the most interesting outcomes of the Initiative is the mind map of projects and enterprises working on sustainability in Dresden. Compiled in a Whiteboarding Programme (Miro) it provides links to projects and businesses in relation to the 17 SDGs.

Source: Mindmap Nachhaltiges Dresden. Interaktive Informationsgrafik der Lokalen Agenda Dresden

https://la-dresden.de/mindmap-nachhaltiges-dresden/

… and how does all that go along with all those nationalists and populists in politics

I have visited Dresden shortly after the general elections about a week ago. I met many friends and colleagues e.g. at the Leibniz Institute of Ecological Urban and Regional Development (IÖR, www.ioer.de), a main research hub in the field of spatial science and sustainable transformation. Friends and colleagues are concerned but calm. The good thing is that the situation has sharpened everybody’s eye. I was impressed about the clear and informed analyze of the situation. We had intensive discussions but also enjoyed the time together. Everybody is aware about what needs to be done. And, of course, they are looking to Berlin to see if the new government in the making will agree on a strong climate and sustainability plan.

Sustainable Germany (9): 69 German enterprises call for an implementation programme for climate neutrality

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Mon, 11 Oct 2021 08:11:40 GMT

Businesses declare themselves prepared to fulfil a central role in climate action

As a perfect fit to my blog post series 'Sustainable Germany' the German Stiftung 2° – German Businesses for Climate Protection 69 German enterprises call for an implementation programme for climate neutrality. The call could support the building of an Ampelkoalition of the socialdemocratic party SDP , the Gre ens and the Liberals because the call may demonstrate a path to link the Greens' call for climate neutrality with economic interests supported mainly by the Liberals. The following English version of the declaration has been published on 11 October 2011 on the website of the foundation.

"Climate change has become tangible for all of us. The latest report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) makes it unmistakably clear that there is no more time to lose in taking decisive action to counter global warming. To do so, we immediately require ambitious climate policy across all sectors that meets the goals of the Paris Climate Agreement and sets out a clear, reliable, and plannable path to climate neutrality for businesses and society.

Many businesses in Germany understand that now is the time to act and have begun to do so. They are reducing their emissions, are making concrete goals a binding part of their strategies for the future, are realising innovative projects, and investing in climate-friendly technologies. The private sector is ready to make climate action its business model and to make climate-neutrality an internationally recognised and export-ready trademark of German industry.

However, businesses require a policy framework for the transformation of Germany into a climate-neutral industrial country by 2045 to succeed, while reaching the goal of a 65% cut in emissions by 2030 relative to 1990. This policy framework will have to make climate-friendly technologies economical while supporting sustainable business models and offering long-term planning security.

The new German government must therefore set the course for this from the first day of the new legislative period. Now is the time for bold and decisive action!

We as companies from all sectors of the German economy therefore call upon the new federal government to:

1. Launch an implementation programme for climate neutrality in the first 100 days.

Following the completed revisions to the Climate Protection Act and the strengthening of the climate targets, businesses urgently require a comprehensive and concrete climate policy action programme – for all sectors and industries. To reliably achieve the climate goals for 2030 in the remaining eight years, it is necessary for the federal government to put forward a “Implementation Programme for Climate Neutrality” in the first 100 days of the new legislative period, building on the comprehensive approach of the European Commission’s Green Deal. The measures contained within it should be rolled out during the first year to provide a strong foundation for future action. The implementation programme must ensure that decisive steps needed to reach climate neutrality by 2045 are finally taken. The programme measures must be outfitted with the financing levels necessary to enable and accelerate the expansion of important technologies and infrastructures and the investments needed in the energy, industry, building, and mobility sectors. On the European level, the federal government should take a clear stance in favour of a “Fit for 55” programme that supports businesses in achieving the climate goals and encourages investment.

2. Increase the competitiveness of climate technologies.

The technologies needed to achieve the climate goals in all sectors are largely familiar. What is required now is a policy framework that makes these technologies market ready and competitive in an efficient way. As a part of its implementation programme, the new German government must enact climate-friendly reforms of the tax, levies, and allocation systems that solve existing disfunction. The CO2 price must be further developed and strengthened as a leading climate policy instrument in reliable steps agreed upon at the European and international levels. Its steering effect should thus be considerably increased and directed toward the goal of Germany achieving climate neutrality by 2045. The CO2 price should additionally be buttressed by an effective mix of measures for individual sectors so that climate-friendly technologies can quickly become competitive. In return, targeted measures are needed to ensure a fair social balance, to effectively counter carbon and investment leakage, and to preserve and unleash resources for future projects. This includes providing significant relief to businesses and consumers on electricity costs. It is also necessary to considerably expand and sustainably establish incentives for investment in climate-friendly technologies – especially in terms of scaling – and sector-specific instruments to support businesses actively working to enact the transformation needed. Commitment is needed to drive forward the creation of lead markets for sustainable and products suited for a circular economy.

3. Accelerate the expansion of renewable energies and increase energy efficiency.

Renewable energies in combination with measures to increase energy efficiency are the backbone of the transformation to climate neutrality in nearly all sectors. They are increasingly becoming an elementary facet of Germany as a location for industry. It is therefore necessary to massively accelerate the expansion of renewable energies and the energy grids they require. By 2030, at least 70% of the rising demand for electricity in Germany must be covered by renewable energies. The installed capacity both of wind energy on land and sea and of solar energy must therefore nearly triple. For this to succeed, sufficient surface area for the expansion of renewable energies must be made dependably available and existing installations must be upgraded. This ambitious expansion of renewable energies must be combined with further measures to create the conditions necessary to achieve the exit from coal-fired power clearly before 2038. These include, above all, consistent measures for a significant increase in energy efficiency in the building sector, especially by increasing the renovation rate, which requires adequate support for the necessary investments. Companies can act as a catalyst for the creation of a renewable energy system. To do so, they require a more attractive and simpler framework for implementing important technological solutions. These include, among others, the self-generation and use of renewable electricity, the efficient generation and use of heating and cooling based on renewable energies and industrial waste heat, the generation and use of hydrogen from renewable energies, and the conversion of corporate fleets.

4. Simplify the approval of climate-friendly infrastructure.

Lengthy and cumbersome planning and approval procedures must not be allowed to slow down the expansion of key technologies and infrastructures for achieving climate neutrality. In addition to generation capacities for renewable energies, this applies to power grids, the industrial plants necessary for the transformation (including for hydrogen production based on renewable energies and for CO2 capture, use and storage), climate-friendly transport infrastructure, and energy-efficient building refurbishment. In addition, the expansion of broadband must be accelerated to enable, for example, digital solutions for optimising sustainable, decentralised energy production. The implementation programme should therefore include a “kick-start initiative” for a fundamental reorganisation and simplification of future and current planning and approval procedures. This requires courage and pragmatism: the duration of approval procedures should be limited to less than one year, if possible. Appeals channels and legal action procedures should be accelerated, and the competent administrative units and courts should be enabled to act quickly.

5. Lead by example.

The state is the largest contracting body in Germany. Around 500 billion Euro are invested in public procurement every year. This gives the public sector a powerful climate policy lever that must be used much more than before to create lead markets for sustainable and circular products. The German government should launch a concerted action by the federal government, the states, municipalities, and the private sector and systematically orient public sector investments, projects, and award criteria towards climate action, the circular economy, and sustainability. Public funding must be used more intensively to mobilise private capital for investments in the climate-neutral technologies of the future. The financial sector plays a central role in financing the transformation. To do justice to this task, a goal-oriented and practicable regulatory framework for the German and European financial sector is needed.

6. Strengthen international partnerships.

The COP26 summit in Glasgow and the German G7 presidency in 2022 must be used to strengthen the transatlantic partnership and to lay the foundations for a club of climate leaders within the context of the G20. It should set international standards for a Paris compatible financial system and climate-neutral products. The Climate Club should work to strengthen climate action and the international competitiveness of German businesses while preventing carbon leakage. The German government should work through strategic partnerships on key technologies to achieve climate neutrality and to secure the competitive advantage of tomorrow.

As businesses, we are prepared to fulfil our central role in climate action. We call upon the new German government to make the transformation to climate neutrality the central economic project of the coming legislative period. We are pleased to offer the coming government our support in doing so."

https://www.stiftung2grad.de/en/implementation-programme-climate-neutrality-7249

Sustainable Germany (8): Angela Merkel’s governance of sustainable development

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Sat, 09 Oct 2021 07:24:42 GMT

Leading a rich country towards sustainability without risking to loose its current wealth

In wealthy countries the transformation to climate resilience and sustainability can be supported by the wealth of financial, technical and intellectual resources. However, if done in wrongly these countries risk to lose their wealth before they reach climate neutrality. A scenario politicians in these countries are afraid of.

In Germany the Federal Chancellor Angela Merkel knows that and so she has chosen a governance strategy where climate and sustainability are both, taken up by the top of the government and at the same time kept under control and separated from other governmental structures and processes.

With a GDP of $3.8 trillion in 2020 (according to a World Bank estimate), Germany is the largest economy in Europe and one of the largest in the world. Like other highly developed, service-oriented social market economies, Germany has one of the highest standards of living in the world. The country's GNI per capita is $55,220. Exports also play an important role in the German economy, accounting for 46.1% of national output -- far more than the 28.6% average for all countries. Germany is home to some of the world's largest automotive industries, such as Daimler, Volkswagen, and BMW, and cars and vehicle parts account for 14.2% of the country's total export value. Other major exports include chemical products, mechanical equipment, and minerals.

Unfortunately, the Achilles tendon is that most of the wealth still depends directly or indirectly on the use of non-renewable resources like coal, oil and gas. Concerned about uncontrollable side effect of a grand plan transformation the government decided to follow a rather incremental approach. The public increasingly takes a different position and thus, the cautiousness of the Merkel government may have contributed to the heavy losses Merkel’s party faced during recent Federal elections.

National institutions, responsibilities and instruments

Source: Overview Institutions . German Sustainable Development Strategy, Update 2021, page 70.

Driver and brakesman of the sustainability process: the Chancellery

The German Sustainability Strategy includes the goals, indicators and targets and the outline of the process to implement the strategy. Preparations for the original Strategy and its 2021 Update took the form of a broad-based dialogue process involving mainly the interested professional public, but also about 1400 citizens. Some 360 institutions, associations, organisations and individuals had submitted responses to the draft. In addition, every two years the Federal Statistical Office provides an extensive description of the trend in national sustainability indicators in its indicator report.

The responsibility for the German Sustainable Development Strategy lies with the Federal Chancellery and according to the strategy this is due to its overarching, cross-cutting nature and particular significance. At the centre of the governance structure there is a State Secretaries’ Committee on Sustainable Development. It is chaired by the Head of the Federal Chancellery and it serves as central coordinator for the Sustainable Development Strategy. The Chancellery claims that "In Germany, sustainable development goes right to the top" (page 13 of the Summary Version). That is almost correct. At the top of the government is the Chancellor and his/her cabinet of ministers not a committee of State Secretaries.

Also interesting is that there is a Parliamentary Advisory Council, the Council for Sustainable Development (mentioned in an earlier post) and municipalities. The role of the parliament as a constitutional body and of municipalities is regulated by law in Germany. With respect to the Strategy their role seems to be limited to meeting attendance, position papers and dialogue. In general, the work of the institutions contributing to the implementation of the Strategy seems to be focused on dialogue, position papers and consultation

The Instruments and procedures include:

- Regulatory impact assessment for sustainable development

- Communications

- Funding as leverage

- Sustainable administration/continuing education

An update of measures is planned in 2021 based on the Federal Climate Change Act

The need to reform Germany's governance of climate resilience and sustainable development

At the High-level Political Forum on Sustainable Development (HLPF) on 5-16 July 2021 in New York City a statement was presented by the German Trade Union Confederation (Deutscher Gewerkschaftsbund – DGB), the
German NGO Forum on Environment and Development Association of German Development and Humanitarian Aid Non-Governmental Organisations (VENRO) and the German UN Youth Delegates on Sustainable Development. Among others it states:

"We are willing to be part of the SDG implementation. However, participation is not an end in itself, but must be politically relevant. Especially the younger generations need to be involved more inclusively.
The German government claims that the 2030 Agenda is the guiding principle of German policies. For this to come true, we need political coherence, global solidarity and effective measures to tackle the multiple crises."

In order to do justice to the guiding principle of the 2030 Agenda to leave no one behind, the federal government must develop the German sustainability strategy into an instrument of change. It needs clear guidance for all ministries to allow implement the Strategy coherently. Furthermore, from VENRO's point of view, the role of Parliament must be strengthened. The federal government should report regularly to the parliament (Bundestag) about the the status of Strategy implementation. Also, the Parliamentary Advisory Council for Sustainable Development requires more support to be put in a position to effectively assess the sustainability of all future legislative proposals. [1]

Meanwhile the winning parties of the German federal election move towards building a new government. The coalition agreement is supposed to role out the way towards climate neutrality, sustainability, digitalization, decent work and social security. It will depend a lot on the governance and management structure if the new government will be able to succeed.

[1]

https://venro.org/fileadmin/user_upload/Dateien/Bilder/Diverse/Statement_VENRO_Jugend_Forum_DGB_2021_final.pdf

Sustainable Germany (7): Green Deal and Leipzig Charter - EU governance of sustainable development

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Thu, 07 Oct 2021 09:35:54 GMT

Having the European Union as an additional level of governance may sound like an extra burden for citizens and national governments. It sometimes indeed is a burden but having once agreed on a common set up policies, rules and regulation (the so-called acquis communautaire ) among the 27 member states of the European Union (EU) reduces barriers in day-today- life. For instance, having one currency, no internal borders (Schengen agreement) makes travel for leisure and business between companies in Europe easier.

Climate and sustainability policy and related governance are work in progress at the level of the European Union but due to the many different instruments developed it can be inspirational for other countries. This blog post will demonstrate, the EU does have regulatory powers and related financial incentives but only in selected policy fields. In all other fields including foreign policy, security, climate and sustainability policy the EU policies depends a lot more on voluntary cooperation and negotiated agreements. The upside of this is that climate and sustainability policies of the Union are not 'ordered from Brussels'. Instead, they have to be developed in an iterative process involving the European Council, European Parliament, European Commission, Committee of the Regions, other EU bodies, national and subnational governments.

As manager of a EU funding programme with 18 participant EU member states and neighbouring countries I experienced myself for many years that the EU has its issues with bureaucracy and at times there is a lack of coherence. The EU Community Intiative Interreg IIIB in the Central, Adriatic, Danubian and South-eastern European Space (CADSES) showed alreday between 2002 and 2008 many of the conflict lines which exist today between North and South, East and West within the Union. However, I also learned that the convening power of the EU and its regulatory and financial instruments have a major impact on development in member states. For the field of climate and sustainability policy this means that EU policies, their governance and tools -if done properly- could become key in the European transformation process towards climate resilience and sustainability.

Sources for EU Community Initiative INTEREG IIIB CADSES:

https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/en/atlas/programmes/2000-2006/european/interreg-iii-b-cadses

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/281318699_Advancing_Trasnational_Cooperation_INTERREG_III_B_CADSES_-_Results_vol_1

From economic to sustainable development governance in Europe

The question of how to govern sustainable development in Europe was already analysed in 2004 by Elizabeth Bomberg. Already then she stated:

"The European Union (EU) is both commended as a leading advocate of sustainable development and condemned for its failure to deliver on its commitments and promises. Both views could draw on substantial empirical evidence. The EU’s tremendously complex structures and processes make conclusive or
straightforward assessments difficult." (page 61)

While a lot has developed since Bomberg's paper was published in 2004 it is still interesting for its analysis of alternative modes of governance in the European Union and how its components have to adapt from an originally economic growth focus of the EU to governance for sustainable development. That the EU left the original economic focus of the former European Economic Community EEC has contributed to the decision of the United Kingdom to leave the Union but that neither frees the EU not the UK from adapting the economy to sustainable development.

Also of interest in Europe are the steering mechanisms of the EU: multilevel coordination, regulatory and non-regulatory tools and policy learning. These demonstrate that the EU has not full governmental powers like a national government but that doesn't have to be a disadvantage if it is used as ground for more participatory governance.

Source: Bomberg 2004, page 63

The European Green Deal

Source: Bromberg 2004, page 63

Elizabeth Bomberg concludes that the EU has already ev olved onto something more than a system of economic governance and she concludes:

"Perhaps the most obvious lessons offered by EU governance are found in the operation of its various steering mechanisms. The EU’s internal practice of bargaining and power-sharing demonstrates how it is possible to achieve consensus on baseline issues (such as the importance of sustainable development),
even if that process of agreement is messy and prolonged. In the EU, enormous efforts are often required to strike agreements that are acceptable to all who have a slice of power to determine outcomes. The EUs well-rehearsed process of inter-governmental and inter-institutional bargaining can act as a template of what to do (or what not to do) to achieve agreement on sticky issues." (page 89)

[1] Elizabeth Bomberg: Adapting form to function?: from economic to sustainable development governance in the European Union, in: Governance for sustainable development: the challenge of adapting form to function/edited by William M. Lafferty, Cheltenham, United Kingdom, 2004, pp 61-94

The European Commission is committed to the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals and puts the Green Deal at the centre of its recovery efforts. The European Green Deal aims at improving the well-being and health of citizens and future generations. [2]

On 14 July, the European Commission adopted a set of proposals aiming to make the EU's climate, energy, transport and taxation policies fit for reducing net greenhouse gas emissions by at least 55% by 2030, compared to 1990 levels. Achieving these emission reductions in the next decade is considered as crucial to Europe becoming the world's first climate-neutral continent by 2050 and making the European Green Deal a reality.

In line with the steering mechanisms available to the European Commission the timeline for the Green Deal implementation in 2021 (see table below) reveals that there are a number of sub plans feeding into the Green Deal which turns into an umbrella for all related activities.

On 15 September 2021 the Commission adopted the concept of the New European Bauhaus . The New European Bauhaus brings a cultural and creative dimension to the European Green Deal, aiming to demonstrate how sustainable innovation offers tangible, positive experiences in our daily life. The project aims at accelerating the transformation of various economic sectors such as construction and textiles in order to provide access to all citizens to goods that are circular and less carbon intensive. This includes a number of policy actions and funding possibilities. There will be about €85 million dedicated to New European Bauhaus projects from EU programmes in 2021 – 2022. Many other EU programmes will integrate the New European Bauhaus as an element of context or priority without a predefined dedicated budget.

On 29 September 2021 the Commission launched today Five New EU Missions , a new and innovative way to work together and improve the lives of people in Europe and beyond. EU missions aim to tackle big challenges in health, climate and the environment, and to achieve ambitious and inspiring goals in these areas. The five missions will aim to deliver solutions to key global challenges by 2030:

Adaptation to Climate Change: support at least 150 European regions and communities to become climate resilient by 2030;
Cancer: working with Europe's Beating Cancer Plan to improve the lives of more than 3 million people by 2030 through prevention, cure and solutions to live longer and better;
Restore our Ocean and Waters by 2030;
100 Climate-Neutral and Smart Cities by 2030;
A Soil Deal for Europe: 100 living labs and lighthouses to lead the transition towards healthy soils by 2030.

[2] https://ec.europa.eu/info/strategy/priorities-2019-2024/european-green-deal_en

https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_21_4747

The New Leipzig Charter for the European Union

However, in 2020 the Ministers stated [3] :

"Nowadays though, urgent global challenges such as climate change, the loss of biodiversity, resource scarcity, migration movements, demographic change, pandemics and rapidly changing economies have a direct and local impact on towns and cities throughout Europe. They may also intensify disparities in our societies. In addition, digital technologies are drastically transforming society, creating potential political, social, ecological and economic benefits. However, these technologies also trigger profound new challenges such as the digital divide, lack of privacy, security issues and market dependencies. In response to these challenges the original Leipzig Charter has to be refocussed." Thus, the ministers agreed in November 2020 upon a New Leipzig Charter "that emphasises the pursuit of the common good using the transformative power of cities. This includes general welfare, reliable public services of general interest as well as reducing and preventing new forms of social, economic, environmental and territorial inequalities. Our common goal is to safeguard and enhance the quality of life in all European towns and cities and their functional areas. No one should be left behind." (page 2 of the Charter)

The New Charter reflects the language of the UN Agenda 2030 and the UN New Urban Agenda adopted by the UN in 2015v and 2016. It also leans on the UN's International Guidelines on Urban and Territorial Planning IG-UTP.

In this post the focus is on European governance and it has to be noted that the governance mechanisms won't be strengthened. One could discuss now the Charter in context of the state of the European Union and its needs for reform. Nonetheless, the Leipzig Charter in its current form is already an important reference document allowing cities and regions advocation sustainable urban and territorial development to refer to this Charter adopted by their ministers. And as such the Charter can be also inspirational to national and local governments and stakeholders in other countries around the world. It can inspired to adapt own national urban policies and/or urban and territorial planning on the ground to make it more sustainable and climate resilient.

Produced in 2007 and 2020 always during a German presidency of the European Council the New Leipzig Charter underscores the German interest in international and especially in European support for sustainable urban and territorial development. Now after looking at International and European governance of sustainable development I am planning to turn with my following posts to governance of climate and sustainable development policies at the national and local levels within Germany.

[3]

https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/en/information/publications/brochures/2020/new-leipzig-charter-the-transformative-power-of-cities-for-the-common-good

Sustainable Germany (6): Time for transformative policies at all levels

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Wed, 06 Oct 2021 11:30:05 GMT

The interest for my series of blog posts on 'Sustainable Germany' is going far beyond my expectations and the last post (5): Germany's call for effective governance of UN sustainable development counts several thousand of viewers and the many likes and comments convinced to produce a follow-up.

This post goes beyond Germany and recommends two annual Spotlight Reports published by “Global Policy Watch” (GPW). GPW is a joint initiative of the international NGOs Social Watch (based in Uruguay) and Global Policy Forum (based in Germany). It was launched in 2015 in order to follow negotiations at the United Nations towards the Third International Conference on Financing for Development in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia and the Post-2015 Summit of the United Nations in New York, as well as their implementation and follow-up processes.

The Global Policy Watch (GPW) project aims to keep members of global civil society informed about crucial global negotiations. GPW explores opportunities for participation and lays the basis for a strong presence of Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) in the monitoring and review processes of the Addis Ababa Action Agenda, Paris Climate Agreement, and the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development for the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The annual Spotlight Report has been published since 2016 by the Arab NGO Network for Development (ANND), the Center for Economic and Social Rights (CESR), Development Alternatives with Women for a New Era (DAWN), Global Policy Forum (GPF), Public Services International (PSI), Social Watch, Society for International Development (SID), and Third World Network (TWN), supported by the Friedrich Ebert Stiftung.

Reshaping gov ernanc e for sustainability
Transforming institutions – shifting power – strengthening rights

The Spotlight report 2019 has been published before the COVID-19 pandemic and it is more directly than the 2021 report focussed on transforming institutions, shifting power and strengthening rights.

In his contribution 'Revisiting the hardware of sustainable development' Jens Martin, Executive Director of the Global Policy Forum writes that 'Most governments have failed to turn the transformational vision of the 2030 Agenda into real transformational policies'. However, he also sees signs of change: Worldwide social movements like Fridays for Future have emerged worldwide and many have young people and women in the lead. He further writes that "They not only challenge bad or inefficient government policies, but also share a fundamental critique of underlying social structures, power relations and governance arrangements."

The Spotlight Reports addresses some subjects similar to the policy paper of the German Council for Sustainable Development: No policy coherence without governance coherence; the need to overcome the weakness of the HLPF. It also adds own positions including the need for a revitalizing of global norm-setting, rejecting corporate voluntarism and the statement that democratic governance requires democratic funding and that the UN should " translate the calls of the emerging global movements for social and environmental justice into political steps towards a new democratic multilateralism. " Please read the full report on findings of civil society reports and findings on global governance of sustainable development.

Interesting in the paper by Jens Martin is also that he sees global governance in relation to national and local governance:

Revisiting the hardware of sustainable development has to start at the local and national level. While most governance discourses emphasize the democratic deficit, gaps and fragmentation in global governance, the major challenge for more effective governance at the global level is the lack of coherence at the national level. It is essential to reflect the overarching character of the 2030 Agenda and the SDGs in the institutional arrangements of governments and parliaments. Creating more effective and coherent global governance will be a futile exercise if it is not reflected in, and ‘owned’ by, effective national counterparts. Effective international arrangements cannot be determined or strengthened without commitments and coherence at the national and sub-national level, in all countries. Therefore, it is necessary to strengthen bottom-up governance .

This series of blob posts will consider this by turning to national and local governance of sustainable development in Germany in the next one or two posts.

Spotlight 2019 source: https://www.2030spotlight.org/sites/default/files/spot2019/Spotlight_Innenteil_2019_web_gesamt.pdf

Demanding justice beyond rhetoric

Time to overcome contradictions and hypocrisy in the COVID-19 crisis

The 2021 Spotlight Report describes the highly uneven socio-economic impact of the COVID-19 crisis and analyses the policy responses to it. It explores beyond the rhetoric, hig hlighting deepening inequalities, self-serving and hypocritical policies and governance failures at national and international level. Addressing the imbalance in global vaccine production and distribution, the report also examines a few key areas where political and structural changes are necessary to correct the limited and asymmetric recovery.

The main reason to include this report into this post are the three paper in the third mainchapter of the report 'Time for transformative policies at all levels'.

I. A rights-based economy: In critical times, a roadmap for action

BY KATE DONALD, CENTER FOR ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL RIGHTS (CESR)

II. Now is the time to reclaim public services

BY DARIA CIBRARIO, PUBLIC SERVICES INTERNATIONAL (PS

III. Steps to prevent a global debt and austerity pandemic

BY ISABEL ORTIZ, GLOBAL SOCIAL JUSTICE, AND MATTHEW CUMMINS, SENIOR ECONOMI

While they all begin with reference to COVID-19 pandemic and crisis they soon turn to the need for a human rights basid for 'building back better' (Kate Donald), the role of public services (Daria Cibrarion) and the need for social justice and the threat of global debt and austerity (Isabel Ortiz).

Spotlight 2021 source: https://www.globalpolicy.org/sites/default/files/download/_Spotlight_2021_web_gesamt_c.pdf

Sustainable Germany (5): Germany's call for effective governance of UN sustainable development

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Sat, 02 Oct 2021 09:50:58 GMT

In context of ‘Sustainable Germany’ governance -including global governance- of sustainable development needs to be discussed because it provides the necessary framework for goals achievement. In this 5th post German expert positions will be presented on how the framework for global governance for sustainable development needs to be developed to allow goal achievement.

German civil society organizations monitoring the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development

In Germany there is a broad discussion of sustainable development and climate change throughout the society. However, the discussion is often sporadic and only a f ew German organizations outside of the government monitor and support continuously global developments around sustainability and climate change.

One of the German networks is VENRO, an umbrella organization of development and humanitarian non-governmental organizations in Germany. The association was founded in 1995 and today consists of around 140 organizations. Their backgrounds lie in independent and church-related development co-operation, humanitarian aid as well as development education, public relations and advocacy.

“ We – the VENRO member organizations – have joined together in the Association with the aim of strengthening our contribution to more justice in the One World. Our common mission is to optimally serve poverty reduction, the realisation of human rights and the conservation of natural resources .” [1]

VENRO monitors the UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development as it is implemented in and with support from Germany. They are committed to ensuring that sustainability becomes the consistent guiding principle of German politics. To this end, VENRO contributes to the political process with own proposals and positions. Their priorities recently included the revision of the German Sustainable Development Strategy (see my blog post ‘Sustainable Germany (3)” and the voluntary reporting by the federal government to the United Nations High-Level Political Forum on Sustainable Development (HLPF).

VENRO formulates on behalf of civil society organizations expectations and demands. In July 2019 Luise Steinwachs, Deputy Chair of VENRO has been part of the German governmental delegation presenting the first Voluntary National Review report at the UN’s High Political Forum on Sustainable Development. This is outstanding, as national governments usually do not share their speaking slot at the United Nations with Civil Society Organizations. [2] In addition, their comments are feed into the work of organizations like the German Council for Sustainable Development.

[1] https://venro.org/english/who-we-are - accessed on 1 October 2021

[2] http://blog.venro.org/tag/hlpf/ and http://blog.venro.org/2019/07/ - accessed on 1 October 2021

The German Council for Sustainable Development on global governance of the 2030 Agenda

The German Council for Sustainable Development (Nachhaltigkeitsr at) stimulates the debate and aims to make sustainability a public concern. According to the website it also ‘initiates and supports projects that aim at societal change, making sustainability a tangible issue in everyday life’. With respect to the later, there are certainly actions but it would be difficult to confirm that the Council already has a major impact on societal change with its projects. [1]

More relevant seem to be the policy papers and other publications of the Council. The position paper ‘Climate Neutrality’ was already introduced in blog post ‘Sustainable Germany (2)’.

[1] https://www.nachhaltigkeitsrat.de/en/projects/ - accessed on 1 October 2021

Reform options for effective UN sustainable development governance

The policy paper on options to reform global governance has been published on 1 March 2021 by the Council. [1] The paper's authors include Council Members like the former German minister for economic cooperation Heidemarie Wieczorek-Zeul or academics like Marianne Beisheim of the German Institute for International and Security Affairs (SWP) and Silke Weinlich of the German Development Institute (DIE). The paper provides an assessment of shortcomings and in the spirit of ‘form follows function’, it presents reform proposals to achieve improvements in four areas:

1. Mobilize political will, take decisions and follow up on these decisions

2. Drive and demand policy coheren

3. Identify effective instruments for the Decade of Action and disseminate them widely

4. Harnessing analysis and foresight for knowledge-based decision-making

Just by reading the titles of the areas one can get a good sense of what the experts are missing: political will, decision-making, follow-up of decisions, policy coherence, effective instruments, analysis and foresight…. That’s quite a lot and the full text is worth reading.

The text, figure and matrix of the policy paper provide the Council’s list of actions which needs to be taken to improve UN governance of sustainable development. It clearly supports the position that more international cooperation is necessary. Interestingly also, reform proposals are differentiates for different levels of reform ambition.

[1] https://www.nachhaltigkeitsrat.de/wp-cont ent/uploads/2021/03/RNE_policy_paper_for_effective_UN-Sustainable_-Development_-Governance_1_March-2021.pdf - accessed on 1 December 2021

Annexes: Figure and matrix from the Council's policy paper

Figure

Sustainable Germany (4): The dual relationship between climate change and sustainable development

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Fri, 01 Oct 2021 09:05:18 GMT

Looking at climate policy and sustainable development policy in Germany it is striking that they developed more or less in parallel without too much coordination between them. As described, in my blog posts Sustainable Germany 2 and 3, there is a climate policy based on the 2021 update of Germany’s Federal Climate Change Act and there is Germany’s Federal Sustainable Development Strategy. How did that happen?

Dualism between climate change and sustainable development

Pragmatic preference for single issue policies and avoidance of systemic interventions

My observation of the time since the Earth Summit since 1992 is that the drivers were pragmatism, international cooperation and the avoidance of systemic interventions. Often single issues and sector problems can be solved easier than complex, interrelated and dynamic problems. This impacts policy priorities and agendas.

A good example for solving a single-issue problem is the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer. This international treaty of 1987 has been signed by 197 countries and as a result, the ozone hole in Antarctica is slowly recovering. UN Secretary general Kofi Annan described it as "perhaps the single most successful international agreement to date" [1] . The success is attributed not only to effective burden sharing by signatories of the treaty but also by the fact that solution proposals were available. For instance, the use of Chlorofluorocarbons and Halons could be simply substituted by other substances.

The issue of climate change is a lot more complex and has already a long story. At the Earth Summit in 1992 the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) was agreed upon. As the basis of following climate agreements it stipulated that parties should meet regularly at the Conference of Parties, or COP. The Kyoto Protocol was signed in 1997 at COP 3 and at the United Nations Climate Change Conference or COP 21 in 2015 196 parties agreed on the Paris Climate Accord. The latter is a legally binding international treaty. The most prominent aim of the treaty is to hold the increase in the global average temperature well below 2 °C above pre-industrial levels and to pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels. However, countries ratifying the agreement determine themselves what contributions they should make to achieve the aims of the treaty – and that doesn’t seem to roll out well. [2]

The next UN Climate Change Conference or COP 26 will be hosted by the United Kingdom from 31 October to 12 November 2021 in the Scottish Event Campus (SEC) in Glasgow, UK. At the UN Summit in September 2021 in New York Secretary General António Guterres at Security Council Debate on Climate and Security stated that parties have to increase their contributions:

“Much bolder climate action is needed ahead of COP 26 – with G20 nations in the lead – to maintain international peace and security. Our window of opportunity to prevent the worst climate impacts is rapidly closing. No region is immune.” [3]

Speaking at the Major Economies Forum on energy and climate change convened by the US President Joe Biden ahead of the of the UN General Assembly, Prime Minister Boris Johnson and host of COP 26 said

"this is the most important period I think now in the history of the planet - because COP simply must succeed". [4]

Looking at the situation Germany it can be said that the call for much bolder climate action has been a major subject during the election campaign. Unfortunately, the forming of a new coalition government may take well into November or December. That will be after the end of COP26! Therefore, Germany is likely to be represented in Glasgow by the old government of Angela Merkel but it won’t have a mandate to take bold action on behalf of a new government still to be formed.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montreal_Protocol - accessed on 1 October 2021

[2] https://unfccc.int/ - accessed on 1 October 2021

[3] https://unfccc.int/news/statement-by-antonio-guterres-at-security-council-debate-on-climate-and-security - accessed on 1 October 2021

[4] https://news.sky.com/story/cop26-boris-johnson-says-climate-talks-in-glasgow-simply-must-succeed-as-major-conference-nears-12410684 - accessed on 1 October 2021

The dual relationship between climate change and sustainable development

Well, if it is so difficult to agree on bolder actions for climate change how much more difficult would it be to agree on bolder actions for sustainable development where the 2030 Agenda to achieve the 17 Sustainable Development Goals by 2030 is also off track?
Isn’t it plausible that politicians prefer agreeing on solving single issue problems instead of facing bolder actions required on complex, interrelated and dynamic challenges like climate change, not to speak about sustainability?

No, while pillarization, sector policies and single-issue solutions may be welcome actions to reduce complexity in day-to-day politics and administration they do not correspond to the real world where they may be closely related and interdependent.

According to e.g. the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) “there is a dual relationship between sustainable development and climate change. On the one hand, climate change influences key natural and human living conditions and thereby also the basis for social and economic development, while on the other hand, society’s priorities on sustainable development influence both the GHG emissions that are causing climate change and the vulnerability.” The Panel doesn’t argue in favor of a separation between climate policy and sustainable development. Instead, it states: “Climate policies can be more effective when consistently embedded within broader strategies designed to make national and regional development paths more sustainable. This occurs because the impact of climate variability and change, climate policy responses, and associated socio-economic development will affect the ability of countries to achieve sustainable development goals. Conversely, the pursuit of those goals will in turn affect the opportunities for, and success of, climate policies.” Recognizing the dual relationship between sustainable development and climate change points to a need for the exploration of policies that jointly address sustainable development climate change. The IPCC websites lists a number of references for this need. 2003). [1]

Closing this blog post, it’s necessary to note that parties of the German parliament are now calling for a Climate programme to be at the core of the future government’s activities.

As advisor I would recommend better considerin the dual relationship between climate change and sustainable development because a systemic intervention is necessary in anyway. A transformative change of the way our governments do politics is necessary. If not done now, again time will be lost.

[1] https://archive.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg3/en/ch2s2-1-3.html - accessed on 1 October 2021

Sustainable Germany (3): German Sustainable Development Strategy

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Thu, 30 Sep 2021 08:36:55 GMT

About one week after the election of the new Bundestag in Germany the Liberals, Greens but also Social democrats of the SPD and -to a certain extend- the conservative Christian democrats of the CDU start exploring possibilities for a coalition government. No big news are expected for the upcoming days with respect to Germany's climate policy and sustainable development strategy. You may want to use the interim to study the state of the art in Germany. And the best way to do this is by having a look at the German Sustainable Development Strategy.

The German sustainability strategy and climate change act

In the time between the conference in Rio in 1992 (United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, UNCED), Germany was a global leader in the field. Therefore, it is not surprising that the first German Sustainability strategy was adopted by the government in 2002. Since then it is updated every four year. Since the UN 2030 Agenda was launched in 2015 the German Strategy was not developed based on the 2030 Agenda. Instead, it was adapted to it afterwards and it serves since 2017 as the Strategy for the implementation of the 2030 Agenda and the Sustainable Development Goals.

The most recent update was produced in 2021 and it now covers also tasks including

- Action against the COVID-19 pandemic

- Economic Stimulus and Future Technologies Package

- European Green Deal

Of course, the future of the Strategy is in limbo. If the future government would be lead as in the last sixteen years by the Christian democrats no major changes of the Strategy and its implementation should be expected. If a different coalition government should agree on a revised climate policy and sustainability policy an update of the strategy and its status may be necessary soon.

Short before the Federal election the Bundestag adopted a revised version of the Federal Climate Change Act. Based on the act the governments implements a plan Klimaschutzplan 2050 as a frame for Germany's climate and energy policy. It has to be noted, as much as the international agendas UN Agenda 2030 and the Paris Agreement UNFCCC are negotiated and monitored in separate arenas, as much these agendas are implemented in Germany rather parallel instead of implementing it in an integrated and coordinated manner. That sounds pragmatic and may be an effort to reduce complexity. However, the agenda goals are far too much interrelated and interdependent. A better coordination between the too should be aimed at when it comes to the next update of the German Sustainability Strategy and Climate Change Act.

The German model is no blueprint for other countries. However, informed by the German model of Sustainability Strategy, Climate Change Act and their development of almost twenty years, other countries and international organizations may identify even better ways for their own way towards climate neutrality and sustainable development.

Sources

Website of the German Federal Government on Sustainability (in English)

https://www.bundesregierung.de/breg-en/issues/sustainability

Website of the German Federal Government on Climate Policy (in English)

https://www.bmu.de/en/topics/climate-adaptation/climate-protection/national-climate-policy

Summary Version in English (Update 2021)

https://www.bundesregierung.de/resource/blob/974430/1937922/29d69a8890ac45d1f4326bce2334b2ae/2021-06-29-dns-englisch-data.pdf?download=1

Full version in English (Update 2021)

https://www.bundesregierung.de/resource/blob/974430/1937922/29d69a8890ac45d1f4326bce2334b2ae/2021-06-29-dns-englisch-data.pdf?download=1

Sustainable Germany (2): Climate neutrality

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Wed, 29 Sep 2021 09:41:16 GMT

Climate neutrality: Options for setting the right course and ambitious delivery

Since the German election of the Bundestag on 26 September 2021 political parties are looking for an agreement on climate friendly policy as basis for the future government policy. This is the moment to recall proposals which are already available.

In early summer 2021 the German Council for Sustainable Development (RNE) and the German National Academy of Sciences Leopoldina have jointly developed a position paper. It specifies overarching options to make a success of the necessary major transformation of the ways in which we live and do business on the path to climate neutrality.

The authors introduce it by writing: “Its intention is not to pre-empt the concrete measures now expected from the policymakers. This paper draws on the definition of greenhouse gas neutrality as laid out in Germany’s Federal Climate Change Act (KSG) and uses this term synonymously with the term “climate neutrality”: climate neutrality has been achieved for an individual region when the greenhouse gas emissions caused there anthropogenically and the greenhouse gases extracted from the atmosphere are balanced at zero. Emission credits purchased from other regions around the world are not taken into account.” Therefore, the paper itself is not an action plan but a guidance document for an action plan.

After explaining that systemic action is necessary and urgent, the paper presents and discusses these key messages :

International alliances, political decisions, societal participation and ownership

1.   Promote strong alliances and global climate partnerships
2.   Interweave the European Green Deal and the new climate targets with the overall legal framework
3.   Allow as much market as possible and implement as much regulation as is necessary
4.   Foster acceptance and promote commitment to climate neutrality among citizens and municipalities
5.   Shape structural change to be socially balanced and strengthen a “just transition” globally

Technological, economic and financial transformation
1.   Expedite the restructuring and transformation of the energy system
2.   Accelerate the transformation of industry
3.   Foster the transformation of mobility, buildings and land use
4.   Define investment paths for realisation of the Paris Agreement
5.   Strengthen industry’s ability to compete through climate-friendly innovation markets
6.   Initiate a transition to a climate-friendly circular economy
7.   Significantly accelerate foresighted investments in the infrastructure of the future
8.   Position education, research and development correctly
9.   Realise innovative financing solutions for a transformational climate strategy

To download and read the full text of the position paper follow this link:

https://www.nachhaltigkeitsrat.de/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/RNE_Leopoldina_Position_Paper_Climate_Neutrality.pdf

Sustainable Germany (1): Building a new government in Germany is as challenging as sustainable development. That’s a chance for Germany and other countries.

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Tue, 28 Sep 2021 11:00:36 GMT

After the German parliamentary elections parties search for the right mix of colors

Picture: picture-alliance/ dpa | Karl-Josef Hildenbrand

While challenging election results are common in many countries Germany was used to know already in the evening after federal election who won the election. In recent years Germany’s election results became increasingly complex. The two dominant parties of cold war times in Western Germany (the conservative Christian democratic party CDU and the social-democrats SPD) lost many of their traditional voters. Instead of 40 percent of the voters they currently have to be happy to have more than 20 percent. In parallel, the Liberals, Greens, left party Die Linked, right wing nationalists AFD and other parties gained influence. The next parliament of Germany will include eight parties. [1]

[1] https://www.deutschlandfunk.de/nach-der-bundestagswahl-2021-welche-koalitionen-sind-denkbar.2897.de.html?dram:article_id=50240 4

Distribution of seats in the new Federal Parliament of Germany

The table below shows possible governmental coalitions (‘Mögliche Koalitionen’). All combinations which add up to at least fifty percent of all seats could form a government. In total five coalition meet that threshold. However, the first two and the fifth group of the below list would be built on the basis of the old CDU and SPD coalition. Due to the insufficient performance of the coalition and the losses of the CDU these three options or not actively presumed – at least not for the moment. That leaves the Ampelkoalition (traffic light coalition: red, yellow and green) with 416 out of a total of 735 seats and the Jamaika-Koalition (black, yellow and green like the colors of Jamaica) with 406 seats as the more likely coalitions. Out of these two the Ampel is the most likely to succeed due to the difficult situation of the conservative CDU after 16 years in government and the heavy losses last Sunday. Well, that reduces complexity a bit.

Table: Possible coalitions of political parties for the new government following after the federal elections 2021

The challenge to build a government corresponds with the challenge of sustainability

Looking just at the possibility of an Ampelkoalition the challenge to team up with each other are enormous:

The Liberals (FDP) have a long tradition in defending freedom but nowadays their focus is more narrowly on economic freedom. During this election campaign their focus was on tax reduction and deregulation for the economy.

The Social-democrat’s (SDP) focus is decent work, justice and climate neutral industrial policy.

The campaign of the Greens (Die Grünen) was mainly about climate policy. They want to end the use of coal earlier as already agreed, increase investments and in return accept higher depts and taxes for their climate policy.

Demands for tax reduction and deregulation by Liberals and the demand for a more consequential climate policy of the Greens seem to be most antagonistic. Therefore, the Ampel doesn’t look likely to produce a dream team.

Interestingly, the challenge to combine the focus of the SDP on society, the environmental focus of the Greens and the economic focus of the Liberals corresponds clearly with the challenge of the principle of sustainability to combine the pillars economy, society, and the environment. Now everything will depend on the ability of the three parties to find a basic agreement on how to combine their priorities. In the worst case, they don’t make it and chose a different type of coalition. In a bad case, parties will find an agreement only at the level of the smallest common denominator. On the opposite, in the best case they define a future programme which helps Germany and supports other countries in better achieving sustainability and climate goals through a better combination of the three pillars economy, society and the environment.

All three parties of a possible Ampelkoalition support the Paris Agreement to limit global warming to well below 2°C and to pursue efforts to limit it to 1.5°C. Unfortunately, none of them has presented an action plan on how to make this happen. The negotiations about a new coalition will be crucial for the question if Germany is ready to take the lead and demonstrate that goal achievement is possible. At the end, the need to bring together antagonistic positions of Liberals, Greens and Social-democrats in a new coalition may either fail or turn out as a stroke of luck: To become successful they have no chance to avoid the challenge of climate change and sustainability. The parties are facing difficult negotiations but if we are lucky, they produce a more action oriented governmental programme for goal achievement and as a frame to consolidate party interests.

Peer to peer learning - the case of Germany

As UN and EU Team leader, analyst, developer and evaluator I work as much internationally as in Germany. As blogger I learn from viewer feedback about a large interest in insights from Germany for international developments and vice versa.

The example of current coalition building Germany reminds me at challenges in other countries. In Germany as much as in other countries a transformative process is necessary to allow national and local governments to respond to climate change and other crises. There is always the temptation to focus on sector policies, one policy level, a few stakeholders and short-term benefits. Telling authorities in Germany and abroad that interrelated challenges and crises require a coordinated response is not always a welcome message. However, the time is ticking.

Of course, each case is different. Policies and advisory services have to be Taylor made but peer to peer learning from other countries, regions and cities often helps to find best solutions. Now governments in Germany and the world are forced to finally demonstrate if they top or flop in goal achievement. The next few years will give proof if we and our governments grow up to the challenge. I have worked in very different context over the last decades but this could turn into the most interesting phase. Suspense, drama and the risk to fail are assured.

I would like to continue discussing with viewers like you the challenges and fascinating opportunity in Germany. You’ll find my blog posts on LinkedIn or directly on my blog at https://www.ugraute.de/blog-1 .

Utilizing the Corona low for personal and professional growth - The experience of a self-employed consultant

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Tue, 14 Sep 2021 15:57:36 GMT

Corona took and takes its toll

The Corona pandemic took and still takes its toll from all of us. In my case it particularly hit me: As an international advisor I work with international teams across the globe, travel to meet international friends, partners and clients and often there is demand for field work abroad. Of course, I used all possible means to overcome the limitations of the lockdown.

At the beginning of the pandemic there was a big hype for Zoom, Skype, MS Team and other means of internet communication. I myself spoke at online conferences and co-chaired workshops on Zoom and MS Teams. These tools are indeed helpful but, frankly speaking, it is like with many other technical innovations. It begins with scepticism, then comes a hype and soon after people acknowledge that tools are just tools. They help us but they neither solve all problems nor are they able to fully substitute direct human encounters. Humans still matter!

On my side: I was fortunate by staying healthy. Workwise, there were even new assignments. Nonetheless, one study could not be finished as expected without own survey work on the ground. And one other cooperation with multiple major stakeholders simply run dry during lockdown. Many activities (and with them income opportunities) were either cancelled, cut down or postponed till 2022. And then of course, I was thrown back on myself sitting in my home office and thought about how I could turn the lockdown into a chance for personal and professional growth. There was no moment of divine revelation but the gradual learning and growing inspired by lots of reading, exchange over the internet and long walks in the forests and fields surrounding Berlin.

The silence of the lockdown inspired also progress, innovation and even a breakthrough

Many say that it would be a huge advantage if you have a long track of experience. It's true but there are also challenges. For instance, how do you make a two minute pitch about 30+ years of work experience in administration, academia and consulting in many different countries? Recruiters usually are not too crazy about reading four or more pages of CV and while they are always impressed by the breadth and depth of my experiences they are often looking for very specialized candidates. So, a first thing I did during lockdown was summarizing key information of my CV, employments, skills, experiences, products and services on a single page. The table below is the September 2021 update of the original one-pager.

Thirty years of work experience on one page

A growing partner network thanks to LinkedIn

To not get stuck and frustrated in your home office is a challenge of its own. Reaching out and communication with others are key. During the pandemic communication through my professional network on LinkedIn helped me to sustain and even grow my existing network of friends, partners and clients in international organizations, governments, academia and civil society. In fall 2019, short before the pandemic kicked in my own network had about 1000 followers. This number has more than doubled to about 2230 followers today.

Of course, followers on LinkedIn are by far not all close partners or even clients. No, the growing number of followers is not more and less than an indication how my posts and messages helped me to stay in touch with my network while there are no or just a few opportunities for face-to-face meetings.

The following chart indicates the number of viewers per post on LinkedIn between January and August 2021. I included into the chart mostly those LinkedIn posts which promoted posts of my own blog.

Source: Own compilation of viewers per post

Profile development with support of a blog

I tested very different posts and learned from the different interest which they generated among different viewer groups. The above chart gives proof of a moderate but steady growth of viewer numbers. Of course, it needs to be acknowledged that my subjects as governance and management adviser are not comparable to the posts on food, fashion and love by famous musicians or actors on Instagram or Twitter.

What cannot be seen from the chart but what is also happening is an increasing interaction with my network through their likes, comments, re-shares and private mails (community engagement). A very important aspect is that with each post I expose myself to a public audience. Thus, posting and blogging is also an intellectual workout that tells me where I stand and it allows me to test new ideas and approaches. The main benefit is the development of my public profile and widening and intensifying cooperation. This may not be too much but in times of Corona this makes the difference between publish or perish. And it's a way to break out of the home office. Through posts and comments, I stay in touch and develop new ideas with colleagues and partners. In doing so, I not only experienced that it is indeed possible to substitute face-to-face dialogue by internet communication. It even allowed me to find new friends whom I haven’t met yet once in real life – something which needs to be changed at the soonest.

To anybody intending a similar approach to mine I recommend to develop a clear and long-term social media marketing strategy. I did that with help of literature including the book 'Social-Media-Marketing für Dummies' by Gero Pflüger (Wiley Verlag 2020, 375 pp).

A breakthrough by finding new clients in the private sector

I am aware that social media marketing is not like direct marketing. A blog post or LinkedIn post generates only in the exceptional case new clients and partners. Rather it is a tool to keep and develop partner and client relations. However, out of these contacts some may either become friends, partners and/or clients. And this happened to me during the lockdown. Looking back at more than 18 months of working under conditions of the Corona pandemic I even can report about a real breakthrough.

Until 2019 my partners and clients were almost exclusively from the public sector: international organizations, national and local governments and academic institutions. In many countries the spheres of private and public sector are divided and it is difficult to switch back and forth. Some even say, that the employability in the private sector goes down if you worked more than five years in public administration. However, I even worked for 25 years in the public sector before I switched to the private sector setting up my own consultancy. I still work predominantly for public institutions and it took another five years before private companies (small, medium sizes but also major global consultancies) got interested in my experience and started contracting me. As the one-page table at the beginning of this blog demonstrates the main changes in 2020 and 2021 are related to the establishment of business-to-business client relationships.

It makes me proud that the breadth and depth of my experiences is finding new interest but of course challenges remain when bridging between public and private sector: Some companies, when they talk about governance mean exclusively corporate governance while my background is in public governance. Also, major companies who want to enter the field of strategy development for sustainable development hesitate for a while when they realize that dynamic cooperation processes with many public and private stakeholders across several policy fields and policy levels makes the short-term revenue calculation a big challenge. In spite of such challenges, I am glad about changes taking place.

The lockdown provided me with plenty of time for study and personal growth which I wouldn't like to miss. Taking a distance from daily routines helped me to sharpen my eyes for the smaller but important things in life, for needs and own strengths and opportunities. The Corona low definitely supported my personal and professional growth. If now governments of the world would re-fresh and intensify their commitments to multilateral cooperation and integrated policy agendas like the Agenda 2030 for Sustainable Development, I don’t have to be concerned about my recovery from the Corona low.

Please read also my post of 1 January 2021 'Remote work: Overcoming the silo of the home office'

http://ugraute.de/overcoming-the-silo-of-the-home-office

The figure above serves only to visualize current and past clients, employers and partners of Ulrich Graute since 1989

UN sources on national institutions needed to achieve the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Mon, 23 Aug 2021 13:26:43 GMT

UN sources about national institutions needed to achieve the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development

As an International Affairs Consultant with a keen interest in sustainable development and related governance I am always interested in new publications which can help to improve governance and management to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals SDG.

UN DESA just published now its World Public Sector Report 2021 which has a focus on national institutional arrangements for implementing the SDG. It provides on 186 pages an interesting and important analysis of different approaches, arrangements and states of progress in the world.

Link: https://publicadministration.un.org/en/Research/World-Public-Sector-Reports

Individual Chapters
Introduction: National institutional arrangements for implementing the Sustainable Development Goals: where are we after five years?
1: Changes in institutional arrangements for Sustainable Development Goals implementation at the national level since 2015 2: Monitoring, follow-up and review of the Sustainable Development Goals
3: Building the capacity of public servants to implement the 2030 Agenda
4: The impacts of COVID-19 on national institutional arrangements for Sustainable Development Goals implementation
Annex: Overall strengths and challenges of SDG monitoring, follow-up and review

If you should look for more information on national arrangement on urban policy and governance please read additionally the OECD, UN-Habitat and Cities Alliance report 'Global State of National Urban Policy 2021'.
https://lnkd.in/dgTHgv3w

The attached DESA report mentions frequently links to SDG 16 which is about "peace, justice and strong institutions." If you look for more info on the SDG 16 related promotion of peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels visit also the SDG16 Hub sponsored by UNDP.
https://www.sdg16hub.org/

And to complete the picture with respect to digital arrangement please read UN DESA's E-Government Survey 2020
Digital Government in the Decade of Action for Sustainable Development.
https://lnkd.in/d3qqEfrT UN E-Government Survey (Full Report).pdf

Oh yes, there is more on integrated financial frameworks and other important aspects of SDG implementation on the websites of UN DESA, UNDP and other UN agencies. If you need professional support please contact them directly or me as a consultant in the field.

Civic engagement and civic space - Summary of an e-Discussion on SDG 16 Trends and Emerging Issues in the Context of COVID-19

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Thu, 05 Aug 2021 06:58:04 GMT

In this e-discussion organized by the SDG16 Hub, Southern Voice and UNDP, participants have discussed in June 2021 the opportunities and risks that the pandemic has generated for civic engagement and civic space, which encompasses the role of civil society organizations in the current context, and how this role affects the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals. The main topics addressed were effective engagement between civil society and government, how COVID-19 related measures affect civic engagement, the impacts of new online spaces on participation and inclusion, and the role of the UN in promoting and protecting civic engagement and civic space, including through Voluntary National Reviews (VNRs). The findings and experiences shared here were feed into the Global Roundtable at the 2021 High-level Political Forum.

Source reference: The final summary of the e-discussion as documented in this blog post was originally published by the SDG16 Hub: https://www.sdg16hub.org/system/files/2021-06/Final%20Summary_FS.pdf

SDG16 Hub

Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels

Civic engagement and civic space, and on how the COVID-19 pandemic has affected progress towards establishing more ‘just societies’, as envisioned by SDG 16, and what is needed for an equitable recovery from this crisis.

The global health, economic and social crisis generated by the COVID-19 pandemic has dramatically highlighted the vulnerability of certain populations which have been disproportionately affected . Existing structural problems and inequalities have been exacerbated. The World Bank estimates that, in a worst-case scenario, an additional 115 million people will fall into extreme poverty due to the pandemic.

In this challenging environment, Civil Society Organizations (CSOs) play an essential role. CSOs that connect to and work with marginalized communities with a focus on advocacy and accountability are key to ensuring that human rights, transparency and citizen's participation are safeguarded. Furthermore, in an environment where governments face unprecedented economic negative shocks and need to decide what trade-offs to make, civil society organizations that focus their work on research and analysis are essential to promote decisions that are evidence-based. Without organizations that represent a wide range of people, we cannot build just, peaceful and inclusive societies that ¨leave no one behind¨.

Yet, even before the pandemic, civic space had been shrinking worldwide. According to the 2020 CIVICUS Monitor , only 3.4% of the world’s pop ulation lives in countries with open civic space. Governments’ efforts to curb infections have affected people’s civil and political rights , such as the freedom to assembly. While restrictions may be justified when their temporary nature and proportionality are ensured, there is also evidence that, in many contexts, the current situation has been used as a pretext to limit civil society action in a targeted and unjustified manner.

Framing Question #1:

Effective engagement between civil society and government

Research seems to show a possible positive connection between social capital derived from civic engagement and lower levels of mortality from COVID-19. ¹
Educational tools in West Africa were used to create CSOs to promote peaceful dialogue and to reduce community tensions in the context of Boko Haram/ISIS West Africa insurgency, with support from both traditional leaders and local government representatives.
CIVICUS’s Solidarity in the Time of COVID -19 brings examples where CSOs took on crucial roles in service provision, food and sanitary equipment distribution, addressing disinformation by public outreach programmes on effective prevention measures.
The Rebuilding for Good paper developed by the Affinity Group of National Associations, Charities Aid Foundation and CIVICUS identifies good examples in relation to COVID-19 response, and outline suggestions for the government to support civil society.
The Stakeholder Group of Persons with Disabilities (SGPwD) ’s research on the experiences of persons with disabilities with COVID-19 shows that, while new and exacerbated barriers for persons with disabilities arose in several areas, the role of organizations of persons with disabilities became increasingly important.
Strengthening Accountability and Integrity Systems (SPAIS) selected 8 CSOs in Kenya to implement pilot interventions on transparency and accountability in the health sector, aiming at strengthening the capacities of key stakeholders towards transparent and accountable governance.
In Tunisia ’s ‘post-transition’ context, civil society plays a significant role in strengthening democratic, inclusive and participatory governance, and in bridging the gaps in the service chain between public institutions and citizens.
UNDP Oslo Governance Centre and UN DESA ’s framework to analyse the Quality of Stakeholder Engagement can be a useful tool to analyse the process of stakeholder engagement in the beginning of the VNR process
SDG16+ Civil Society Toolkit , to be launched at the HLPF 2021, can be a useful resource for civil society partners to unpack SDG16+ in their own contexts, and support practitioners on utilizing and maximizing SDG16+ work to enhance their work.
More focus should be placed on NHRI and the important role they can play, particularly on working on civic space issues and supporting civil society.
Human Rights Defenders should be better supported, given the increasing risks they face globally.

¹ ( Elgar et al 2020 ).

Framing Question # 2:

How COVID-19 related measures have affected civic engagement

2021 State of Civil Society Report highlights that decentralised movements for racial justice and gender equality are challenging exclusion and demanding a radical reckoning with systemic racism and patriarchy.
Women-led movements are challenging gender stereotypes, exposing patterns of exclusion, and forging breakthroughs to lay the groundwork for fairer societies.
Young people are at the forefront of protest and have taken ownership of climate change to make it a decisive issue of our time, through, for example, the Fridays for Future movement.
Present day movements are deriving strength by taking the shape of networks rather than pyramids, with multiple locally active leaders. Unsurprisingly, powerful people’s mobilisations are inviting sharp backlash.
The mobility measures imposed by the governments led to prohibition of public demonstrations at a time of greater tension and citizen discontent with the mismanagement of the pandemic crisis.
The “Spiral of Silence” , strategy used by governments to hinder civic space by inducing fear to silence communication channels, was exemplified by Belarus.
Counter-terrorism laws need reformulating, since their vagueness might hinder CSOs safety, lead to human rights violations, and serve as a tool for governments to reduce dissent and criticisms.
Two policy briefs developed by CIVICUS reveal a plethora of measures to limit the space for civil society to operate and discharge their vital contributions .

Framing Question #3:

How new online spaces have affected participation

The development of innovative digital mechanisms has provided new channels to exercise freedoms of association, assembly, and expression, and helped democratize exchanges.
Because the COVID-19 pandemic has fundamentally changed how we've worked (digitally) over the past year, there is a need to ensure that we're learning from and building upon some of the things that this virtual engagement has led to – namely, bringing many more voices to conversations.
Engagement must happen by ensuring accessible online participation , such as supporting of cross-cutting solutions, promoting effective access to information, prioritizing accessible platforms, facilitating accreditation and registration of participants, and ensuring safety of participation channels.
Some of the risks involve cybersecurity, digital divide and censorship .
The Stakeholder Group of Persons with Disabilities ’ COVID-19 research has found that online spaces are creating more exclusion and additional barriers for persons with disabilities, including lack of access to COVID-19 information and barriers in receiving social protection measures and employment.
Some online platforms have worked diligently to add accessibility features during the pandemic, such as Zoom , but this does not create inclusion for people who do not have the ability or means to access the internet.
In the absence of the "traditional" ways to promote capacity building, coordination, and advocacy (i.e., through workshops, conferences, etc.), there is a need to re-think how to work at the national and local level in a post-pandemic world. The Mainstreaming SDG 16 resource provides detailed guidance which can be used in the absence of direct in-country support to maximize learning among partners.

Resources

Ashish Kothari et al., Pluriverse: A Post- Development Dictionary

ASIES: Gobernabilidad y Covid 19: Su Impacto en el Área Política, Educativa, Jurídica y Económica CIVICUS: 2021 State of Civil Society Report, Chapter 5

CIVICUS: Solidarity in the Time of COVID -19

EDGE Webinar: Weaving Systemic Alternatives from the Global South; Questions & Answers

Elgar et al (2 020): The trouble with trust: Time-series analysis of social capital, income inequality, and COVID-19 deaths in 84 countries

Front Line Defenders: Global Analysis 2020

GANHRI: Marrakech Declaration: “Expanding the civic space and promoting and protecting human righ ts

defenders, with a specific focus on women”

GIZ, TAP Network: SDG 16 in VNRs and Spotlight Reports

Global Alliance, White & Case: Analysis of the 2020 Voluntary National Reviews and SDG 16 Global Alliance blog: Civic Space: Why it Matters

Global Tapestry of Alternatives: Webinar series

The Guardian: At least 331 human rights defenders were murdered in 2020, report finds IISD: Will the SDGs Still be Relevant after the Pandemic? A Disability Rights Perspective International Center for Not-For-Profit Law: COVID-19 Civic Freedom Tracker International Civil Society Centre: Solidarity Playbook

International Disability Alliance : Accessibility Guides

International Disability Alliance: COVID 19 and the disability movement

International Disability Alliance: Overview on Accessibility of Video Conferencing Apps and Services International Disability Alliance: Resources and Tools for Action

International Disability Alliance: The experiences of persons with disabilities with COVID-19

International Disability Alliance: Voices of People with Disabilities During the COVID19 Outbreak Latinobarometro 2018

OHCHR, GANHRI, UNDP: COVID-19 and National Human Rights Institutions ,

OHCHR, GANHRI, UNDP: Tripartite Partnership to support NHRIs with OHCHR and GANHRI

Partners4Review: Voluntary National Reviews submitted to the 2019 High-level Political Forum for Sustainable

Development – a Comparative Analysis

Partners4Review: 2020 Voluntary National Reviews – a snapshot of trends in SDG reporting Secretary General: Role of the United Nations in protecting and promoting civic space

TAP Network and the Global Alliance for Reporting Progress on Peaceful, Just and Inclusive Societies:

Mainstreaming SDG 16: Using the Voluntary National Review to Advance More Peaceful, Just and Inclusive Societies.

UN Sustainable Development: Finland’s VNR 2020

UN Sustainable Development: Voluntary common reporting guidelines for voluntary national reviews at the high-

level political forum for sustainable development (HLPF)

UNDP/DESA: What is a good practice? Analytical Framework to analyse and strengthen the quality of stakeholder

engagement practices

United Nations: Guidance Note: Protection and Promotion of Civic Space . United Nations: Secretary General’s Call to Action for Human Rights United Nations: World Youth Report (WYR)

UNDP: NHRIs and COVID-19

UNDP’s Development Dialogues: Building A Better , Fairer Future For The Furthest Behind

Urban Upgrading for Inclusion, Sustainability and Resilience in a time of Global Pandemics

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Wed, 04 Aug 2021 13:42:09 GMT

Instead of a summer reading attend an online course of the World Bank Group!

The new online course on urban upgrading is a c hance for everybody interested to dive into the work of informal settlements and their upgrading. This course is based on the World Bank’s Urban Upgrading for Inclusion, Sustainability and Resilience in a time of Global Pandemics. Use this opportunity!

The course provides s good introduction but also detailed anlyses and descriptions of cases from informal settlements, community organizations and the work of development partners. I specially like that it underscores the social dimension, governance of upgrading and how conflicts in slum upgrading can be dealt with.

Answering the graded weekly and final quizzes can be tricky and there may be a few glitches left (e.g. question 2 of the quiz in week 8 produced the opposite of what the training material says; this is similar in question 19 of the final quiz).

This World Bank Group’s Massive Open Online Course (MOOC) is a self-paced course. Thus, participants can complete it according to their own schedule. The WBG recommends to complete the course over nine weeks, with 4-5 hours’ time investment per week.

Link to the Online course: https://lnkd.in/dxdpNWp

The High-Level Political Forum on Sustainable Development in search for the future of the 2030 Agenda and SDGs

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Fri, 16 Jul 2021 10:34:19 GMT

Aim of this blog post is to demonstrate some of the efforts the UN is paying to turn current crises into an opportunity to progress its sustainability agenda. It reports on main sessions and the side event of Local2030.

Gutierrez: Rather than progress we are moving away from our goals

The Secretary General has mentioned already several times since early 2020 that the 2030 Agenda with its Sustainable development Goals (SDG) is off-track. Now, in July 2021, this acknowledgement was reflected in most speeches at the High-Level Political Forum on Sustainable Development (HLPF), which is the subsidiary body of the United Nations responsible for the entire organization's policy on sustainable development.

UN Secretary-General António Guterres noted the dramatic situation in his opening address to the Ministerial Segment of the HLPF on Tuesday, 13 July 2021:

“While the High-level Political Forum (HLPF) is intended to assess progress on the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, we must face facts. Rather than progress we are moving away from our goals.”

Many speakers noted how the pandemic has exposed and exacerbated systemic inequalities and rolled back decades of progress, pushing more than 100 million people back into poverty. The IISD Earth Negotiations Bulletin report of main proceedings for 13 July 2021 summarizes how the ECOSOC President Munir Akram (Pakistan), UN General Assembly President Volkan Bozkir, the President of Indonesia Joko Widodo or Marta Lucía Ramírez Blanco, Vice President of Colombia described with their own words the dramatic situation which is exacerbated by the Covid-19 pandemic. [1] The impact of COVID-19 on the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (2030 Agenda) and its Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), loomed large over the 2021 HLPF. [2]

Six years after adoption of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, key questions remain on the implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). How do we get on track to end poverty and hunger, and transform towards inclusive and sustainable economies? How do we revamp and transform consumption and production and address and mitigate climate change? And what should we do about the 21 SDG targets that matured in 2020 and have not been fully achieved? These were some of the topics the High-level Political Forum on Sustainable Development addressed. [3]

Understanding the SDGs not only as challenge but as a way to cope with other challenges?

In spite of the sober assessment of the current situation politicians and experts used the HLPF right from the beginning to search for opportunities to overcomes crisis and bring the 2030 Agenda back on track. The message soon became clear: The 2030 Agenda is not only a challenge for Member States but it can be a tool helping to overcome current challenges.

For instance, UN Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) President Munir Akram (Pakistan) who opened the session, said that Member States must be guided by the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the Addis Ababa Action Agenda on financing for development to face current challenges and use the HLPF to demonstrate our unwavering commitment to the 2030 Agenda. ECOSOC Vice President Juan Sandoval Mendiolea presented key messages from the ECOSOC Integration Segment, including restoring trust in institutions and rebuilding the social compact; leaving no one behind; eliminating inequalities; economic recovery guided by satisfying human needs and the environment; a new more equitable and sustainable model of development; global digital connectivity; high-quality reliable data; finance; and an improved ECOSOC.

One approach to search for better implementation was to ask how local authorities can be better supported. An entire special session of the HLPF was dedicated on the role of cities and local authorities in SDG implementation because many SDG targets can only be achieved through extensive local action. The Congress of Local and Regional Authorities, Council of Europe, emphasized that cities, towns, and regions need to have “the authority to act, the skills to implement, and the voice to share their experience.”

Speakers presented cases from several countries and they explained the value of conducting and supporting voluntary local reviews (VLRs), noting that:

they have advanced SDG implementation by translating the Global Goals into concrete community actions and solutions;
they enable direct engagement between the UN and cities, which are the best positioned level of government to inform policy on building back better from COVID-19;
they help a community reflect on efforts and identify challenges and areas that need attention; and
they can help dissolve “local silos.” [4]

Localization and mainstreaming SDGs to achieve goals

As it happens often at major conferences the more interesting discussions take place during side events. That's the way it was also at the online 2021 HLPF. While the official sessions were filled with formal reports and political statements some side events gave a glimpse on what needs to be done more concretely. One of these side events was the session “Accelerate Post-Pandemic Recovery and SDG Localization through joined up local action” organized by Local2030 [5] . To accelerate SDG implementation at the lo cal level, Local2030 brings together leaders from national, regional, and local governments, the United Nations, private sector, civil society, philanthropy and academia to collaboratively develop and implement solutions that advance the SDGs at the local level. The side event at the HLPF was co-organized with UN-Habitat and UNDP.

Amina Mohammed, Deputy Secretary-General of the United Nations underscored the importance of joint commitments at national and local level for localizing the SDGs and an inclusive, resilient and sustainable recovery. Maimunah Mohd Sharif, UN-Habitat Executive Director looked at the many challenges and said that it needs champions which lead the way and serve as inspiration and role model for others. Emilia Saiz of UCLG added in her statement that there is a need for a focus on service delivery. The impact of the work must become visible and it needs to be achieved in a multistakeholder partnership. Lara Blanco, Deputy Director of the Sustainable Development Unit in the Executive Office of the Secretary General talked about capitalizing on Covid 19. She set the tone by underscoring that goal achievement is not only a technical and financial challenges but that it has a human dimension: It needs compassion, empathy and solidarity to succeed.

In the side event’s segment on SDG monitoring and reporting for long-term development planning Shipra Narang Suri, Chief of the Urban Practices Branch at UN-Habitat and moderator of the segment explained that for excellent planning of action it needs data and information broken down to the neighborhood level. Amson Sibanda, Chief of the National Strategies and Capacity Building Branch UNDESA seconded but pointed to the fact that many Member States have insufficient capacities in their statistical offices and that the pandemic has put additional challenges to their work. Therefore, he called for building better statistical capacities. Of course, statistical offices can only monitor activities which happen and therefore, he also called for scaling up support for Member States to mainstream SDG in policies and to strengthen partnership at all levels.

In a nutshell the HLPF and especially its side event by Local2030 in an inspiring way made clear what it needs: Appropriate statistical, financial and human capacities at all levels and it needs compassion, empathy and solidarity because joined up partnership and action at the local and all other levels are the (only) chance to implement the 2030 Agenda and SDGs.

[1] This blog post is based on own observations by the author during online transmissions of sessions and on the reporting “2021 High-Level Political Forum on Sustainable Development (HLPF 2021)” by the IISD Earth Negotiations Bulletin ENB. It includes report on each day of the HLPF.

https://enb.iisd.org/sdgs/HLPF2021

[2] IISD ENB report for 8 July 2021

[3] IISD ENB report for 6 July 2021

[4] http://sdg.iisd.org/news/local-sdg-action-reporting-get-higher-profile-at-hlpf/?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=SDG%20Weekly%20Update%20-%2016%20July%202021&utm_content=SDG%20Weekly%20Update%20-%2016%20July%202021+CID_fbb6dc0aa9537099a6e0cd1cf6f9c677&utm_source=cm&utm_term=Read

[5] https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/partnerships/local2030

Happiness is if after 30 years you return to your start-up and find a successful, confident and dynamic institution

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Tue, 06 Jul 2021 16:22:04 GMT

Ulrich attending the anniversary in Mittweida (left) and the main building of the State Centre in Dresden (right)

It was during the German unification process in the early 1990s that I supported the building of new governmental institutions in the Free State of Saxony in the eastern part of the Federal Republic of Germany.

On 1 July 1991 and together with only one assistant I opened the Saxon State Centre for Civic Education (Sächsische Landeszentrale für politische Bildung; www.slpb.de). On the same day we had a small reception with a few politicians, journalists and civil society organizations. Nothing special. Aim of the Centre was and still is to promote non-partisan democratic dialogue between all groups of the society to strengthen democracy and a sense of community in the society.

Now, 30 years later, on 5 July 2021 and together with the former President of Germany, Joachim Gauck, other politicians and (due to corona only) a few other representatives we met at the University of Applied Science in Mittweida, Saxony, Germany for a discussion on the challenges ahead of us. Supported by an excellent team of media students and in celebration of the anniversary a discussion on the future 30 years of democracy and society was held with the former president as keynote speaker.

Joachim Gauck was a protestant preacher during socialist times before he joined the peaceful revolution. Soon after he became head of the federal office in charge of the files of the former secret service of Eastern Germany (‚Gauck-Behörde‘). From 2012 until 2017 he was President of Germany.

In his speech he gave key messages including these: Democracies need democrats, democrats need to be informed and state centres for civic education support the ‚empowerment‘ of citizens to actively contribute to the development of state and society. If you understand German language, it’s worth to watch the full tape of the session because thanks to Joachim Gauck, Anne Hähnig (DIE ZEIT), Constanze Kurz (Chaos Computer Club) and Roland Löffler (Director of the SLPB) it was a very inspiring and partly controversial discussion. Discussed was the challenge of populism (which is big in Saxony) but also digitalization as challenge for the society. Constanze Kurz criticized that today and enhanced due to the corona pandemic the dialogue of the society on its own future has been transferred to commercial platforms who have a commitment to their economic interests but not to the society and democracy. To limit the related dependency, it will be necessary to continue capacity building face to face and off the commercial platforms.

I attended the event as guest of honour and was only briefly mentioned. But that role as observer was perfectly fine with me. I was so proud to see that the small centre which I started in 1991 has developed into a resourceful public institution supporting non-partisan political dialogue. Instead of using the anniversary to maily look to the past the event focussed on the challenges to be expected for the next 30 years including pandemics, climate change, economic and social challenges and on how to do face the challenges jointly with all groups of the society.

If you want to watch the discussion you find it on (the commercial platform) YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uz0N7hAfxqA
Or visit the website of the state centre (in German): www.slpb.de
Or visit Ulrich’s blog: https://www.ugraute.de/blog-1

Inclusive Cities Leaving No One Behind - Neither a Myth nor a Reality but Work in Progress

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Thu, 01 Jul 2021 05:43:27 GMT

Inclusive Cities Through a Multidisciplinary Approach

Inclusive cities which leave no one behind are not a reality but they are also not simply a myth. Instead, they are work in progress. To be inclusive for all citizens this is a goal cities all around the world are striving for but it is unlikely that being an inclusive city would be a goal a city may achieve once and forever. There will be always new challenges and opportunities that emerge. Therefore, the term inclusive cities should indicate more a process towards inclusiveness as a long term goal than describing a status secured.

For three days in June 2021 participants from South Africa, the Global South and with support from European experts discussed options to build inclusive cities. Organizers had picked a multidisciplinary approach which was reflected by the thematic areas of the event:

Urban Integrated Transport Systems: Towards efficient, affordable, accessible and secure public transport for all,
Twinning Urban Environmental Sustainability and Climate Change: Towards clean, healthy and secure cities for all,
Inclusive urban designs and the Covid-19 pandemic,
Rural-urban interdependencies and linkages for inclusive cities,
Inclusive cities – Focus on vulnerable group (women and Children, people living with disabilities, migrants and the urban poor), and
Inclusive cities and affordable housing.

A multidisciplinary, multi-level and truly comprehensive approach is required

Presentations and discussions at the symposium, its panels and breakout rooms often had the character of a search for a common understanding on what is to be understood by a truly inclusive city and what needs to be done to move closer to the goal. To not get lost in complexity presenters and discussants tended to anchor their contribution on one or two policy areas and explored from there how to embrace the bigger challenge of inclusive cities.

Piotr Lorens began the search during his keynote at the opening panel. His anchor subject was social housing but the full title already demonstrated that social housing is not a stand-alone subject: ‘The Need of Social Face of (not only) Social Housing - Focus on Post-Pandemic Challenges’. In parts the keynote provided a to-do-list for inclusive cities. Ambrose Adebayo, chair of the panel and Professor Emeritus, School of Built Environment & Development Studies UKZN recalled the New Urban Agenda of the United Nations which includes the notion of a ‘right to the city’ and a place to dwell as precondition to actively participate in the life of the city.

Peter Bikam of the University of Venda (SA) in his intervention on the second day stated that the issue is not planning but service delivery. With this remark he put the focus on policy implementation which is too often lagging behind the more attractive formulation of new policies. In a similar intention Elizabeth Belpaire stated that the world is failing and that more attention needs to be paid to the health of people and of the planet.

Following these interventions which widened the scope of inclusive cities it was almost natural that some of the following presenters would argue in favor of comprehensive approaches. Puven Akkiah of Ethekwini Municipality expressed the need for long-term goals and perspectives. For him short termism is the enemy of inclusivism. He also said that Sustainable Development Goals and the New Urban Agenda of the United Nations would provide a good framework but that this framework needs to be localized. Nelson Chanza and University of Johannesburg also underscored the need for a comprehensive approach.

The need not only for a multidisciplinary but also a multilevel cooperation and coordination was brought up already on the first day be Subharti Moonsammy, the former Head of the Development Planning, Environment and Management Unit of Ethekwini Municipality. She specifically referred to the District Development Modell in South Africa which still needs to be filled with life but which would help to assure better policy coherence.

Other speakers – including me – presented tools and methodologies for better cross sector and multilevel cooperation leaving no one behind. The local goal of inclusive cities corresponds to the goal of the United Nations' 2030 Agenda to ‘leave no one behind’. Thus, a better coordination between UN, National and local goals could be mutually beneficial and reinforcing. Wrapping up the discussions of the symposium the chair of the Local Organizing Committee Prof Hangwelani Hope Magidimisha-Chipungu added that the dialogue will be continued at future events of the University of KwaZulu-Natal.

Professional, inclusive and fun

Professional, inclusive and fun – that’s how I would describe the symposium “Achieving Inclusive Cities through a multidisciplinary approach”.

The fun part was provoked by surprising incidences like the sudden appearance of the son of Prof Hangwelani Hope Magidimisha-Chipungu on her lap while she was speaking at the plenary on Day 2 of the conference. This added a relaxed and collegial tone to the dialogue and that compensated a bit for the remote character of a Zoom conference without face-to-face meetings.

The event has been organized very professionally and by South African stakeholders only: University of KwaZulu Natal (UKZN), University of Johannesburg, University of Venda, eThekwini Metropolitan Municipality, South African Council of Planners (SACPLAN), and South African Cities Network (SACN). I have attended many conferences in and about Africa in recent years but often International Organizations have a key role as donors and organizers. Not so at this conference.

In addition, it has been endorsed by the International Society of City and Regional Planners (ISOCARP). Members of the ISOCARP global professional association were sprinkled across the programme and certainly contributed to the quality of the conference. However, the ownership for the conference was with experts from South Africa and some other countries of the Global South.

Of course, a lot such conferences are convened in Africa by African national, local and academic institutions every year but it is probably a privilege of the remote working arrangement during the Covid pandemic and the reduced cost for an online conference. It has provided me with this unique opportunity to attend this symposium from my office in Berlin and it has provided the partners from Durban, eThekwini and Johannesburg with the opportunity to convene and international symposium according to own preferences. Therefore, this event may also show a way forward to strengthen African ownership of international dialogues about the future of African cities and Africa in general. It certainly a pleasure for me to attend and support such endeavors.

D ocumentation of the symposium

Opening panel discussion on Day 1

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fd1VhE-IsxU

Panel discussion on Day 2

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jLHm6FxazeY

Grand finale panel on Day 3

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rWJVVOjsKu8

Tapes on thematic breakout groups are also available on YouTube provided by the University of KwaZulu Natal. For more info see the website of the event

https://inclusivecities.ukzn.ac.za/2021-int-symposium-on-inclusive-cities/

Synopsis for the Grand Finale Panel of the Symposium

A Rich Country’s Challenge Entering the Heaven of Sustainability

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Thu, 10 Jun 2021 05:37:46 GMT

Angela Merkel receiving the new position paper on 8 June 2021;

Picture: Bundeskanzleramt/Steins

Germany's government has received a new position paper on climate-neutrality and sustainable development but will the country take the opportunity to lead the way for sustainability?

Global agendas require good national strategies and capacities to be implemented at national and subnational level

The United Nations 2030 Agenda with its Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) and the Paris Agreement of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) are different types of international agreements. What they have in common is that their implementation depends on ‘nationally determined contributions’ (Art 3 Paris Agreement) ‘taking into account different national realities, capacities and levels of development and respecting national policies and priorities’ (Art 21 of the 2030 Agenda A/RES/70/1). Thus, it requires national implementation strategies and the building of national capacities which then translate the international goals into national policies and actions for goal achievement. Not paying enough emphasis to these strategies and their functioning risks goal achievement.

Being a rich country is not always easy

Germany is perceived of being a rich country and a leader in the field of sustainability. Indeed, Germany has globally one of the top ranking GDP. Policies including the German energy transition already triggered a significant structural change in the energy system. The country benefited from the reduction of CO ² emissions due to the collapse and transition of the economy of Eastern Germany in the 1990s. In addition, Germany already in 2001 established a Council for Sustainable Development advising the government. Since Angela Merkel became Chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany she attended 16 times the Annual Meeting of the Council (see picture board below compiled by the Council). So, there seems to be good willing actors and resources to take action. But Germany has a problem: It’s one of the rich kids on the block.

Picture: 16 years of Angela Merkel at the Annual Conference of the Council

You may wonder why being rich is a problem. Rich countries have more resources than other countries and should be able to invest more, to take greater risks and to solve problems easier than others. That is very true. At the same time the richer a country is the more it can lose. This risk can slow down action and it generates the paradox of a situation where countries like Germany want to do both, share their wealth with others who have less but maintain the advantages of their privileged status to not fall behind in future (in other words: eat the cake and keep it).

In highly industrialized countries with a large population like Germany wealth exists only partly in form of a stockpile of money which could be given away. Instead, most of the wealth is invested in ongoing efforts to maintain and develop economic competitiveness, high living standards, outstanding education, health systems, social protection, infrastructure etc. Citizens in countries like Germany pay relatively high taxes to maintain this system and in return they easily get nervous if the system is put in danger of losing part or all of its value.

And this is the point: Transforming a system like the German economy and society towards sustainability is like a major surgery of a living and bustling organism. Mistakes may damage or destroy the entire organism. Even if there is a public awareness about deficits and unhealthiness of the system there is also the awareness on how much could be lost if the wrong decisions are taken and the currently strong system falters. Therefore, it’s no surprise why wealthy nations hesitate to change the path which made them rich even though this very path risks to hit the wall very soon.

I didn’t write the above to justify inequality or unsustainable politics. It’s just to raise the awareness that the transformation needed is not only linked to opportunities but also to risks and that even in high developed countries. To secure opportunities for future generations it’s not sufficient to just reduce CO ² emissions and protect natural resources. It also requires to preserve, develop and adapt achievements of our current societies, their educational, cultural, health, governance and other systems and structures. Realising this is for many politicians like a cold shower and they may get afraid of their own courage to launch major reforms. How to do all that and keep a focus on what’s needed?

Having all this in mind the German Council for Sustainable Development and the German National Academy of Sciences Leopoldina came up with an ambitious proposal on 8 June 2021 at the 20th Annual Conference of the German Council for Sustainable Development (Online Conference, in German). [1] The Chairman, Werner Schnappauf almost broke his fingers (meaning: he seemed being very nervous) when he repeated several times that the joint position paper is not a political plan but just a science-based technical description of options leaving all political decision-making to politicians. Well, that’s what academics often say when they are aware that their proposal is politically highly explosive and what makes it worse in the case of Germany that the report was published just months before the September national elections. Unfortunately, it's the governments own Council for Sustainable Development that insists on staying outside of the preparation of specific measures which are now expected from politics.

[1] Council for Sustainable Development: https://www.nachhaltigkeitsrat.de/

LEOPOLDINA: https://www.leopoldina.org/en/leopoldina-home/

Werner Schnappauf, Chair of the Council for Sustainable Development; Picture: Rat für Nachhaltigkeit

The nexus: everything is depending on the energy system

To keep this post short, let’s go right to the core of the position paper ‘Climate-neutrality – Options for an ambitious reorientation and implementation’ (‘Klimaneutralität – Optionen für eine ambitionierte Weichenstellung und Umsetzung’) [1 ]. It presents a mix of instruments for an integrated economic, environmental and social development. More important, its implementation is required mainly for the next legislative period (2021-2025). From international cooperation to technical, economic and financial transformation the position paper describes principles. Most importantly, it asks for a systemic transformation with pricing of carbon emissions as the central nexus point because energy consumption is driver of the economy and society. Thus, transforming energy consumption would be the key to sustainability. Restructuring and transitioning the energy system away from fossil towards renewable energy sources will trigger transformation across economic sectors and will also change everybody’s daily life. To add pressure and in reference to a recent ruling of the German Supreme Court, the position paper states that the main part of the emissions reduction has to be delivered within this decade. Otherwise, it would shift the burden to the next generation which the Supreme Court wants to prevent with its ruling.

While many recommendations look familiar to other principles described in the Paris Agreement and 2030 Agenda of the UN the power of the new position paper stems from the demand to act now and in this decade in a systemic way leaving no one behind to prevent irreversible tipping points of climate change. And imagine, starting by changing the energy system will leave nothing as it is now. This is now written down and neither the current nor the future government will be able to ignore that this advice was provided by own advisory bodies.

The position paper calls for multilateral cooperation, political decisions and participation and leadership by the society. It may surprise some but it prefers market tools wherever possible. This was underscored also during the Annual Conference. However, as Maja Göpel, Director of The New Institute in Hamburg made clear in her presentation the market is not a purpose of itself. Instead, it has to serve the security of supply, provide transparency of assets and has to take seriously and provide transparency on long term goals and strategies. And it is the role of the government to provide an enabling environment that assures that the development stays on track for goal achievement. It was amazing how she promoted in her ideology free presentation a major shift in economic policy orientation.

[1] https://www.nachhaltigkeitsrat.de/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/RNE_Leopoldina_Positionspapier_Klimaneutralitaet.pdf

Picture: Screenshot from the presentation by Maja Göpel as the session ‘New thinking and decision-making – imperative for a sustainable policy’

Politicians and their scientific advisors remain hesitant to enter the road towards sustainability

Following the presentation and discussion of the position paper politicians were invited to take position in the afternoon. Would they jump on the boat and implement the advice provided?

Responding was easy for Angela Merkel who received the paper but who in September 2021 is not running for office again. While she won’t be responsible for any implementation after September of this year she made very clear that it is insufficient what has been done so far: “Was wir bisher tun, reicht schlichtweg nicht aus”. [1] This clear statement increased pressure on subsequent speakers from political parties. Nonetheless, most of them walked on eggshells trying to link a praise of the position paper with a cautioning and pointing to important particular interests. Upcoming elections were clearly on their mind and so they hesitated to make far reaching commitments.

And this brings me back to the beginning of this post. With its strong industries, high employment rate and high living standard Germany made a fortune using energy from fossil sources for centuries and especially since the beginning of the industrialization. Taking away this source of wealth and to transform the energy sector as described as an option by the Council and Leopoldina puts achievements of the past at risk. That’s a lot to swallow for politicians and voters during an election period. Of course, doing nothing will put all human life on earth at risk. So, the position paper of the Council and Leopoldina may be tough in its risk assessment but at least it indicates options to overcome the crisis. Germany's politicians and voters should be happy about having such forward-looking think tanks.

But not all the blame goes to the politicians and voters. The approach of the Council and Academy Leopoldina are also ... let's say ... irritating. On the one hand they warn of the risk of irreversible tipping points which threaten all live on earth. On the other hand they underscore that it isn’t their role to suggest political solutions. Maybe they have seen during the Corona pandemic that some virologists ended between political frontlines because they clearly described what needs to be done to get the pandemic under control. But this clear positioning by scientists was indispensable to make the dialogue on solutions more rational and solution oriented. The Council of Sustainable Development seems to take a different position.

I do understand the interest in protecting the independence of science but in the given case it is a bit as if a medical doctor tells you: I can tell you about your life threatening disease but I don’t tell you how to heal it and I certainly will not help during a surgery. Well, I don't really understand. The Council is not a project of basic research and if not even the Advisory Council of the Government in cooperation with the National Academy of Sciences has the courage to speak out clearly on what needs to be done exactly something is wrong.

Politicians, council members and scientific advisors seem to agree on the analysis of the situation but they are all not really oriented towards joint search for solutions. Instead, they hide behind their own traditional roles and hesitate to leave their own silos. It is doubtful that this way a solution can be found. In this situation a national strategy for sustainable development could help. Of course, Germany has a sustainability strategy but apparently it doesn’t define the roles, responsibilities and cooperation among stakeholders in a solution-oriented way. The adding up of separate steps doesn't make an integrated process. Capacity building on interface management could help in this situation to better link the different arenas of science, policy advise and policy-making. With a little extra effort the good wiling government and the excellent expertise of the Council and the National Academy Leopoldina could easily increase the problem solving competence of the German institutional setting to support a sustainable development. Saving the earth should be worth that extra effort.

[1] https://www.sueddeutsche.de/politik/klimaschutz-rat-fuer-nachhaltige-entwicklung-angela-merkel-1.5315882

The Joint-Decision Trap and Sustainable Development Cooperation

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Thu, 20 May 2021 07:19:15 GMT

Participative and inclusive cooperation, networking and a fluid mix of governance solutions are important innovative attempts to overcome gridlocks in international cooperation to achieve sustainable development. Will they be able to succeed in an international environment driven by power rivalries and conflicting interests? This blog posts puts the attention on the joint-decision trap which lingers wherever decision making depends on consensus and cooperation. The Joint-Decision Trap is jointly responsible for many gridlocks at the UN Security Council and the UN at large but it can as much become a threat to innovative forms of participative and inclusive governance processes - if they don't strive to mind the trap.

Picture taken by the author in 2014 at a UN stakeholder forum were representatives of member states and non-state stakeholders met to discuss the Post 2015 development agenda. Unfortunately, not all member states used that opportunity.

Intergovernmental, participative and inclusive governance can be very innovative but they must be smart enough to not run into traps lingering in the way

The discussion on effectiveness and efficiency of international development cooperation is decades old. There is a widespread agreement among governments and non-state actors on the need to reform of international organizations (IO) and development cooperation. However, apart from smaller reforms here and there little is happening. It seems that a major overhaul of the system of international organizations and development cooperation is not likely to happen soon. Therefore and considering the urgent need to deliver on internationally agreed development goals, institutions began to search for new, more flexible and efficient forms of governance and financing. This is driven by hope to improve delivery and to trigger innovation and reform of the larger system.

It looks a bit like an old wall where fresh green is growing in the cracks of the wall. In international development cooperation the fresh new green is represented by terms like ‘participative planning and policy making’, ‘inclusive global governance’, ‘networked multilateralism’ or ‘fluid mix of governance solutions’. Indeed, it is inspiring and motivating that there are many new studies, e-papers, webinars and seminars promoting participative and inclusive governance making use of networked and a fluid mix of governance solutions to overcome gridlocks aiming at building back better and accelerating cooperation and goal achievement. Well, it is known that nature is strong and easily takes over areas once inhibited and that deserted by humans. And, one should never underestimate that a small innovation here and there can trigger a major reform or transition of an enti re system. But does the fresh green in development cooperation have a chance to succeed while Great-Power rivalries exist? Kemal Derviş and Sebastián Strauss of the Brookings Institution asked in an article of the Project Syndicat on 21 April 2021 'Can Multilateral Cooperation C oexist with Great-Power Rivalry?'. Well, the article didn't really answer the question but it described the danger that Great-Power Rivalry in the world may block cooperation and, I think, new forms of governance have to be developed in a way that they become resilient enough to sustain in the international environment as it is.

Can a fluid mix of governance solutions rebalance global governance

like fresh green can grow in the cracks of a wall?

Imagine you would be elected as the tenth UN Secretary General later this year. On your first day you would enter your office strongly committed to implement the Agenda 2030 with its 17 SDG and the Paris Agreement on Climate Change. What you are likely to encounter at your office is a situation where two trains are running seemingly unattached across the world stage, both trying to lead the way. Firstly, there is the traditional multilateral cooperation as it forms the basis of the United Nations. Secondly, there is the even more traditional power rivalry among the great powers. There were times when multilateral cooperation was stronger than today but times since World War II have never been free of power rivalries. Well, and why you see multilateralism and power rivalry you don’t see much of the ‘We the people’ as it is stated so prominently at the beginning of the Charter of the United Nations. If it is already difficult for multilateral cooperation to coexist with Great-Power Rivalry new forms of governance have to be even more aware of the challenge of this environment. There is not only an old system with cracks in its walls and some fresh green but there is heavy weather where power rivalries, multiple crises and constantly emerging new issues are threatening good willing cooperation.

It’s important - I would even say that it is indispensable - to have a vision and dreams and to be open and optimistic. However, if important things are at stake, like peace on earth or the survival of humanity, it is advisable to keep an eye on weaknesses and risks on the way to success. And even if the vast majority of actors is composed of good willing institutions and individuals there may be traps related to the modes of governance and cooperation which can provide free riders with a chance and which in return may even kill any chance of success.

Joint-Decision Traps

The Joint-Decision Trap JDT was identified by the political scientist Fritz Scharpf and published in the scholarly article, Scharpf, Fritz W. (1988). The Joint-Decision Trap. Lessons From German Federalism and European Integration. Public Administration, Vol. 66, No. 2. pp. 239–78.

"The Joint-Decision Trap is understood to be a situation in which there is a tendency for government decisions to be taken at the lowest common denominator in situations where the decision-makers have the ability to veto the proposals."

If you ever wondered why decision-makers in political negotiations tend to limit their commitments below original intentions it may have to do with one of these situations. Analysing such situations and evading possible joint-decision traps is therefore paramount for the problem-solving capacity of political agreements.

The specific analysis of Joint-Decision Traps but also the analysis of forms of interaction in general can be very elaborate and complex. It may include considerations of game theory and, more importantly, it requires full information on the policy environment, institutional context, actors, their orientations and capabilities, constellations, forms of interaction and knowledge on the problems to be addressed. And of course, the complexity grows with the numbers of actors involved and the dynamic of the process. [1]

Joint-Decision Traps in intergovernmental negotiations

To start, let’s begin with the United Nations Security Council. According to the UN Charter, Article 23, the Security Council consists of fifteen UN members: 5 permanent members with veto power and 10 non-permanent members without veto power. This membership makes the case relatively easy to analyse. As soon as there is no unanimity among the five permanent members Russia, USA, China, France and Great Britain any resolution is blocked and trapped. The unanimity requirement for the permanent members of the Council and the frequent power rivalries among these members makes the Council a classic case for a joint-decision traps.

The General Assembly of the UN has 193 members and each of the 193 countries represented at the Assembly has one vote with the same weight as the vote of each other country. The Assembly is the main intergovernmental body of the UN. It aims at consensual decision making but it can take also majority decisions. This setting with 193 members seems to be more complex than the Security Council with 5 permanent members but could a decision of the Assembly outvote a decision by the Council? No, because the resolutions and decisions of the General Assembly are - unlike the Security Council - not binding on the UN member states under international law. A decision of the Assembly cannot change or outvote a legally binding decision of the Council or the fact that one permanent member of the Council stops a Council draft decision by using its veto. This link between General Assembly and Council further increases the weight of the Security Council in the institutional setting of the UN and in return the risk that problems are not solved because they get stuck in a joint decision trap. And this context has major consequences for sustainable development cooperation. As a resolution of the General Assembly the Agenda 2030 for Sustainable Development Goals of September 2015 is also not binding on the UN member states under international law. This means: No country can be sued if it doesn't achieve the goals. Instead, cooperation and consensus finding are without alternative.

Joint-Decision Traps in networked multilateralism and a fluid mix of governance solutions

Efforts to reform the UN charter, intergovernmental bodies, their membership and competences failed so far and with unanimity and veto power being major generators of UN gridlocks governments, stakeholders and analysts started locking for other modes of governance to prevent the trap. Such efforts met with calls from local authorities, stakeholders from civil society and private sector to get a voice in international decision making on those subjects which affect them.

If you ever attended a major conference of an international organization you may know the governance mode which developed in response to the above situation: Yes, there are the closed meetings of intergovernmental bodies. They are usually attended only by delegates from member states. However, in addition to these there are often hundreds or even thousands of other participants from governmental authorities, civil society, academia and private sector who convene in parallel at side events or other meetings and conferences. This can sum up to twenty or sometimes thirty thousand participants as in case of the Habitat III Conference in Quito, Ecuador in 2016. The 2015 United Nations Climate Change Conference, COP 21 was held in Paris France, from 30 November to 12 December 2015. 195 national delegations attended the conference but there were also numerous non state-parties who organized side events.

Under Corona conditions such events take place mainly virtually and looking at the CO ² emissions of participants travelling across the globe one may question the value added of thousands of participants without a role in the decision-making. However, while there is usually no direct impact of side events on official intergovernmental meetings, these extended frameworks generate an indirect impact on negotiations. And maybe more importantly, each of these events is a market of ideas and a demonstration of strength of non-governmental participants. Still it remains somewhat opaque what drives thousands to meet near the venue of conferences where they have no voice in the decision-making. Therefore, this emerging trend needs closer attention.

Chatham House’s insights into the emerging practice of practical pathways for embedding inclusivity into global governance arrangements

International affairs institutions including Chatham House and the German Institute for International and Security Affairs (Stiftung Wissenschaft und Politik, SWP) are among those who pay more attention to analyse emerging practices of a more informal engagement of state and non-state actors striving to make global governance more inclusive.

Marianne Beisheim and Felicitas Fritzsche at the SWP analyse the UN Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) and the High Level Political Forum (HLPF) Review 2021 and discuss the future of a ‘networked multilateralism’. At the centre of their approach are ECOSOC and HLPF as anchor points (Andockstellen) for non-state actors to join the dialogue of ECOSOC and HLPF. Already today, ECOSOC is in charge of cooperation with non-state actors but according to SWP partnership platforms with non-state actors could be filled with a lot more life. The SWP authors regard this as a pragmatic step to build bridges with decision-makers from national governments and non-state actors because the later are needed to achieve internationally agreed goals. [2]

Chatham House on its part organised in 2020 a series of roundtables of its ‘Inclusive Governance Initiative’. Based on the roundtables Chatham House published in April 2021 a very interesting Synthesis Paper ‘Reflections in building more inclusive global governance’. At its centre it presents ten cross-cutting insights on state governance and emerging practice. [3]

[1] Scharpf, Fritz W. (2006): The Joint-Decision Trap Revisited. In Journal of Common Market Studies 44(4), 845 – 864.

Scharpf, F.W. (1997) Games real Actors Play. Actor-Centred Institutionalism in Policy Research (Boulder, Co: Westview).

[2] ECOSOC und HLPF Review 2021: Bau- und Andockstellen für einen vernetzten Multilateralismus. Beisheim, Marianne und Felicitas Fritzsche, in: Baustellen des Multilateralismus. Global Policy Forum, Bonn, Seiten 32 -43. www.globalpolicyforum.org.

[3] https://www.chathamhouse.org/2021/04/reflections-building-more-inclusive-global-governance?utm_source=linkedin.com&utm_medium=paid-social&utm_campaign=lnkd-inclusive-governance-intl-affairs&utm_content=linkd-pr-c1 – accessed on 17 May 2021

Chatham House’s Ten Insights on State Governance and Emerging Practice

1. Agency has become more dispersed, but the power for transformational change at a global level still predominately lies in the hands of states

- States remain the anchor of the international system.

- International organizations are built on member state charters and can only push systemized global governance as far as states are willing to go.

- Global coalition-building is still largely driven by traditional state-to-state diplomacy.

2. Multilateral institutions provide a unique platform for developing nations, advocates/champions of particular issues and non-state-actors to have a voice.

- (…)

3. Governments and international organizations recognize the growing strength if nonstate actors, but inclusion means more than just creating a ‘larger tent’.

- (…)

4. Multilateral organizations may face a trust deficit, but so do multi-stakeholder initiatives

- Inclusive governance is not about how to have everyone at the table. It is about having the right mix.

- Stakeholders recognize when engagement is superficial.

- Outcomes depend on a clear purpose. A lack of outcomes affects stakeholder participation.

- Multi-stakeholder processes are susceptible to challenges associated with elitism, power imbalances and the influence of money.

- The speed and agility of non-governmental stakeholders can be assets.

- Inclusivity projects gain credibility by engaging early and often, throughout the policy life cycle.

- Multi-stakeholder initiatives can widen fissures and inequities.

5. Transparency should be a priority when rebooting global governance. It is not a principle. Data, open access and citizen action can create new opportunities.

- (…)

6. Plurilateral, regional and ‘minilateral’ governance solutions have become popular alternatives to multilateral gridlock.

- (…)

7. Subnational arrangements can be resource to bring global governance closer to people and an asset in the implementation of global agreements.

- (…)

8. Youth inclusion needs to shift from listening mode to policy participation. Global challenges demand an intergenerational perspective.

- (…)

9. Capacity-building is an effective means to cultivate more inclusive global governance.

- (…)

10. Rapidly evolving global issues will require a fluid mix of governance solutions. It is the only way to keep pace with the complex challenges of today’s world. But existing global rules and law still have a role.

- (…)

The paper by Chatham House and especially the ten insights acknowledge the search for alternatives to multilaterale gridlocks. It also includes indications of possible joint-decision traps e.g. by pointing to trust deficits of multi-stakeholder initiatives. However, the paper but doesn't address the risk of running into a joint-decision trap. Neither Chatham House nor SWP propose new structures or formal competences for local authorities and other non-state stakeholders in decision-making. Instead, they call for ‘networked multilateralism’ as proposed by SWP or a ‘fluid mix of governance solutions’ as outlined and discussed by Chatham House.

The papers by Chatham House and SWP are very inspiring and solution oriented. However, would their pragmatic and incremental approach have a chance to revitalize multilateralism and to overcome great-power rivalries?

Yes, to follow their or similar approaches certainly would have the advantage that actors are only loosely coupled, more freely in their action and there seems to be nobody with a veto power. But is this enough to exclude a joint decision trap? No, because parties can be trapped in both, a too tight and also in a too loose coupling of actors and constellations.

I had the privilege to analyse the latter case of loose coupling in my PhD thesis about multi-stakeholder cooperation in context of the European Union Community Initiative Programme INTERREG IIC CADSES in Central and South-eastern Europe. [ 1] In this case cooperation began with a honeymoon of a purely informal cooperation which could be described as ‘networked multilateralism’ or a ‘fluid mix of governance solutions’. It emerged out of the situation after the fall of the iron curtain and the end of the Soviet Union in the 1990s. Governmental systems in Central, Eastern and South-eastern Europe were in transformation. The old structures were already broken but the new onese not yet established. It was a time with lots of optimism and energy. New forms of cooperation were explored with freedom following approaches like trial and error. Everybody looked for cooperation and nobody asked for a closer and more formalised cooperation and so all kinds of informal cooperation mushroomed.

The downside was this: Without formalising cooperation in a cumulative standard of acquired rights (in case of the EU this is called Acquis Communautaire ) all fluid forms have to be reconfirmed or even re-negotiated each time you want to do something together. And you always have to consider emerging issues, changes in the actor constellation and institutional setting. With new governments established and new interests formulated all across Central and Eastern Europe and in face of several successive wars on the Western Balkans this honey moon soon reached its limits. It was inspiring and creative but it didn’t solve pending problems.

In a next step EU funding programmes like the Community Initiative INTERREG in cooperation with EU external relation interventions like PHARE and TACIS for Eastern neighbours brought funds. Shortly after the Eastern enlargement of the EU applied the Acquis Communautaire in new member states. Unfortunately, all this was done in a hurry and so they haven’t used the honeymoon of their early cooperation to discuss and agree on political principles and challenges. EU standards were more or less helicoptered to the East.

And no surprise, today countries like Hungary and Poland struggle with some principles of democracy and rule of law of the EU. It isn’t yet sufficiently analysed by research but I wouldn’t be surprised if the informal networking approach and the fluid mix of governance solutions of the early years contributed to the joint-decision trap member states are now confronted with: their need to agree but don't share the same basic values. This might have been prevented by a more thorough discussion of the acquis within the countries applying for membership. To omit this was a hands-on approach to foster european cooperation but it also was a bit naive.

[1] Graute, Ulrich, 2004: Politikverflechtung in der Politikverflechtungsfalle. Kooperation im Mehrebenensystem der Europäischen Raumentwicklungspolitik, Raumforschung und Raumordnung, Heft 1, 62. Jahrgang, Köln: Carl Heymanns Verlag, 18-26. Graute, Ulrich, 2002: ESDP and INTERREG II C – applying an informal policy of the Member States with help of a formal intervention of the Community, in: Borislav Stojkov: Danubian and other Planning Issues. University of Belgrade, 2002, Belgrade, 1-16. Graute, Ulrich, 2002: Kooperation in der Europäischen Raumentwicklungspolitik – Mehrebenen-kooperation in komplexen Politikprozessen analysiert am Beispiel der Formulierung und Implementierung einer Politik zur integrierten Entwicklung des europäischen Raums. IÖR-Schriften 34, 2002, Dresden: IÖR, 306, ISBN 3-933053-16-1.

Avoiding Joint-Decision Traps in International Cooperation for Sustainable Development

Certainly, it would be helpful if international cooperation could prevent the risk of running into joint-decision traps - be they due to a too loose or too tight coupling. This is not an argument against networked multilateralism and a fluid mix of governance solutions but they shouldn’t be seen simply as an escape from a gridlock. Instead, they should be used strategically as opportunity to search for forms of governance which are reliable, support problem-solving and are able to rebalance international cooperation. Otherwise, they turn into a lost opportunity and we have no time and opportunity to loose.

There is no simple formula on how to avoid joint-decision traps but a mix of practice experience, learning from past experience, intensifying research and capacity building can help to make new forms of governance solutions resilient enough so that they can succeed in an environment of vetted interests and power rivalry:

Practice, practice, practice : More practical experience is needed in applying emerging forms of networked multilateralism and a mix of fluid forms of governance solutions. With more practice experience it is likely that the understanding will grow on how to strategically use emerging practical pathways for problem solving.

Learning from past experience : Governance is not in its infancy. Instead, whenever countries and societies were in transition, e.g. after war, revolution or at the end of colonization, new forms of governance were explored. This rich experience of transition periods should be analysed and lessons to be learned should be identified.

Research : While the world is investing heavily in information technology and artificial intelligence its research, infrastructure and equipment many governments even reduce investments in social science. Instead, with a growing world population we also need to invest more in social science research. E.g. it needs to be better understood how different governance solutions work in complex constellations with growing numbers of actors in a dynamic policy environment, what is networked multilateralism and what is a suited fluid mix of governance solutions.

Institution and capacity building : For negotiations with civil society and other non-state actors governments need qualified counterparts with a strong representative mandate. It is nt enough that networks of non-state actors call for a seat at the table of decision making. They also must qualify themselves to represent society. Therefore, networks of non-state actors need to further professionalize and become more representative.

The Ministry for the Future

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Tue, 11 May 2021 10:13:18 GMT

It all began with a killer heatwave in India in 2026. It killed 20 million people in two weeks. That’s more than soldiers had died during the entire Second World War. After the heat the world was in shock and searched for a way out. In his novel ‘The Ministry for the Future’, published in October 2020 the American science fiction writer Kim Stanley Robinson tells us the story how a recently established subsidiary body of the Paris Climate Change Agreement (CMA) became the linchpin for that search.

The Ministry for the Future - A new subsidiary body to advocate for the world’s future generations

The Paris Agreement Under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change was adopted by 196 countries at the Conference of Partis COP 21 in Paris, on 12 December 2015 and entered into force on 4 November 2016. Its goal is to limit global warming to well below 2, preferably to 1.5 degrees Celsius, compared to pre-industrial levels. In line with the Agreement’s Article 16, clause 4, the COP “shall make the decisions necessary to promote the Agreement’s effective implementation by establishing subsidiary bodies as deemed necessary for the implementation of the Agreement.” At COP29, held in Bogota, Colombia in 2024 such a subsidiary body was created. The announcement said:

“Be it resolved that a Subsidiary Body authorized by this twenty-ninth Conference of the Parties serving as the meeting of the parties to the Paris Climate Agreement (CMA) is hereby established, to work with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and all the agencies of the United Nations, and all the governments signatory to the Paris Agreement, to advocate for the world’s future generations of citizens, whose rights, as defined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, are as valid as our won. This new Subsidiary Body is furthermore charged with defending all living creatures present and future who cannot speak for themselves, by promoting their legal standing and physical protection.”

The new agency was established in Zurich, Switzerland, in January of 2025 and the media nicknamed it “the Ministry for the Future”.

Really? A ‘subsidiary’ body to defend all living creature

The heatwave in India showed to the world the dramatic situation of the world vice versa climate change. And Robinson as author apparently thinks that such drama is a necessary precondition to trigger change.

And what kind of change? It is somewhat typical what happens at the world stage. It’s not that courageous world leaders would take the leader and launch a super big programme. No, while being shocked by the heat wave the world shifts all its attention to international cooperation, governance and management searching for a solution. And that is why I discuss the book in my governance blog ‘With burning patience’.

The team at the ministry analyses and concludes that

”Eleven policies would get it done, they all told her (note: her being Mary the head of the ministry). Carbon pricing, industry efficiency standards, land use policies, industrial process emissions regulations, complementary power sector policies, renewable portfolio standards, building codes and appliance standards, fuel economy standards, better urban transport, vehicle electrification, and feebates, which was to say carbon taxes passed back through to consumers. In essence: laws; Regulatory laws, already written and ready to go.” (page 251)

Really there seem to be no mysteries, in either the nature of the problem or the solution.

“And yet it’s not happening.” Mary observed.

Systemic solutions and Robin Hood activism

The book in its 106 chapters and on its 565 pages circles around the struggle of the ministry to generate a meaningful impact on the climate crises.

As author Robinson takes the freedom to blend fact and fiction in a remarkable narrative around climate crisis. In more than 100 often very short chapters Robinson provides a lot of technical information but in a way easy to understand for non-economists and non-climate experts. He describes along the story of the novel how economists externalize the future value of resources out of their equation about what is economically valuable today. He describes black wings as illegal sub-entities of public organization which do the dirty work of killing adversaries. And he goes to the level of individuals by discussing the impact of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD).

Well, not everybody will like all activities described: Groups called Children of Kali, Gaia’s Shock Troops, and others knock off selective wealthy people, target fossil fuel-burning transport, attack thermal power stations, calling it the War for the Earth. Hackers in an unknown location, are doing their bit to disrupt the systems that keep the global financial machine ticking. [1]

How may the story end?

I haven’t finished the novel yet. It is suspenseful but due to the big load of technical information it doesn’t always feel like a novel. Therefore, it might be helpful to read it chapter by chapter and let the textbox passages sink before going on reading.

Of course, I am looking forward to read how the book will end.

It might end like in a romantic story: Two fellows from antagonistic countries who are not allowed to fraternize fall in love and it’s them who hold the key in their hands on how to solve life’s persistent questions. Well, but the world is too complex for a simple romantic solution. So, it is more likely that there is an ongoing struggle dealing with complex and dynamic problems and the governance of multi actor constellations where actors have different capabilities, interests, constellations and modes of interaction. I don’t expect that the novel will provide a happy ending but I would be surprised if it doesn’t end with signs of hope and plenty of inspiration. The rest is in any way up to us to deliver.

[1] Read the book review by Ashish Kothari

https://www.firstpost.com/india/in-ministry-for-the-future-kim-stanley-robinson-blends-fact-and-fiction-in-a-remarkable-narrative-around-climate-crisis-9438421.html

In Ministry for the Future, Kim Stanley Robinson blends fact and fiction in a remarkable narrative around climate crisis

It’s a roller coaster of a book, one of the most significant pieces of fiction on the climate and ecological crises thus far and must be read by all those in any position to act on what is clearly humanity’s biggest challenge. Mongabay- India March 19, 2021 15:19:37 IST https://www.firstpost.com/author/mongabay-india

Please, get your copy of the book from your trusted book seller near your home, e.g. Book Culture in New York on 112 ^th Street (near Columbia University) or Dussmann on Friedrichstraße i n Berlin where I found the book.

The Paris Agreement to fight climate change (UNFCC) and the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development cannot exist without each other

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Fri, 23 Apr 2021 14:25:31 GMT

The Paris Agreement and the 2030 Agenda

The Paris Agreement (UNFCC) and the UN 2030 Agenda were both adopted in 2015 but represent two different types of international agreements:

The Paris Agreement aims at limiting global warming to well below 2, preferably to 1.5 degrees Celsius, compared to pre-industrial levels. The Paris Agreement is a legally binding international treaty on climate change.
The 2030 Agenda with its 17 Sustainable Development Goals and principles like the one to leave no one behind is a lot more ambitious and complex. Countries are expected to take ownership and establish a national framework for achieving the 17 Goals. However, the SDGs are not legally binding.

Also, the Paris Agreement and the Agenda 2030 work in two distinctively different ways:

The Paris Agreement requires economic and social transformation , based on the best available science and plans for climate action known as nationally determined contributions (NDCs) . The Paris Agreement works on a 5- year cycle of increasingly ambitious climate action carried out by countries aiming at reducing greenhouse gas emissions and building resilience to adapt to the impacts of rising temperatures.
The 2030 Agenda also shall be implemented by all countries and all stakeholders, acting in collaborative partnership. Part of the means of implementation were agreed at the Third International Conference on Financing for Development, held in Addis Ababa from 13-16 July 2015. A UN High-Level Political Forum on Sustainable Development is responsible to monitor the implementation and recommend modifications. However, the implementation mechanism is compared to the Paris Agreement is rather weak. Probably in awareness of this the Agenda 2030 includes as SDG 17 the goal to strengthen the means of implementation and revitalize the global partnership for sustainable development.

With its clear goal to limit global warming and its legally binding status the Paris Agreement seems to be more appealing and implementable while many get lost between the 17 SDG with their 176 targets to be translated into national plans and activities. Climate change policies are essentially focusing on emission reduction in relation to policy sectors including electricity, transportation, buildings, industry, agriculture and lands. While this is still a very complex challenge it has a clear focus on emission reduction and this makes seems easier to rally support for.

I could continue analysing differences between Paris Agreement and 2030 Agenda but the purpose of this blog post is to underscore how interdependent they are and that implementing them on two separate paths bears risks for both.

The Leader’s Summit on Climate - almost ignored the SDG [1 ]

As the U.S. Government reenters the global climate fight, President Biden convened the Leader’s Summit on Climate early in his presidency on 22-23 April 2021 to ensure close coordination with key players in the international community at the highest levels of government. The summit aimed at setting the world up for success on multiple fronts to address the climate crisis, including emissions reductions, finance, innovation and job creation, and resilience and adaptation. The theme of the Leader’s Summit is to raise ambitions. Ambitions are indeed raising but “We are not where we have to be” as it was said by the Special Presidential Envoy for Climate John Kerry.

Reentering the global climate fight could have been done in a humbler way after four years of dismissive politics by the former US administration. However, world leaders were so glad that about 40 of them spoke at the summit, making it an important milestone on the road to the UN Climate Change Conference (COP26) in November 2021 in Glasgow.

At the Leaders’ Summit on Climate hosted by the United States on Earth Day, UN Secretary-General, António Guterres said that leaders everywhere must take action. He summarized the challenge as follows:

“First, by building a global coalition for net-zero emissions by mid-century – every country, every region, every city, every company and every industry.

Second, by making this a decade of transformation. All countries – starting with major emitters – should submit new and more ambitious Nationally Determined Contributions for mitigation, adaptation and finance, laying out actions and policies for the next 10 years aligned with a 2050 net-zero pathway.

Third, we need to translate those commitments into concrete, immediate action.

So far, only 18 to 24 per cent of pandemic recovery spending is expected to contribute to mitigating emissions, reducing air pollution or strengthening natural capital.

The trillions of dollars needed for COVID-19 recovery is money we are borrowing from future generations. We cannot use these resources to lock in policies that burden them with a mountain of debt on a broken planet.” [2]

The Climate Change Action cannot be successful without the broader and even more ambitious 2030 Agenda

Although the Secretary General is as much responsible for the Paris Agreement as the 2030 Agenda he didn’t stress the interdependency between the two agreements. This was done by other world leaders. The President of the Russian Federation, Vladimir Putin pointed in his contribution to the fact that the fight against climate change has to be linked with other fundamental challenges including the fight against poverty and to reduce the wealth gap between nations. Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany underscored that the fight against climate change requires a transformation of our entire way of living.

And this is the point: It is not possible to achieve the Paris Agreement aiming at limiting global warming to well below 2, preferably to 1.5 degrees Celsius without transforming the way of life of billions of people on earth.

Therefore, the fight against climate change cannot be fought as if it would be a stand along single issue. In addition, the policy environment is too much loaded with other conflicts and challenges which also require attention on the way to goal achievement:

- The Paris Agreement requires close multilateral cooperation but at the same time the great-power rivalry is between US, China, Russia, Europe and others is risking to drive countries further apart then intensifying cooperation.

- In addition, climate change, the Corona pandemic, inequality in the world affect individuals around the world in very different ways. At the same time their support is needed for climate action.

Therefore, transforming the way billions live without considering other needs and challenges of the people would risk to leave them behind.

The constellation of multiple crises and interests in the world is easily overwhelming for individual citizen and political leaders at the local, national or international level. The global system and societies around the world may even collapse if world leaders focus in future on a single agenda like the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions.

Well, that all sounds dramatic but there is a solution: World leaders should not only intensify Climate Change Action but they should also intensify the implementing of the 2030 Agenda. While the Paris Agreement is about reducing emissions, the agenda is about improving the situation of people and nature. Therefore, the agreements are complimentary.

In addition, Climate action is already a formal part of the 2030 Agenda (SDG 13). Thus, the interdependency of the agreements and their goals is already laid down in the agreements of 2015. It’s just that the different paths which Paris Agreement and 2030 Agenda took in 2015 distracted from their interrelations and interdependency. We just have to revitalize the awareness for the interrelation and interdependency. Indeed, chances for success are likely to be increased for both agreements if Climate Change Action would be better linked with the fight against poverty, pandemic, inequalities and for more resilient cities, life below water and on land, better institutions and international partnership. At the end, the goals of both agreements address the life on one and the same planet earth. Therefore, climate action and leaving no one on the way to an increasing sustainable world are two sides of the same coin.

[1] https://www.state.gov/leaders-summit-on-climate/

[2] https://unfccc.int/news/climate-ambition-builds-at-leaders-summit-on-earth-day

Financing for sustainable development needs institutional and policy reform but the real cost of (un-)sustainable development remain vague

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Tue, 06 Apr 2021 14:30:21 GMT

Would you mind or do you even like reading reports on financing for sustainable development? It may not be easy especially for non-experts in finances but it certainly can be interesting and revealing. After all, financing for sustainable development doesn't depend on financial experts alone. Everybody interested in sustainable development should keep an eye on finances to assure that all necessary aspects are addressed appropriately. This post is a small contribution to the necessary dialogue on the subject.

Right in time for the Spring Meetings of the World Bank Group the United Nations Inter-agency Task Force on Financing for Development launched the Financing for Sustainable Development Report 2021 (FSDR 2021). The report is a lot about investments, their financing but also the need to improve the enabling environment including the reform of policies and institutions. Financial experts love numbers but what you won’t find in the report are updated estimates on the cost (money, lives and other resources) for both cases, achieving the SDGs by 2030 and non-compliance with the SDGs by that date. So, we still don’t know exactly what is at stake. However, the report calls for immediate action to avoid a lost decade for many.

I mmediate action: Financing sustainable development in times of COVID-19

The Secretary-General of the United Nations states in his foreword that the COVID-19 pandemic has dramatically set back progress on sustainable development, exposing and exacerbating inequalities among peoples and countries. According to the report

“… the focus must remain on containing the pandemic and addressing its socio-economic fallout for all. There is a grave danger of a sharply diverging world—with one group of countries recovering on the back of strong stimulus measures and digital acceleration, and many others sinking deeper into a cycle of poverty, hunger, unsustainable debt and austerity—potentially facing another lost decade of sustainable development and failing to achieve the SDGs. Preventing this scenario must be a foremost priority in global recovery efforts.

The 2021 Financing for Sustainable Development Report of the Inter-agency Task Force focuses on this urgency and calls for:

Meeting ODA commitments and providing fresh concessional financing for developing countries, especially Least developed Countries (LDCs), along with replenishing the capital of Multilateral Development Banks (MDBs) as needed; sustaining a high level of positive net flows at highly concessional terms to International Development Association IDA-eligible countries through a successful replenishment of IDA20; Fully funding the Access to COVID-19 Tools (ACT) Accelerator, to ensure rapid and equitable access to vaccines, diagnostics and therapeutics;
Provision of a new allocation of Special Drawing Rights (along with voluntary use of SDRs of countries in strong external positions to help countries most in need) in support of liquidity for developing countries to fight COVID-19 and its economic/social fallout; an extension of the G20 Debt Service Suspension Initiative as circumstances demand; and debt treatments from official bilateral and commercial creditors for countries with unsustainable debt levels or protracted financing gaps.”

(Source: Financing for Sustainable Development Report 2021, page xiii)

Governance reform: Financing sustainable development requires an institutional and policy reform plus a strengthening of multilateralism

The Secretary-General makes in his foreword an interesting remark on the framework for sustainable development: “Investment alone, however, is not enough. To address the systemic nature of global risks including climate change and pandemics, we must reform our institutional and policy architecture, strengthen multilateralism, and create new platforms and networks for global cooperation.” (page iv)

In chapter 6 on Global governance and policy coherence the report points to the need to increase the coherence and consistency of the international monetary, financial and trading systems: “Building on the Monterrey Consensus, the Addis Agenda calls for coherence across a broader range of policy areas, including investment, development policy, and environment institutions and platforms. The deeper coordination that is now needed covers additional areas, such as tax, competition, and non-economic issues such as climate change, disaster risk, human rights, gender and migration.” (page 154)

In addition, it briefly points to the need that national policy makers ensure a coherent policy mix to achieve the SDGs (page 154). Good governance and accountable institutions are highlighted as key for designing and implementing coherent policies for achieving the SDGs. What that could mean is described for instance in chapter III.G for the field of science, technology, innovation (STI) and capacity-building. According to the report STI development and implementation play an essential role in addressing increasingly complex and unpredictable threats in a globally interdependent world – beyond the immediate COVID-19 pandemic.

In addition, it is stated that diverse fields of scientific knowledge contribute directly and indirectly to building resilient societies. These and other references to non-economic aspects are interesting but they may be selective and not comprehensive. In addition, COVID-19 is an example of an emerging issue which dramatically increases the cost while it has dramatically set back the progress on sustainable development. It would be interesting if and, if yes, future dynamic developments can and are factored in.

The cost: Cost of sustainable development and of doing nothing

Considering the many goals and targets of the interrelated and dynamic web of SDGs it is plausible that it is challenging to estimate the full cost in for the 2030 Agenda implementation. Nonetheless, political decision-making often circles around the cost for planned activities and around the cost of not reacting to needs. Not having an updated estimation of cost risks that needs will be either not addressed at all or that they are not addressed appropriately. And financing for sustainable development becomes merely a matter of trial and error.

There is a tiny little subchapter on ‘the cost of doing nothing’ (page 16). There it is stated e.g. that in human development terms, the “cost on climate change is prohibitive” and that investments in prevention, risk reduction and resilience are a prerequisite for sustainable development (page 17). I like the message that ‘decision-making at all levels must become risk-informed’. However, this chapter is somewhat a lost opportunity because it doesn’t tell the full truth on the cost of doing nothing.

With respect to climate change there is the internationally agreed goal to limit the increase of the temperature on earth by 2 respectively by 1,5 degrees and what that would mean for the climate in the different regions of the world. That’s something governments and the public can talk about. In case of the SDGs there is nothing similar. The SDGs with their targets promise a better life but why isn’t there an estimation of the overall, economic, social and environmental costs for the case of non-compliance? These costs (finances, lives, other resources etc) could be estimated for different possible scenarios but having them would help to imagine what we’re talking about when it comes to SDG implementation and necessary reforms institutional and policy reform.

I recommend reading the report or to scan through and to get a taste of the challenge of financing sustainable development. Maybe you’ll conclude like me that not all answers on pending questions can be expected from financial experts alone. Instead, it needs the contributions by national development experts, urban and rural planners and many other sector experts to get a full picture on costs and financing opportunities. In that case the FSDR 2021 is an excellent starter.

SDG and COVID-19: It’s time again to think big about sustainable development and multilateralism

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Wed, 31 Mar 2021 09:21:59 GMT

Ignoring climate, dept, inequality, corona and other crises doesn’t work anymore

With the change of the US Administration from Trump to Biden a sudden shift in US politics came. Subjects ignored by the old administration (including climate change, inequality the severeness of the corona pandemic) are all of a sudden at the frontline. Not that the USA would have become all of a sudden, a heaven for sustainability and peace-loving politics. No, one should be realistic. What the US is doing is not more than facing the reality as it is: The world including the US is challenged by multiple crises and sooner or later has to face the crises.

The second thing the change from Biden to Trump demonstrated is that one country – even a powerful country like the US – cannot face all perils alone. The return of the Biden administration to the Paris Climate Agreement and Biden’s halting the US withdrawal from the World Health Organization repair mistakes of the old administration but could also mark more general a turning points in the world towards the acknowledgement that the real borders of our life are not national borders but the atmosphere of our planet. Everything within that atmosphere is interrelated and requires cooperation.

It has been acknowledged by the UN and member states, the 2030 Agenda with its 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) is off track and the impact of SARS-COV-2 and its mutations is far from under control. Still we see the majority of countries following old national reflexes and fight on their own. Where there are efforts for coordination as in case of COVID-19 Vaccines Global Access (COVAX) it also shows the challenges to scale up vaccine distribution. The UN Secretary-General calls equitable availability of vaccine doses the biggest moral test for the global community. In a statement the Secretary-General stated:

„Noting that progress on vaccinations has been wildly uneven and unfair, with just 10 countries having administered 75 per cent of all vaccines, he emphasized that more than 130 countries have not received a single dose. “If the virus is allowed to spread like wildfire in the global South, it will mutate again and again,” he warned. “This can prolong the pandemic significantly, enabling the virus to come back to plague the global North.” Recalling the creation of the COVAX facility — the one global tool to procure and deliver vaccines to low- and middle-income countries — he stressed the urgent need for a global vaccination plan to bring together all those with the required power, scientific expertise and production, and financial capacities.” (SC/14418, 17 February 2021)

The situation hasn’t much approved since the statement of 17 February 2021 but the rich countries are staring to learn. In spite of their advantage of better access to vaccination and other precautions taken many of the rich countries entered a new deadly wave of the virus and the so-called ‘South African’, ‘British’ and ‘Brazilian’ mutations of the virus play an important part in it. There is the acknowledgements that new mutations may breed somewhere in the world and there are concerns that such future mutations even may be immune against available vaccines. That would destroy all efforts so far in the fight against the virus. And not even the rich countries are rich enough to permanently finance emergency measures in their own countries. Therefore, I am sure, soon there will be the acknowledgement that no country can win the fight against COVID-19 alone.

So, if I am optimistic, it’s not because I think that all people on earth have an intrinsic motivation in favor of international solidarity and cooperation. Unfortunately, that is not the case. But the facts that egoism may threaten us all and may even destroy life on earth cannot be ignored anymore. It will force world leaders and their countries back on track of a more cooperative approach for problem solving.

In a sense, history is repeating: The foundation of the United Nations wasn’t preceded by a value driven honeymoon but by the aggressions of Germany and Japan during World Word II which forced even antagonistic political systems like the capitalist USA and socialist USSR into a coalition. This is learning from mistakes or trial and error but, never mind, as long as wisdom kicks in early enough.

Reviewing and rebooting the 2030 Agenda

The rediscovery of the 2030 Agenda may take even longer as the cooperation to fight COVID-19 but it will be important to be prepared when the moment comes. Don’t forget: There are vaccines against SARS-COV-2 only because some member states supported basic research since decades and because in early 2020 in several places on earth scientists started searching for a new vaccine. In a similar way it is now necessary to review the way the 2030 Agenda is implemented and to get ready for rebooting the implementation process.

To be clear, we need to stop distractions and lullaby politics where the ambitious 2030 Agenda would be boiled down to a minor program easily to be handled without major efforts. Instead, what is need is a strategy fit for the purpose as stated in the Preamble of the Agenda:

‘ We are determined to take the bold and transformative steps which are urgently needed to shift the world onto a sustainable and resilient path. As we embark on this collective journey, we pledge that no one will be left behind .’

Wow, what impressive words! A call for action to change our world! Instead, today political leaders are distracted by other crises (although – as we know by now – that those other crises are often mutually related in one web) and kick around the 2030 Agenda like an annoying burden. They don’t see that in reality the 2030 Agenda maybe the best golden nugget they have at hand to address the multiple crises with an integrated approach.

Please read the 2030 Agenda and build your own oppinion: https://sdgs.un.org/2030agenda

‘Maybe’ and ‘maybe not’ as driver and as killer of result-based cooperation

That something may be or may not be the outcome of a policy is a normal element in political dialogues and developments. To ask ‘maybe there is an alternative’ can be the beginning of out-of-the-box thinking and innovation. So, it is important to raise questions.

Unfortunately, the ‘maybe – maybe not’ stylistic element in political dialogue is also often used to blur a situation, to prevent taking a firm stance and to keep all options open. The reason for this is not necessarily a bad intention. Sometimes it is defended with the argument that ‘politics is the art of the compromise/possible’ (Prince Otto von Bismarck) where you look for the biggest common denominator which allows to unite all stakeholders. Well, and that is usually somewhere between the extreme positions. However, to confront every firm stance with the position that there ‘maybe’ might be a better alternative can also undermine a clear result-based policy. Of course, different things need to be tried out. We need to develop our capacities because agenda implementation is a necessary learning and transformation process. But the world has to be bold to face global challenges.

We need bold investments in research to improve the knowledge base and to cope with emerging challenges.

We need to support national and local governments to become champions in agenda implementation and goal achievement.

We need to unlock the creativity and energy of all citizens in the world because the challenges are too big for the world leaders alone. Instead, we need all hands on deck.

Risk all - ‘Maybe’ has never won a game

Let me close this post with a reference to the world of sports.

The Football World Championship in 2014 was won by Germany and the decisive scorer was Mario Götze. In memory of him and the achievement a street art mural was produced in Berlin shortly after. The artwork expresses the determination of the goal getter to score the goal during the highly competitive match. Fitting to the expression the mural is titled

Risk all – Maybe has never won a game

Riskier Alles – Vielleicht hat noch nie ein Spiel gewonnen

Wouldn’t it be great to see such a determination in fighting against SARS-Covid-19 and in achieving the United Nations 2030 Agenda with its Sustainable development Goals (SDG)?

Streetart: Mario Götze (2014) at a wall in Berlin-Charlottenburg, picture by Lisa Walther
https://www.die-lisa-walther.de/fotowelt/streetart/hausfassaden-berlin/

Failure to plan is planning to fail – Post 3: Integrity for Sustainable Development

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Wed, 17 Mar 2021 14:58:56 GMT

A plan is a baseline giving orientation and the vision and strategy are among the most consequential elements of planning. Of course, in life nothing goes according to plan. However, without such a baseline where do we start and how do we improve? Therefore, Benjamin Franklin coined the phrase “Failure to plan is planning to fail”. This blog post in two parts does not repeat the broad literature on urban and territorial planning respectively on national development planning. Written during the Corona pandemic and in anticipation of other crises to follow the earlier two parts feature two of common but most consequential deficits (lack of vision and lack of strategy) and how to overcome them. This third part now features the necessary accountability and integrity of sustainable development.

Fun parts and not so funny parts of governing sustainable development

As most things in life sustainable development has its more and its less attractive parts. In the first sustainability program for that I worked in the late 1990s I remember well a subdivision manager from the German Federal Ministry of Construction. After the Steering Committee meeting at which projects had been approved, he approached me saying “Now the interesting part is over”. What he was referring to was that he considered the programme development with visioning, strategy development, appointing managers and allocating funds for projects as the creative part. He added: “Well, the implementation is also important but it is no more that interesting and creative. Everything essential is already laid down in the project document. Thus, it only has to be implemented.” I was just a bit puzzled about the encounter but it should have been an omen to me.

When the 2030 Agenda was launched in 2015 something similar happened. Politicians were very proud on their creative power and ambitious 2030 Agenda with its 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) as it was adopted by the UN General Assembly … and then they too – like the subdivision manager earlier – turned towards other tasks. Of course, others may intervene now and underscore the creativity which unfolds during agenda implementation and goal achievement but we have to note that the attention of political leadership has decreased considerably since 2015. I do assume that developing a coherent implementation structure, defining indicators, raising funds and assuring transparency and accountability of agenda implementation seems to be a lot less sexy than designing new policies.

Purpose of this post is to describe briefly what politicians are missing if they pay not enough attention to #accountability , #transparency and #integrity . A special focus will be put on auditors who could potentially play a key role in building accountability for the SDGs. Overall, by paying more attention to implementation, monitoring and evaluation decision-makers in policy and management could again demonstrate creative power, while, in the opposite case, they would contribute to the failure of the 2030 Agenda.

Financial Integrity for Sustainable Development

The High-Level Panel on International Financial Accountability, Transparency and Integrity for Achieving the 2030 Agenda (FACTI Panel; https://www.factipanel.org/ ) was convened by the 74th President of United Nations General Assembly and the 75th President of the Economic and Social Council on 2 March 2020.

It’s no joke! After launching the 2030 Agenda it took member states of the UN almost five more years to convene the panel.

The Panel is a diverse group of individuals from different backgrounds, experiences and national and regional contexts. It is co-chaired by H.E. Ibrahim Assane Mayaki, former prime minister of Niger, and H.E. Dalia Grybauskaitė, former president of Lithuania. The objective of the FACTI Panel is to contribute to the overall efforts undertaken by member states to implement the ambitious and transformational vision of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. It is mandated to review current challenges and trends related to financial accountability, transparency and integrity, and to make evidence-based recommendations to close remaining gaps in the international system.

In February 2021, the High-Level Panel has launched its report. While at the UN there is much talk about localizing the SDGs, the report puts its focus on national and global governance. In addition, it addresses the situation of citizens. Unfortunately, it doesn't describe responsibilities of local authorities and local stakeholders, or the possible application of instruments like citizen audits in context of #accountability , #transparency and #integrity .

The report does describe the lack of resources which is hampering global progress and that the COVID-19 pandemic has introduced a series of formidable stumbling blocks on top of pre-existing systemic challenges. Governments of developed and developing countries around the world have galvanized into action, undertaking exceptional measures to bring the crisis under control. As a matter of fact, the crisis has sharpened pre-existing divides within and between countries. As tax revenues plummeted alongside the slowdown in economic activity, governments needed to undertake colossal public spending on health and social welfare, which left them reeling from already mounting debt burdens amid insufficient levels of revenue mobilization. A year into the pandemic, the grim trend has only intensified and threatens to reverse hard-won progress in developmental gains. Based on this analysis the report identifies a system problem around financial integrity of the Agenda implementation and calls for a systemic solution:

» The world needs to envision a system of financial integrity for sustainable development.

» Achieving this vision would require concrete actions to ensure that all economic and financial activities conform to rules and standards that are compatible with and contribute to sustainable development.

(FACTI Panel report, page vii; https://www.factipanel.org/ )

The FACTI Panel

“calls for concerted, coordinated international action, and for global measures targeted towards politicians, policy-makers, civil society, as well as the private sector. Reorienting financial flows to promote sustainable development requires a fundamental change in how we operate together. It calls for reinvigorated collective effort to promote transparency by all parties; to catalyse crucial and necessary changes that will help countries finance the ambitious SDGs.” (page 5)

The report proposes a global pact for financial integrity for sustainable development and makes 14 recommendations to free the economy from illicit financial practices and ultimately enable sustainable development for all, everywhere.

Supreme audit institutions as potential key players assuring accountability

In addition to the global pact each member state has to prepare for implementing the SDG. One of the steps the UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs undertook in support of this is the production of the DESA Working Paper No. 157 ‘The role of external audits in enhancing transparency and accountability for the Sustainable Development Goals’. The paper written by Aránzazu Guillán Montero and David Le Blanc (ST/ESA/2019/DWP/157) examines the involvement of supreme audit institutions (SAIs) in auditing the preparedness of governments for SDG implementation.

Source: DESA Working Paper No. 157, page 12.

Source: DESA Working Paper No. 157, page 20.

The subject of auditing SDGs is complex because the 2030 Agenda is not legally binding and since national monitoring efforts are largely left to the discretion of individual countries. However, SAIs are potentially a key player in building accountability. As national accountability institutions, SAIs have a formal mandate to oversee and assess government efforts and to implement the SDGs. In the past, SAIs focused on compliance and financial auditing. Recent efforts in developing standards for SDG auditing further underscore the already ongoing expansion of SAI’s mandates to assess the economy, efficiency and effectiveness of public spending and government performance. While this process is on-going there is no agreed standard for SDG auditing. This is the point where capacity building comes into the play as a pertinent task to support the development and promotion of government preparedness and standards for SDG auditing.

It was one of the most contentious issues during negotiations on the 2030 Agenda how member states should be held accountable for the delivery or progress on the goals. However, in the interest of goal achievement it deems necessary to pick up the old discussion again and to define transparency, accountability and integrity. I am sure that this part is as interesting for governance experts as the agenda development has been. In anyway, the 2030 Agenda is not raisin picking and governance of the agenda must cover the fun parts and the not so funny parts of sustainable development.

Ulrich’s Blog: www.ugraute.de/blog-1

There you find all blog posts from the same series 'Failing to plan is planning to fail':

Stakeholder Engagement in Sustainable Development

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Fri, 12 Mar 2021 10:50:29 GMT

Analysing the quality of stakeholder engagement in implementing the 2030 Agenda

In January 2021 UN DESA and UNDP launched the publication:

What is a ‘Good Practice’? A Framework to analyse the Quality of Stakeholder Engagement in implementation and follow-up of the 2030 Agenda

https://www.undp.org/content/oslo-governance-centre/en/home/library/what-is-good-practice.html - accessed on 5 March 2021

The United Nations 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and its SDGs assigns an important role to stakeholders. In this respect the reports describes:

“ While governments have the main responsibility for implementing the 2030 Agenda, stakeholders from different sectors and at all levels are called on to play different roles in contributing to the 2030 Agenda . The 2030 Agenda highlights two roles that stakeholders can play in particular: holding governments accountable for their actions or lack thereof (e.g., by tracking implementation or engaging in advocacy activities) and making their ‘own contributions’ to implement the SDGs (e.g., by aligning their own actions or by providing services). The latter sometimes happens in close collaboration or even on behalf of governments. In practice, there are additional roles that stakeholders can play, such as providing inputs to policymaking. Some stakeholders will focus on one or the other role and some will play overlapping roles .” (page 2)

It is important to mention that the publication has a focus on the first-mentioned role that stakeholders play: holding their governments to account.

“ The ‘accountability role’ of stakeholders is not only explicit in the narrative of the 2030 Agenda, including its call to ‘Leave No One Behind’. It is also refined and supported by one entire goal: SDG 16, which promotes, inter alia, effective, accountable and transparent institutions (16.6), responsive, inclusive, participatory and representative decision-making (16.7) and access to information and fundamental freedoms (16.10) as well as targets on Peace, Justice and Inclusion across SDGs. SDG 16+ can thus be seen as enabling stakeholders to play their accountability role.” (page 2)

It is a strength of the publication that it draws from five years of experience in implementing the 2030 Agenda. In addition, it includes multiple reference to the Covid-19 pandemic and its impact. This, it provides an up to day analysis of the situation.

The report has a forward-looking approach but doesn’t paint a too rosy picture. In its gap analysis it rightly argues (page 5):

Although the majority of governments report on engaging stakeholders, many struggle to set up and maintain open, inclusive, participatory and transparent processes

Little guidance is available to analyse the quality of stakeholder engagement systematically

The Analytical Framework

The framework is based on key principles of quality stakeholder engagement: inclusion (non-discrimination and accessibility); participation (access to information for engagement and influencing decision-making); and accountability (transparency and responsiveness).

Source: What is a Good Practice’?, UN DESA and UNDP 2020, page 5

The following two pages document the analytical framework for quality stakeholder engagement. It’s important to highlight that the framework proposes for the assessment of the above mentioned three principles and their criteria four level (0-3). Each level stands for a different level of intensity in engaging stakeholders.

The framework is followed by a description of interesting key results of country practices that the framework was tested with.

Also important is the user guide in chapter 5 describing how to apply the framework

Suggestions to further develop the Framework

The framework is an important tool to analyze stakeholder engagement. The levels of increasing intensity of stakeholder engagement allow member states to assess where they stand and what next level they could strive for.

What could be added to the framework is a distinction between voluntary and rights-based stakeholder engagement by implementers. The publications promotes stakeholder engagement as a voluntary and mutually beneficial tool to improve the implementation of 2030 Agenda and SDG.

In practice, in many countries there is a legal framework for stakeholder engagement and it has its own impact on the stakeholder engagement and its intensity. For instance, in democratic societies this begins with the impact citizens gain on planning and development through their rights to vote at local and national levels of governance. In addition, a number of countries have legal tools like, citizen petition and citizen decision which can force the ‘implementer’ (see table above) to act. These could be added to the report.

Maybe most important is that the engagement of those stakeholders who are affected by a planning process e.g. of an infrastructure or other construction projects is formalized in the building and planning codes of many countries. The Framework describes the ‘Influence in decision-making’ under the principle of participation but it describes it simply as

‘Openness to allow stakeholders to provide input, actively participate and have their perspectives considered in decision-making processes. Also refers to openness to explain how substantive inputs have impacted outcomes.’ (page 11)

The umbrella term ‘openness’ doesn’t allow distinguishing between the advantages and disadvantages of different legal frameworks. It avoids discussing the relevance of citizen rights in all those cases where and when the implementer shows no ‘openness' in stakeholder engagement. However, this lack citizen rights in the framework could be removed relatively easily. For example, it should be considered adding a fourth level. This level could indicate as a good practice that the framework of a country is not only ‘open’ to engage citizen if the governments wants that but that specific citizen rights for stakeholder engagement have been stipulated in the legal framework. Such rights may include the right of information, right to be heard and appeal rights.

Measuring your personal success in the spirit of sustainability

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Mon, 22 Feb 2021 18:38:14 GMT

Linking sustainability criteria with your own career development

Source: Pieter Kruger https://www.linkedin.com/posts/e-professor_time-to-reassess-the-definition-of-success-activity-6769246574775173120-ByBs - accessed on 22 February 2021

Recently I worked with Jia Yen Lim, a postgraduate student from Toyohashi University of Technology in Japan. At one point he said how much he is impressed by my profile and experience and then he asked me to learn more about my professional career experiences. That's a difficult question to answer briefly. Therefore, I was happy when I found a post by my colleague Juaneé Cilliers from Sydney who based her post on work by Pieter Kruger. He is a London based clinical psychologist working in elite sport psychology and the chart in the post shows two different models on how success can be measured.

I learned measuring success along the model “Salary and Job Title”. And so, I was happy that my first employment was a well-paid director function right away. However, something was missing and soon I switched to the other model mentioned on the chart as “A Better Measure”. It was not an intentional choice between models. Instead, it developed gradually along with my experience but I am still happy with it.

However, I would like to warn everybody:

Think twice before choosing the presumably “Better Model”.

Here are my reasons:

The two models are both based on the assumption of equal opportunities, i.e. that in both models you earn enough money to make your living. Well, if you have a low wage job, a family to sustain or other high expenditures the second model may turn out being a challenge too big.

‘Liking what you do’ is great but what you like or dislike about a job may change over time. In that case you have three options: a) Keep loving your job in spite of its caveats; b) develop your current job in a way that you fully like it again; or c) you leave it and chose a job you like more. Sounds good but it doesn’t happen by chance. To keep ‘liking what you do’ may require a lot of initiative and perseverance.

Mental health, physical health and free time are also great but they too require constant attention. I do running since more than 30 years but in a way that my knees are still healthy. I can stay a lot of stress but I need my daily walks. Free time? For stress management it is usually best to take a break but sometimes, I experienced, it is better to solve a problem first and that way to remove the reason for the stress. If well done it contributes to your work life balance but again, it’s needs attention.

The fact that you chose for yourself the “Better Measure” doesn’t mean that hiring managers are more likely to hire you. You may get their sympathy for your CV, profile and experience. However, where employers are looking for candidates for a job in a competitive environment they may trust more in a more focussed person following the first model. That's not necessary the better decision but it's based on experience of the past and you have to expect that employers still stick to old paths.

In spite of all the above I am a defender of “A Better Measure”. Certainly, the model focussing on "Salary and Job Title" has the advantage of a clear focus - but life doesn’t have that same focus. The “Better Measure” is not better because it is more simple or easy to implement. The opposite may be the case! However, we have only one life and so I’m happy that I have chosen the more complex model. For me, the switching to the "Better Measure" model increased sustainability in my life.

And that’s it: The second model is better because it is more sustainable.

For more posts see Ulrich’s blog “With burning patience”

https://www.ugraute.de/blog-1

Failure to plan is planning to fail – Post 2: Strategy as precondition for goal achievement

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Thu, 18 Feb 2021 15:32:38 GMT

A plan is a baseline giving orientation and the vision and strategy are among the most consequential elements of planning. Of course, in life nothing goes according to plan. However, without such a baseline where do we start and how do we improve? Therefore, Benjamin Franklin coined the phrase “Failure to plan is planning to fail”. This blog post in two parts does not repeat the broad literature on urban and territorial planning respectively on national development planning. Written during the Corona pandemic and in anticipation of other crises to follow the two parts feature two of common but most consequential deficits (lack of vision and lack of strategy) and how to overcome them.

Failure to plan is planning to fail

Post 2: Strategy as precondition for goal achievement

T he purpose of strategic planning

In distinction from a detailed plan a strategy (from Greek στρατηγία stratēgia, "art of troop leader; office of general, command, generalship") is the general action plan to achieve one or more long-term or overall goals under conditions of uncertainty. It is based on a joint vision and describes strategic themes, goals, quantifiable objectives, tactics and success measures for goal achievement with the resources available. Corporate and military strategies are often not public to prevent the competitor or enemy from taking counteractions. In peaceful international cooperation this is not possible. Instead, where a contribution and own initiative is expected from a large number of stakeholders including member states, UN system entities, governmental and non-governmental stakeholders it is a must that they not only share the same vision but also understand and support the strategy and make their own commitments accordingly.

Many strategies fail because they’re not actually strategies

There are many policy documents in public and private sector including in development cooperation and national, urban and territorial planning that bear the word ‘strategy’ prominently in the title. For decision-makers the term strategy must have something irresistible. It suggests competence, a strategic forward looking and long-sighted approach and leadership – and which decision-maker doesn’t want to demonstrate that?

Unfortunately, where partners take it already easy with developing and committing to a joint vision one shouldn’t be surprised when the same happens with respect to strategy development. In practice, lack of or weak strategies is a phenomenon known in the public and the private sector. Freek Vermeulen (1) analyses the subject in the Harvard Business Review (November 08, 2017) under the self-explanatory title Many Strategies Fail Because They’re Not Actually Strategies. He identified that strategy consultants come in, do their work, and document the new strategy in a PowerPoint presentation and a weighty report. Then some town hall meetings are organized, employees are told to change their behavior, balanced scorecards are reformulated, and budgets are set aside to support initiatives that fit the new strategy. And then … nothing happens. He then further recalls that a real strategy involves a clear set of choices that define what the firm is going to do and what it’s not going to do. Many strategies fail to get implemented, despite the ample efforts of hard-working people, because they do not represent a set of clear choices. With just a collection of goals a so-called strategy does not tell you what you are going to do; all it does is tell you what you hope the outcome will be.

(1) Freek Vermeulen (2017) Many Strategies Fail Because They’re Not Actually Strategies. Harvard Business review. https://hbr.org/2017/11/many-strategies-fail-because-theyre-not-actually-strategies - accessed on 17 February 2021.

Strategic choices for the Agenda 2030 and the New Urban Agenda to recover from crises

The United Nations knows not only one but several agendas aiming at a transformation for sustainable development. For the purpose of this post I analyzed the Agenda 2030 titled Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (A/RES/70/1) and the New Urban Agenda (NUA) (A/RES/71/256). Both documents are impressive as they list numerous ambitious goals. The NUA includes an entire chapter listing transformative commitments and pledges. The Agenda 2030 does the same in the chapter The New Agenda (articles 18 -38). But what is the value of these commitments, acknowledgements and pledges if the implementation remains voluntary, without a vision, strategy and agreement of sanctions in case of non-compliance?

On the positive side, it is to be highlighted that the so-called plans for actions include also descriptions of means of implementation. They do no substitute a strategy. However, the goals, commitments and means of implementation allow in principle to add a vision, i.e. a narrative of our common future, and to develop quantifiable objectives, tactics and success measures for goal achievement with the resources available. Thus, there is a chance to overcome existing deficits.

Climate change, COVID-19 and related economic and social challenges are likely to increase pressure on the UN to review and update own agendas. And as long as the vision and strategy of current agendas are not compelling they are vulnerable. First initiatives have been launched already. For instance, the Doha Forum, in partnership with the Stimson Center’s Just Security 2020 program, released on 30 Nov 2020 its new report: Coping with New and Old Crises: Global and Regional Cooperation in an Age of Epidemic Uncertainty. The report’s analysis and ideas aim to spur greater, and more open, discussion and debate on the role that global governance institutions and novel, public-private partnerships can have in seeking a recovery from the pandemic that is broad-based and durable, equitable, and green. The report is not on how to achieve the Agenda 2030 after the pandemic. Instead, it proposes a new roadmap 2023 with a focus on four newly formulated thematic clusters. Highlight for institutional revitalization is a UN-linked new G20+. (2)

(2) Doha Report https://lnkd.in/dYC8C-M - accessed n 18 February 2021

It's not clear what's the strategy behind the Report and how influential the Doha Report and other initiatives will be. It will depend among others on pandemic and political developments in upcoming months. However, a review, update and even a substantial dismantling of the current agendas is possible in coping with new and old crises. And since decision making in context of the UN can be very slow or even blocked there is also the option that no real decision is taken and officially nothing changes. But since the 2030 Agenda is already off track now review could mean its slow death.

The positive effect of a challenge of the 2030 Agenda would be that the tabling of alternative proposals will generate strategic choices.

For those who invested since 2015 in the implementation of the 2030 Agenda and NUA this is a chance to improve the framework of agenda implementation. In this context, it certainly will be helpful if they make up their case, add a compelling narrative and strategy. All stakeholders could win if the expected dialogue in the coming months would generate a vision, strategy and reliable commitments.

In preparation of this process it also may be helpful if supporters of the 2030 Agenda could better carve out the estimated and other anticipated gains of agenda implementation.

To give an example: National Urban Policies (NUP) and UN-Habitat’s Guidelines of Urban and Territorial Planning (IG-UTP) are already mentioned in the NUA. They aim at better cross sector and multi-level policy coordination to make the best use of limited sources in cities and territories. In principle such means of implementation can be of benefit for the entire 2030 Agenda and in response to COVID-19 and other crises. Better cross sector and multi-level coordination is at the heart of the interrelated web of SDGs. UN-Habitat is offering them on there service list and is ready to do depending of funds available.

The question is: Are such means of implementation really just some tools among many others and one shouldn't bother too much. Or, are these tools raw diamonds with the potential to boost the entire agenda implementation? I cannot give a final answer because nobody is doing a stress test. And without a stress test the real value remains unknown. Imagine, the UN has developped thousands of studies and hundreds of tools. I wonder how many are just sitting on some shelf because they never were assessed from a strategic point of view. The interns, short term staff and consultants who did the bulk work may have left the institution since long with their institutional memory and the managers still in charge are flooded with emerging and ongoing tasks, faced with budget challenges, high staff turnover and since one year also by the pandemic and lockdown. I understand that the Secretary General comes to very drastic descriptions of the situation (see my blog post on the Importance of Vision of 18 February 2021). However, the good thing is that the UN with its staff has still a pretty good institutional memory, shelves full of studies and tools, and with its country and project offices the UN is present throughout the world. It's time to become more strategic, count the assets and demonstrate to the world the UN's strategic value.

For the above mentioned means of implementation this requred that they should be assessed and offert as a stratgic choice. Listed on shopping lists (often called toolbox etc) they are no real strategic choices because the potential cot and benefits of their implementation are not yet well analysed and estimated. Yes, decision makers e.g. from national or local governments like project shopping lists to pick from and they tend to take offers backed by donor funding. This is the way much of traditional development cooperation works. A more modern approach would be that the UN and other international organizations (being aware of the potential value of their tools and services) explain to member states and other partners what's potentially in it if they use the tools, approaches and services. For instance, how much more effective and efficient a government could deliver services if they would follow principles of integrated and multi-level planning. This would give them an idea on cost and benefits and on the own commitment they would have to make. Yes, and only now they would have a strategic choice.

Now look again at the many 'We commit' phrases in the 2030 Agenda and NUA and imagine member states would reconfirm them based on a strategy with strategic choices. It might generate a much more realistic but not necessarily less ambitious agenda. It's just that the vision, strategy and related strategic choices would make commitments easier.

_____

If you have any questions, comments or a request for advisory services please contact Ulrich Graute via ulrich.graute@ugraute.de

All posts on the subject Failure to plan is planning to fail will be available on the blog “With burning patience”: https://www.ugraute.de/blog-1

Failure to plan is planning to fail – Post 1: The importance of vision

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Thu, 18 Feb 2021 15:32:34 GMT

A plan is a baseline giving orientation and the vision and strategy are among the most consequential elements of planning. Of course, in life nothing goes according to plan. However, without such a baseline where do we start and how do we improve? Therefore, Benjamin Franklin coined the phrase “Failure to plan is planning to fail”. This blog post in two parts does not repeat the broad literature on urban and territorial planning respectively on national development planning. Written during the Corona pandemic and in anticipation of other crises to follow the two parts feature two of common but most consequential deficits (lack of vision and lack of strategy) and how to overcome them.

Failure to plan is planning to fail

Post 1: The importance of vision

According to John Graham a vision is a mental picture of the result you want to achieve. It should be a picture so clear and strong that it will help make that result real. A vision is not a vague wish or dream or hope. It’s a picture of the real results of real efforts. It comes from the future and informs and energizes the present. A vision inspires action, is a practical guide for creating plans, setting goals and objectives, making decisions, and coordinating and evaluating the work on any project, large or small. A vision helps to keep organizations and groups focused and together; especially with complex projects and stressful tomes. An example for an outstanding vision is the Preamble of the Charter of the United Nations.

John Graham: Life on the edge. #5 – The importance of vision. https://www.johngraham.org/coach/5-the-importance-of-vision - accessed n 18 February 2021.

The Vision of the United Nations:

Preamble of the Charter of the United Nations

WE THE PEOPLES OF THE UNITED NATIONS DETERMINED

to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind, and
to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small, and
to establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained, and
to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom,

AND FOR THESE ENDS

to practice tolerance and live together in peace with one another as good neighbours, and
to unite our strength to maintain international peace and security, and
to ensure, by the acceptance of principles and the institution of methods, that armed force shall not be used, save in the common interest, and
to employ international machinery for the promotion of the economic and social advancement of all peoples,

HAVE RESOLVED TO COMBINE OUR EFFORTS TO ACCOMPLISH THESE AIMS

Accordingly, our respective Governments, through representatives assembled in the city of San Francisco, who have exhibited their full powers found to be in good and due form, have agreed to the present Charter of the United Nations and do hereby establish an international organization to be known as the United Nations.

Source: UN Charter https://www.un.org/en/charter-united-nations/ - accessed on 18 February 2021

What happens if you skip the vision? I remember a project were mayors and representatives from academia envisioned a joint network. They took it easy and didn’t bother specifying their expectations. Well, after approval of the project it went into a year of crisis because it turned out that they had different ideas about the purpose of the network: Cities thought more about the ‘net’ and that they would like to meet once or twice a year for exchange. Representatives of academia thought more about ‘work’ and that they hoped for an intensive and on-going exchange of data and information as basis of research work. The missing of a joined vision for their network almost killed the project right from the beginning. So, be it a small or large project it’s always better to take the time to develop a vision and use it as the common basis for developing a policy, programme or project.

The need for a vision as narrative of our future

The charter of the UN is still valid and inspiring. However, the world is currently facing a series of crises which the founders of the UN didn’t have in mind in 1945. Today, governance models and approaches of the UN and other international, national and local level are struggling to adapt to emerging challenges. At the same time the resources of our common earth are exploited. It will be necessary to establish a new development model that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. Yes, yes, that’s the old message of the 1987 Brundtland report ´Our Common Future’. It is still true but, unfortunately, we still not living up to it.

The 2030 Agenda of the UN as adopted by the member states in September 2015 is ambitious in its title ‘Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development’. However, it has no clear vision in addition to that of the UN Charter. Instead, the 2030 Agenda presents itself as “a plan of action for people planet and prosperity”. Here is a problem: If you aim for nothing less than a ‘transformation of our world’ you need a vision as a narrative of that transformed world. Without that one gets what we currently face: UN, member states and many other stakeholders feel committed to implement the 2030 Agenda but at the same time they struggle to link the action plan adopted in 2015 with the dynamic situation in 2021. And this is because there is no common mental picture of our future which could guide us.

Well, we are living in a technology driven world where computer algorithms know more and more about us and have a growing impact on what we want. In addition, the UN is very keen on formulating targets, indicators for Agenda implementation and puts a strong focus on data collection monitoring. Therefore, one may wonder if computer wouldn’t be better than humans in writing the narrative of our future? No, in distinction to what could be delivered by a set of Algorithm Overlords of the Artificial Intelligence of our computers “we will need a new and compelling narrative of our future, based on an ethical vision of what human beings are and how they should live together. Such a vision, founded as it must be in our moral intuition, is one that only a human can offer or comprehend.” [1]

[1] David Mattin (2020): Designs for Life. In: Matthias Schrader, Volker Martens (Eds.): The Great Redesign. Frameworks for the Future. Hamburg, pp 38-46.

The silence of the lockdown a chance to reflect on the narrative for our future

Midway upon the journey of our life
I found myself within a forest dark,
For the straightforward pathway had been lost.

Dante Alighieri, Devine Comedy (Inferno, Canto 1)

While the world is in lockdown it seems to be calm and quiet. Looking deeper, the ice under the lockdown is thin and below it's neither calm nor quiet. Instead, the world is in turmoil. The pandemic is developing mutants; the economic and social costs are growing every day. In the meantime, the climate crisis and numerous other natural and man-made disasters are waiting to get our full attention. And the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development is off track. To summarize the current deplorable situation of the earth let me just refer to one person who should know. United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres, says everything in his Nelson Mandela Lecture of 18 July 2020 “Tackling the Inequality Pandemic: A New Social Contract for a New Era” [1] . Everything? Well, the Secretary General doesn't speak about own shortcomings of the UN. [2] However, apart from this partial blindness Guterres' speech is an excellent lecture calling for a great redesign in form of a New Social Contract.

[1] https://www.un.org/sg/en/content/sg/statement/2020-07-18/secretary-generals-nelson-mandela-lecture-%E2%80%9Ctackling-the-inequality-pandemic-new-social-contract-for-new-era%E2%80%9D-delivered - accessed on 10 February 2021

[2] Aargauer Zeitung on 10 February 2021: http://ow.ly/9MzN50DwSqe

„More Trouble“: Two scientists look at the Corona development curve („flatten the curve“). What they don't see is the even higher and bigger curve of climate change

Source: Statistically Insignificant www.instagram.com/statisticallycartoon/

After the pandemic “back to normal", a "new normal" or a "never new normal"

Many just hope to return to the "normality" as it was known before Corona. Others look at the deplorable situation as described e.g. by Mr Guterres and call for a "build back better" and a “new normal”. Again, others take a step further and imagine a "new never normal". For instance, Matthias Schrader doesn't see behind the pandemic a new status quo. Instead he sees a continued development process. In his preface to the book The Great Redesign [1] he writes:

"I wish you courage in redesigning the "new never normal", and an eye for the big picture. Because real change requires staying power. Entrepreneurial short-sightedness does not help us. Normally the initial idea is not followed immediately by success but rather by a longer period of patient trial and error and constant improvement to carry through and establish innovation. Stay tuned. It could be great."

Of course, even the normality before the pandemic was marked by innovations and a more or less gradual transformation. To be challenged is good but at the same time the scenario of a “new never normal” is scary. Humans need normality for a balanced life. I doubt that humanity could adapt to a permanent “never new normal” if that would come close to a prolonged chaos. Therefore, a new normal deems preferable but there is no narrative for it yet. And here is the link to the subject of the post: Without a vision or narrative of our future we cannot develop a plan.

Call for a vision as narrative of our future

Dear reader, please use some of your time (in or out of lockdown) to think about what could be a compelling narrative of our future on which we all could agree regardless of political beliefs, religion, race, sex or ethnicity. Please, look also at existing visions. They are not necessarily bad but do they provide a full or only a partial narrative of our future. What’s missing? What should be added?

Everybody could write down or contribute to the vision as a mental model of our future. You might be a monk in a closure, a political leader, a staff member silenced by the conditions of a country or institution or you may be free to follow your own interests only. What matters is your creativity and imagination to produce a compelling narrative of our future as a vision to which everybody can commit. And imagine, with your narrative of our future you might win the Peace or Literature Nobel Prize one day.

Of course, for that vision it will require a strategy to implement it (see part 2 of the blog post).

[1] Matthias Schrader (2020): Redesigning the "New Never Normal". In: Matthias Schrader and Volker Martens (Eds.): The Great Redesign. Frameworks for the Future. Hamburg, pp 9-11.

________

If you have any questions, comments or a request for advisory services please contact Ulrich Graute via ulrich.graute@ugraute.de

All posts on the subject Failure to plan is planning to fail will be available on the blog “With burning patience”: https://www.ugraute.de/blog-1

Complexity Management with Dante Alighieri

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Wed, 03 Feb 2021 14:14:49 GMT

Why do I write about the poet Dante in a blog on international cooperation, governance and management? Like many of us today, Dante was struggling with the life of his time. He even had to go into exile. However, his answer was not a blog post, political campaign or retreat into inner emigration. No, he responded to the challenges of his time by writing with burning patience a masterpiece in poetry. It's now 700 years since his death. So, we are in a Dante Year! And I want to use this blog post to inspire anybody interested in complexity, governance and management to read a bit in the Devine Comedy. It may teach us a lot about what is possible.

At the same time it may help you to stay humble: You think you wrote a great text or book? Superb, now follow Dante and transfer it into a poem and, please, use throughout your entire poem the interlocking three-line rhyme scheme, or the terza rima used by Dante. Certainly, there is a lot we can learn from poetry and poets like Dante.

Dante Alighieri (1265-1321) by Domenico Petralini, 19th Century

Dante Alighieri was born at about 1265 in Florence and died 700 years ago on 14 September 1321 exiled in Ravenna. To get strait to the point: He was a polymath of his time. He was an Italian poet, writer and philosopher. He introduced the local language into literature and thus he helped to establish the modern-day standardized Italian language. The Devine Comedy (Divina Commedia) is highly complex. Its structure and story is summarized in the box below.

The Comedy is no easy reading. If you try to read and enjoy it you may want to use an edition with commentaries explaining the poetry, historical, political, philosophical, theological and the personal context of Dante's life in Florence and later in Ravenna. I used for my first reading an edition with comments in Italian language by Danielle Mattalia and illustrations by Gustave Doré (published by Rizzoli Editore, 1980). For the purpose of this blog post I made use of the DANTE LAB of Dartmouth College. It is very convenient because it is a customizable, digital workspace for scholarly analysis of Dante Alighieri's Divine Comedy (http://dantelab.dartmouth.edu/).

T he Devine Comedy - Structure and story

The Divine Comedy is composed of 14,233 lines that are divided into three cantiche (singular cantica) – Inferno ( Hell ), Purgatorio ( Purgatory ), and Paradiso ( Paradise ) – each consisting of 33 cantos (Italian plural canti). An initial canto, serving as an introduction to the poem and generally considered to be part of the first cantica, brings the total number of cantos to 100. It is generally accepted, however, that the first two cantos serve as a unitary prologue to the entire epic, and that the opening two cantos of each cantica serve as prologues to each of the three cantiche.

The number three is prominent in the work, represented in part by the number of cantiche and their lengths. Additionally, the verse scheme used, terza rima , is hendecasyllabic (lines of eleven syllables), with the lines composing tercets according to the rhyme scheme aba, bcb, cdc, ded, .... The total number of syllables in each tercet is thus 33, the same as the number of cantos in each cantica.

Written in the first person, the poem tells of Dante's journey through the three realms of the dead, lasting from the night before Good Friday to the Wednesday after Easter in the spring of 1300. The Roman poet Virgil guides him through Hell and Purgatory; Beatrice , Dante's ideal woman, guides him through Heaven. Beatrice was a Florentine woman he had met in childhood and admired from afar in the mode of the then-fashionable courtly love tradition, which is highlighted in Dante's earlier work La Vita Nuova .

The structure of the three realms follows a common numerical pattern of 9 plus 1, for a total of 10: 9 circles of the Inferno, followed by Lucifer contained at its bottom; 9 rings of Mount Purgatory, followed by the Garden of Eden crowning its summit; and the 9 celestial bodies of Paradiso, followed by the Empyrean containing the very essence of God. Within each group of 9, 7 elements correspond to a specific moral scheme, subdivided into three subcategories, while 2 others of greater particularity are added to total nine. For example, the seven deadly sins of the Catholic Church that are cleansed in Purgatory are joined by special realms for the late repentant and the excommunicated by the church. The core seven sins within Purgatory correspond to a moral scheme of love perverted, subdivided into three groups corresponding to excessive love ( Lust , Gluttony , Greed ), deficient love ( Sloth ), and malicious love ( Wrath , Envy , Pride ).

In central Italy's political struggle between Guelphs and Ghibellines , Dante was part of the Guelphs, who in general favored the Papacy over the Holy Roman Emperor . Florence's Guelphs split into factions around 1300 – the White Guelphs and the Black Guelphs. Dante was among the White Guelphs who were exiled in 1302 by the Lord-Mayor Cante de' Gabrielli di Gubbio , after troops under Charles of Valois entered the city, at the request of Pope Boniface VIII , who supported the Black Guelphs. This exile, which lasted the rest of Dante's life, shows its influence in many parts of the Comedy, from prophecies of Dante's exile to Dante's views of politics, to the eternal damnation of some of his opponents.

Source: Wikipedia - accessed on 3 February 2021

T he Poem begins with the entry of the poet to hell (Inferno). Just have a look at the structure of this cantica. All dramas of life are featured there or do you missing anything?

https://fmlaster.wordpress.com/2018/04/20/morning-musings-and-dante/

Of course, hell as Dante describes it is nothing funny. It is misterious, heavy, bloody and dark. Whenever I enter a difficult phase in my life I always recall the frist lines of the Devine Comedy (Inferno, Canto 1).

Nel mezzo del cammin di nostra vita
mi ritrovai per una selva oscura,
ché la diritta via era smarrita.

Midway upon the journey of our life
I found myself within a forest dark,
For the straightforward pathway had been lost.

Does that sound familiar to any situation in your life?

And if you understand by now the world as imagined by Dante just write it down but not as a simple blog post but as a poem. And, never forget to write it in the interlocking three-line rhyme scheme, or the terza rima. I am sure Dante, being exiled in Ravenna, wrote the Devine Comedy with burning patience. However, he took about twelve years to write it (ca. 1308-1320). So, take your time too.

Dante entering hell The world with the earth, hell, purgatory and paradise as

Illustration by Gustave Doré imagined by Dante.

https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Divine_Comedy

Social Scienes: Where Crises are Man Made it Needs More Research on Politics, Governance and Management

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Mon, 01 Feb 2021 11:02:48 GMT

Path dependency in research policy may keep us from asking the right questions

When there is a crisis governments and many people love to look for solutions based on research in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) and then they throw money at the implementation of solutions. Often this is the right thing to be done. No surprise, studying and doing research in STEM today often has a higher reputation than studies in the Humanities and Social Sciences. And also no surprise, there is no Nobel Prize in Political Science, History, Sociology, Cultural Studies, Urban and Territorial Planning. What's the problem with this path?

Many crises of our times are caused - in part or in total - due to human impacts. So, shouldn't we invest more in research on the human impacts when we search for solutions? If we stick to that well established path disregarding the Humanities and Social Sciences in comparison to STEM we may generate as the wrong question on man made crises and disasters and prevent ourselves from solving root causes of the man made crises and disasters.

This post has no intention to question STEM research and studies but it raises the question if enough is done in other academic fields. STEM research won't tell us how governance and management should look like after the Corona pandemic? Do we need new and reformed political systems, governance and management mechanisms or is the key to the future just another 'technological revolution'?

This post begins by taking some inspiration from leading thinkers of our time. This shall demonstrate that even leading thinkers and social science struggle a lot to help answering the above questions and that it is still a long way to a better understanding of the world and how we should approach it. Afterwards the post turns to discuss a few pragmatic and down to earth conclusions. At the end the post warns again that the path dependency of contemporary research and development may generate a lot of important technological knowledge and tools. However, it may impact negatively the chances of building back better after the Corona pandemic and other crises.

Technical solutions may be well intended but combined without contextual thinking makes them dysfunctional
Walls, metal barriers and road signs can have useful functions in cities. However, the road sign on the picture required a hole in the wall. The road sign is now only partly visible. In addition, it is placed between the sidewalk with a brand new metal barrier on the side of the wall and not along the street. Now the barrier, the hole in the wall and the road sign don't make traffic any safer but help anybody who wants to climb the wall. (Picture: U. Graute)

F rancis Fukuyama and Jürgen Habermas: What was the normal prior to the pandemic?

The Cold War framed the normal in the decades after World War II. This time was marked by the ideological battles between, on the one side, socialists and their aiming at the "dictatorship of the proletariat" and, on the other side, the democratic systems with their various degrees of "free" and "social" market economy which tried to grow up to its promise of "freedom for all". That ideological battle came to an end in the 1980s with the Chinese economic reform towards a "socialist market economy", the Perestroika in the Soviet Union, the fall of the Iron Curtain. It seemed as if democracy and market economy were the winners but ...not so fast.

In reality, there was no common understanding of a new normal. For instance, the famous American political scientist Francis Fukuyama wrote that humanity has reached "not just ... the passing of a particular period of post-war history, but the end of history as such: That is, the end-point of mankind's ideological evolution and the universalization of Western liberal democracy as the final form of human government." According to him we would be now (i.e. in 2021) 30 years after the end of history. Oh boy! Instead, the German philosopher Jürgen Habermas was more concerned about the new confusing complexity (neue Unübersichtlichkeit) and an utopian energy exhaustion (Erschöpfung utopischer Energie). While the big ideological divide had faded away there was a lot insecurity about the future path of development.

Arundhati Roy: The pandemic as a portal

The pandemic came on us a year ago in early 2020. Many of us still sit at home and in their home offices. Many are bored at the same time depressed by the lockdown and wonder with burning patience what comes after the pandemic. Will there be other crises and can we strengthen the resilience of our societies and world? On 3 April 2020, the Indian novelist Arundhati Roy published in the Financial Times an article titled 'The pandemic is a portal' :

"Whatever it is, coronavirus has made the mighty kneel and brought the world to a halt like nothing else could. Our minds are still racing back and forth, longing for a return to “normality”, trying to stitch our future to our past and refusing to acknowledge the rupture. But the rupture exists. And in the midst of this terrible despair, it offers us a chance to rethink the doomsday machine we have built for ourselves. Nothing could be worse than a return to normality.

Historically, pandemics have forced humans to break with the past and imagine their world anew. This one is no different. It is a portal, a gateway between one world and the next.

We can choose to walk through it, dragging the carcasses of our prejudice and hatred, our avarice, our data banks and dead ideas, our dead rivers and smoky skies behind us. Or we can walk through lightly, with little luggage, ready to imagine another world. And ready to fight for it."

Normality after the crises: the risk of mistakes caused by path dependency

The above selection of arguments is selective and not representative. However, it inspires the following reflections:

When Arundhati Roy and others argue against a return to the normality before Corona they should consider that the pre-corona normality was already marked by vibrant discussions and the search for better governance and management of the world, its cities and territories. However, her appeal that there should be no return to that time where we didn't have the solutions in anyway remains valid.

The examples of Fukuyama, Habermas and Roy underscore the struggles even leading thinkers in the humanities and social science have in understanding the often confusing complexity and interrelation of our times. But it is dangerous to turn away from their questions. Instead, the search for answer should be boosted.

Arundhati Roy suggests to imagine another world and to be ready to fight for it. That is complementary to Habermas who complained already in the 1980s about a utopian energy exhaustion. Habermas argues more as the heavy thinker while Roy suggests to " walk through lightly, with little luggage ". If so different persons express that we do not think enough about the frameworks for the future we should consider doing that.

It is interesting, if in these days a virologist expresses the need to intensify research on viruses and the development of vaccines it is likely that governments and pharmaceutics companies throw money after the virologist and urge the boost of research. There is a general tendency in the world to prioritize science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). Instead, nothing similar happens when academic studies of the humanities and social sciences struggle explaining why institutions and individuals fail to better cooperate, govern and manage the world, its countries, cities and territories. Instead, investments in the humanities and social science may be even cut. This preference of STEM compared to social sciences generated a path dependence.

In the current situation but even before the pandemic there were many calls for a digital revolution and the development of Artificial Intelligence (AI). Certainly, there are good arguments to further develop and make better use of information technologies including AI. However, we also may be speeding here our march into the trap of path dependence and neglect research and development of human behaviour and governance for a more sustainable and resilient world.

Path dependence is when the decisions presented to people are dependent on previous decisions or experiences made in the past. For instance, path dependence exists when a feature of the economy is not based on current conditions, but rather has been formed by a sequence of past actions each leading to a distinct outcome. (source: Wikipedia, accessed on 29 January 2021)

The Campaign for Social Science in Great Britain

In the United Kingdom, the Academy of Social Sciences (www.acss.org.uk) - of which I am a Fellow - launched a Campaign for Social Science (campaignforsocialscience.org.uk) as the outward-facing, advocacy voice of the Academy. The Campaign currently works in particular to amplify the voice of social sciences in policy issues affecting all social science disciplines and Higher Education Institutes across the United Kingdom. Campaign activities focus on evidence-led briefings and reports, events and promoting social sciences in the media. The Campaign advocates to inform and influence public policy with social science evidence and promote the benefits of investment in social science education, research and infrastructure. The Campaign is supported by a coalition of universities, learned societies, charities and publishers. In response to COVID-19 the Campaign established a hub showcasing some leading examples of research, think-pieces and policy analysis across the full spectrum of the social sciences which contribute to understanding and tackling the impacts of the coronavirus pandemic on society and economy.

While Great Britain is trying to change the trajectory and put a stronger focus on the Humanities and Social Science to increase the problem solving capacity other countries still following the old path. The big crisis of our times including climate change, pollution, lack of sustainability, the pandemic and conflicts around the world all are either man made or are caused by a strong human impact. How can we just sit and wait for a new vaccine, software, app or AI application if we humans are at least part of the problem? Therefore, we have to become aware of the path dependence of research and development policy, revise and pay more attention to problem solving through the Humanities and Social Sciences.

Proceedings of the 56th ISOCARP World Planning Congress

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Fri, 29 Jan 2021 15:53:16 GMT

The 56th ISOCARP World Planning Congress

The Congress opened its virtual gates last November 2020 and its closing session is scheduled to take place on 4 February 2021, 13:30 - 15:30 CET.

Registration for 56th ISOCARP World Planning Congress will remain open throughout the Virtual Congress, which will run from 8 November 2020 to 4 February 2021. For more information on registration and the programme, please visit the Congress website: doha2020.isocarp.org

The proceedings of the entire congress are available for download here:
https://doha2020.isocarp.org/programme/discussions/183-proceedings
Title              Proceedings of the 56th ISOCARP World Planning Congress
File size        79 MB
Date Added   29 December 2020
ISBN/EAN   978-90-75524-67-3

This publication contains research papers and case study reports presented (and will be presented) during the ISOCARP 2020 Virtual Congress from 8 November 2020 to 4 February 2021. Submissions are categorised alphabetically per track and can be easily accessed through the Paper Index (pp. 34-39) that directly links the title to the actual paper/report within the Proceedings. If you are using Adobe Acrobat reader, you may also easily access and locate a paper through the "Bookmarks" panel in the navigation pane.

Of course, as author of this blog I would like to especially invite you to pay attention to my own paper . It is included to the proceedings :

Ulrich Graute (author)
National urban policies and integrated urban and territorial planning as key facilitators supporting the achievement of SDG and NUA, pp 1526 - 1533
in: Proceedings of the 56th ISOCARP World Planning Congress
Editors: Piotr Lorens and Hangwelani Hope Magidimisha
©ISOCARP 2020
Produced and published by ISOCARP
ISBN/EAN 978-90-75524-67-3

Last but not least, you can find the full recording of the session where I presented my paper following this link:

https://www.ugraute.de/isocarp-urban-policy-forum-2020

Urban and Territorial Policies to Facilitate the Achievement of Internationally Agreed Goals

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Tue, 19 Jan 2021 08:34:50 GMT

Full recording of the ISOCARP Urban Policy Forum

The COVID-19 pandemic on top of other economic, social, environmental and political crisis in 2020 has demonstrated the fragility of our urbanized world. In this situation, urban policy is called to reform urban planning and to better link it with other national and local policies. This is necessary to implement National Urban Policies (NUP) and the International Guidelines on Urban and Territorial Planning (IG-UTP) in support of the Sustainable Development Goals and the New Urban Agenda. Aiming at high quality input and an inspiring discussion ISOCARP invited speakers and discussants from UN-Habitat, OECD, UCLG and TU Delft.

Here you can watch the full recording of the Urban Policy Forum organized as a Special Session at the 56th ISOCARP Virtual World Planning Congress on 10 December 2020.

Programme of the Urban Policy Forum

Co-chairs Ulrich Graute, ISOCARP Scientific Committee (email: ulrich.graute@ugraute.de)

Frank D'hondt, ISOCARP Secretary General (email: secretarygeneral@isocarp.org)

Introduction Ulrich Graute and Frank D'hondt

Keynote 1

National urban policies and integrated urban and territorial planning as key facilitators supporting the achievement of SDG and NUA

Ulrich Graute, International Affairs Consultant

Keynote 2

Global state of NUP and the National Urban Policy Programme

Kibong Lee, UN-Habitat Policy, Legislation and Governance Section, Nairobi

Keynote 3

Implementation of the International Guidelines on Urban and Territorial Planning (IG-UTP)

Laura Petrella, UN-Habitat Chief of Planning, Finance and Economy Section, Nairobi

Discussants

Tadashi Matsumoto, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), Paris

Sara Höflich, United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG), Barcelona

Keynote 4

Reforming planning systems – the linking pin between NUP and IGUTP

Frank D'hondt, Director of the Territorial Capital Institute, Den Haag

Keynote 5

ESPON COMPASS – Comparative Analysis of Territorial Governance and Spatial Planning Systems in Europe (Applied Research 2016-2018 - Final Report)

Vincent Nadin, TU Delft

Keynote 6

NUP - The perspective of infrastructure and economic policy

Marco Kamiya, UN-Habitat Knowledge & Innovation Branch, Nairobi

Round table

The future of an NUP and IGUTP inspired Urban Policy to implement NUA and Agenda 2030

Moderation Frank D'hondt and Ulrich Graute

Discussants All speakers and input from the audience (Q&A)

Closing word: Frank D’hondt, ISOCARP Secretary General

Registration for 56th ISOCARP World Planning Congress will remain open throughout the Virtual Congress, which will run from 8 November 2020 to 4 February 2021. For more information on registration and the programme, please visit the Congress website: doha2020.isocarp.org

Localizing the SDGs: Does the SDG Implementation Require a Reform of the Way the United Nations works? (4/4 posts)

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Thu, 14 Jan 2021 22:04:24 GMT

4. Does localizing SDGs require a reform of the United Nations?

'Social distancing' between the international and local levels hampers SDG localization and achievement

Localizing the SDGs is an important subject for the UN since the launch of the Agenda 2030. Unfortunately, many UN diplomats seem to understand by 'localizing the SDGs' only the monitoring of the extend to which the SDGs are achieved on the ground. In contrast, the responsibility to care about goal achievement on the ground was delegated to the member states. A need for e.g. a (lean) management where coordination across international, national and local levels would be assured was not seen. Thus, while there was much talk at the UN Headquarters about localizing the SDGs there was never the intention to give local authorities a seat at the table where decisions are taken.

Unfortunately and to use a term from the current Corona pandemic, this 'social distancing' between the international level of the UN and the local level prevented an integrated and well coordinated implementation of the Agenda 2030 across all policy levels and countries. In addition, inter-agency cooperation within the UN and with development partners has also still a lot of potential to prove that the work of the UN as One is effective with respect to goal achievement. In return this means, when the Secretary General and the member states deplore now that SDG implementation is off track they complain about something which was caused by their own decision to simply delegate the SDG implementation to member states and to safeguard a social distancing where it doesn't help.

Talking about 'social distancing', it has to be admitted that local stakeholders also preferred to stay away from the political wrestling at the higher policy levels. Over 30,000 people from 167 countries participated at the Habitat III Conference in Quito in 2016. Only 2,000 of them were representatives of local and regional governments and among them were only a few hundred mayors. [1] Strong advocacy for the own cause looks different.

Overall, the need for a proper cooperation, enabling environment and implementation mechanism has been largely underestimated. If this doesn't change it could be that the next UN reform discussion, again, will be driven by stakeholders without a strong local linkage and commitment. Worse, the drama of the Coronavirus pandemic may be used as an umbrella to dismantle the ambitious Agenda 2030 and replace it by other priorities which may be not supportive for a sustainable development. This is not a prognosis but as advisor I am expected to always consider also the worst case.

The commitment of the UN to sustainable development is not laid down in the Charter but it is subject to negotiations

Demands for and discussion on a reform of the UN are on-going since decades and address a possible reform of the Security Council, ECOSOC, financing, development, human rights, transparency, diversity and democracy at the UN. Secretary-General António Guterres himself has made proposals to reform the United Nations for the areas of Development, Management and Peace and Security. [2] Any bigger reform is a major challenge because one cannot do it without touching vested interests of member states. Even partial reforms like a new definition of 'development' and a restructuring of the UN development pillar immediately touch interests of member states, governmental and non-governmental organisation and even of UN staff.

In 1945 the main goal of the UN was to prevent another world war. Since then the membership grew thanks to decolonization. Over the years many new mandates and agencies have been added to the organization. Stimulated by environmental problems in the 1970s a new thinking spread that our one Earth is a closed, finite system and our only home. The UN established the Brundtland Commission in 1983 to help direct the nations of the world towards the goal of sustainable development. The commission published its results in the Brundtland report "Our Common Future" in 1987. This report paved the way to the UN Conference on Environment and Development, also known as the Rio de Janeiro Earth Summit, in 1992. Local development was identified as key to goal achievement and the Local Agenda 21, as one of the concrete outcomes of the Rio Summit triggered worldwide about 6400 local agenda initiatives to mainstream sustainable development. The UN Summit in 2015 with the launch of the Agenda 2030 including the SDG marked a further widening of the scope of the UN. Now, not only the nations and their people but also the cities, the land, oceans and the climate are at the core of the UN. The world is now understood as one home or oikos ( ancient Greek : οἶκος, plural: οἶκοι; English prefix: eco- for ecology and economics ). Unfortunately, (household) there is no common understanding on the management and maintenance this oikos needs, and this puts the entire policy at risk.

[1] https://habitat3.org/the-conference/participants/ (accessed on 14 January 2021)

[2] https://reform.un.org/ (accessed on 13 January 2021)

Global and regional cooperation in an age of epidemic uncertainty

The accumulation of different international crisis and now the Corona pandemic triggers a new reform discussion. Many governmental and non-governmental institutions already joined the dialogue on the future of the UN. For instance, the Doha Forum is a global platform for dialogue, bringing together leaders in policy to build innovative and action driven networks. Strategic partners include Chatham House, European Council of Foreign Relations, International Crisis House and the Munich Security Conference. [1] And there is the Stimson Center in Washington D.C.. It currently implements a Just Security 2020 program that "aims to build a more capable United Nations, strengthen other global institutions to better cope with existing and emerging global challenges, and promoting multilateral approaches to international problems." The Doha Forum, in partnership with the Stimson Center’s Just Security 2020 program [2] , released on 30 Nov 2020, the day before the UN Summit on the pandemic a new report: " Coping with New and Old Crises: Global and Regional Cooperation in an Age of Epidemic Uncertainty " [3] . Co-chairs of the Doha Forum are the Deputy Prime Minister of Qatar and the very Gro Harlem Brundtland who chaired in the 1980s the Brundtland Commission.

[1] https://dohaforum.org/about-us (accessed on 13 January 2021)

[2] https://www.stimson.org/project/just-security-2020/ (accessed on 13 January 2021)

[3] https://dohaforum.org/docs/default-source/default-document-library/doha-report-2020-web-version.pdf (accessed on 12 January 2021)

Unfortunately, this new report is less inspirational as the one of 1987. The report’s analysis and ideas aim to spur greater, and more open, discussion and debate on the role that global governance institutions and novel, public-private partnerships can have in seeking a recovery from the pandemic that is broad-based and durable, equitable, and green. The report has no focus on the implementation of the Agenda 2030 after the pandemic. Instead, it proposes a new roadmap 2023 with a focus on four thematic clusters:

Supporting public health, basic human rights, and social protection systems;
Facilitating robust and fair economies through improved capacity development, financing for development, and resilient supply chains; and better, fairer business and life opportunities for entrepreneurs and youth;
Fostering a green recovery through sustainable industry, decarbonisation, and a broader knowledge base for climate action;
Strengthening digital connectivity, infrastructure, and public awareness-raisin.

The Doha Forum also proposes with its report to prepare for September 2023 a World Summit on Inclusive Global Governance and to adopt there a Plan of Action. While the report makes multiple references to the Agenda 2030 it foresees coordination with the HLPF only for summer 2023, i.e. short before the proposed summit. Instead of a close link to the Agenda 2030 the above-mentioned thematic clusters talk about 'sustainable industry', 'broader knowledge base for climate action', 'basic human rights' and 'resilient supply chains'. And the highlight under the subject institutional revitalization is a UN-linked new 'G20+'. The terms and their use differ considerably from the Agenda 2030. Is this just semantics or could it be the beginning of a revision of the Agenda 2030 with its SDGs towards a more pragmatic security and economy centred kind of 'UN light'? The question is difficult to be answered from the report alone.

Whatever the underlying motivation, it should be noted that there is a new discussion about the UN, its governance and policies, and it may take an unexpected turn. But even independent of the Doha Forum there are reasons enough to discuss the situation of the Agenda 2030 and localization of SDGs and to prove that

The Agenda 2030 can be put back on track and
The way the UN operates can be made more effective and efficient by strengthening coordination and participatory elements.

Suggestions for better localizing the SDG and the UN

Member states and UN Secretary General acknowledged even before the Corona pandemic that the Agenda 2030 with the localization and achievement of SDGs is off track. From here it is not too far a way to either dismantle the Agenda completely or to weaken its ambitions e.g. in the name of a COVID-19 recovery programme. Alternatively, the upcoming discussion and transition phase can and should be used to improve the Agenda 2030 by localizing the UN!

What does localizing the UN mean? A world government and world bureaucracy with a kind of a State Planning Committee at the level of the UN that micromanages the world down to the local level? No. I don't have a final definition yet and use the term here as a programmatic expression. Certainly, what is needed is a better and more effective coordination between the UN at the international level and the world below that level. The UN needs to be better informed by the local situation, challenges and opportunities. The most people are at the local level. They are not just the object of UN acitivities. Instead, they should be treated as the sovereign (recall the beginning of the UN Charter: 'We the peoples...'; see also blog post 1). The UN would benefit from going local and providing local authorities a seat at the table where decisions are taken (see blog post 3).

The following suggestions are work in progress for the reader's consideration. The guiding question for their formulation was what can be done within the current UN system to improve localizing the Agenda 2030 and the SDG implementation by improving the work and stakeholder cooperation of the UN itself.

Suggestion 1 Experience: Practice, practice, practice localization of the SDGs

Practice, practice, practice SDG implementation because all experience of practical efforts to implement and achieve goals tell us best what works, what does not and why. Which enabling environment, implementation mechanism, tools and approaches are most effective and what capacities are available or have to be build up? Special emphasis should be put on anything which goes beyond the comfort zone of normal work. This includes initiatives that jointly address several SDGs and targets (e.g. Nexus projects) in a participative, integrative, cross sector, cross border and multilevel manner with diverse sets of stakeholders. Stakeholder should also learn from peer-to-peer exchange and from applying guidance documents, tools, methodologies and data as provided by local, national and international organizations including UN Statistical Committee, UN-Habitat, UNDP, UNECE, ESCAP, World Bank, Cities Alliance, OSCE, UCLG, ICLEI etc.

Suggestion 2 Past experience: Get informed and inspired by past experience including Local Agenda 21

In addition, through an ex-post evaluation or research it would be useful to gain a better understanding about the 6400 Local Agenda 21 initiatives launched during the Rio Process after 1992. What can we learn from their different forms, approaches, performance, failures and achievements? The outcomes could help to identify good and bad practices which could further support current activities to get the Agenda 2030 on track again.

Suggestion 3 Capacity development: Build on growing experience of the Corona pandemic

From own work experience I know that many institutions adapt and amend their on-going programmes and projects in response to the Corona pandemic. In doing so, local authorities around the world are learning how much development and prosperity in their own municipality and territory depends on global cooperation to fight the Corona pandemic. From this understanding of interdependencies to a general intensification of networking and cooperation it is just one step.

Suggestions 4 Advocacy: Boost cooperation and stakeholder networks

Unfortunately, at the level of the UN there is no representative body for all local and other subnational authorities. With the UN as an international organization where member states are represented through their national governments it is likely that dialogue about localizing the SDGs will remain limited and advocacy by local authorities for the needs of local implementation will remain a challenge. In this situation it is even more important that local authorities, professionals etc engage in networks including UCLG, Metropolis, ICLEI, ISOCARP, AESOP etc and support their work as indicated in blog post 2.

Suggestion 5 Advocacy: Don't rely on appeals and underscore the risks and costs of missing the SDG

The document libraries of UN agencies, governmental and non-governmental organizations are full of recommendations like these: Get inspired by these collections of practice examples, these tool boxes, reports and guidelines. That's good! However, if there should be at any time in future an effort to dismantle the Agenda 2030 the appellative type of argumentation may not be sufficient. Instead, it might need a fact-based argumentation why the implementation of the SDG is needed and what would be the cost for the societies if goals won't be achieved. There have been some good efforts in this direction in 2020. For instance, the UN Economist Network for the UN 75th Anniversary presented in September 2020 its report " Shaping the Trends of Our Time ". [1] Its main chapters include one on urbanization. That's progress but more would be needed to prove that a dismantling of the Agenda 2030 from its ambitions would be (financially or otherwise) too costly.

Suggestion 6 Policy coherence: Integrate agendas and strategies at the UN and national levels

The integration and coordination of agendas and strategies is indispensable. Without it policy coherence cannot be assured. Either it is possible to integrate development agendas at the level of international organizations or, if that is not possible, it cannot be expected that parallel agendas are implemented by local stakeholders. The integration of agendas will need both, research and, again, practice, practice, practice.

For the authors of the above-mentioned report " Shaping the Trends of Our Time " it is clear that the UN must play a central role in helping to guide the mega-trends in line with the commitments made in the 2030 Agenda. That requires coordination and integration. Prepared by UN-Habitat the main chapter on urbanization (pp 71-101) discusses trends, patterns and drivers of urbanization. Its recommendations (p 92) highlight national urban policies (NUP) and national development planning (NDP) as providers of a framework for guiding the social, environmental and economic opportunities of sustainable urbanization. With this main chapter the entire UN report underscores the potential of NUP and integrated and participators urban and territorial planning in response to global mega-trends and in achieving the Agenda 2030. It will be necessary to continue the path of coordinating national development planning with national urban and other national spatial policies. In a similar way it will be necessary to better coordinate agenda development at the level of the UN.

Suggestion 7 Management: Prevent bureaucracy through smart interface management

Nothing in my four blog posts on localizing the SDGs is intended to support the idea of a world bureaucracy or any other control system which micromanages all activities in the world. That would be a horror. Instead, I would favour a form of a loose coupling between existing institutions on all policy levels and in all relevant policy sectors. Of course, to be effective and efficient and prevent a new super bureaucracy it requires a smart interface management between policy levels, sectors of policy and stakeholder groups.

[1] https://www.un.org/development/desa/publications/report-of-the-un-economist-network-for-the-un-75th-anniversary-shaping-the-trends-of-our-time.html

------

Note on this series of four blog posts

Localizing the SDGs: Does the SDG Implementation Require a Reform of the Way the United Nations works?

Post 1: The UN in 2015 prepared the SDG but no appropriate enabling environment and implementation mechanism
Post 2: First efforts to localize the SDG between 2015 and 2020

Post 3: Local actors call for a seat at the table of international decision-makers to improve SDG implementation

Post 4: Does localizing SDG require a reform of the United Nations?

To read all posts of the new blog 'With burning patience' please follow this link

https://www.ugraute.de/blog-1

Localizing the SDGs: Does the SDG Implementation Require a Reform of the Way the United Nations works? (3/4 posts)

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Tue, 12 Jan 2021 22:45:00 GMT

3. Local actors call for a seat at the table of international decision-makers to improve SDG implementation

Local authorities are key to SDG implementation but struggle with their low visibility in inter-governmental dialogues and decision-making

Where is the main work to be expected for implementing the SDG? Cities will have to carry a major if not the main load considering that most of the pollution is generated in urban areas. Not even the life in our oceans can be protected (SDG14) without cities stopping to flush their plastic and other pollutants into the oceans. At the same time, and as described in the first post of this series, local and regional authorities have at the level of the United Nations only an observer role without any decision-making competence.

In 2014 and 2015, I accompanied the Governing Mayor of the Berlin, Michael Müller to attend Habitat III PrepComs in New York and Nairobi and then Habitat III in Quito in 2016. In Germany, the Mayor of Berlin is a high-ranking representative. He has a seat and voting right at the Upper House (Bundesrat). Due to the ranking of the city as a region its Governing Mayor is involved in law making at the national and regional level. In addition, in New York, Nairobi and Quito he acted as Vice President of Metropolis - the global network of major cities and metropolitan areas. In this function he represented more than 140 metropolitan cities or approximately 10 % of the world population. That sounds impressive. However, at the level of UN intergovernmental bodies he was acknowledged just as a non-state actor without diplomatic rank. His slots to speak weren't confirmed until 30 minutes before the meetings began but to keep the chance of speaking on behalf of the cities he had to take the risk of travelling around the world without any guarantee of a speaking right at official meetings. [1]

And the speaking assignments were carefully minced. The first picture below shows in 2014 in New York the overall attendance at the plenary of the first preparatory conference (PrepCom) for Habitat III, the United Nations Conference on Housing and Sustainable Urban Development to be organized in 2016 in Quito. That's where you got visibility. The two following pictures show that the Governing Mayor of Berlin and Vice President of Metropolis got only a small speaking slot at a side event downstairs in a small conference room with less than 25 attendees. There you didn't get much visibility.

... Oh, I can't continue writing this without astonishment ....

Hidden as the event on 16 September 2014 was in the basement of the UN Headquarters it was called "High-Visibility Event". Somebody definitely showed humour.

[1] Ulrich Graute (2016) Local Authorities Acting Globally for Sustainable Development, Regional Studies, 50:11, 1931-1942, DOI: 10.1080/00343404.2016.1161740

Picture 1: PrepCom1 Plenary with approximately 300 participants; picture 2: Berlin's Mayor and other local representatives; picture 3: UN officials including Joan Clos (USG, UN-Habitat) plus Emilia Saiz of UCLG at the 'High visibility' event for mayors-

Ok, but side-lined and hardly visible as the mayor was as a non-state representative he used his speech to propose a strengthening of the role of cities:

"As a representative of METROPOLIS and as Mayor of Berlin, I am convinced that decentralisation and subsidiarity are important principles of governance. Therefore, I agree with the decision to develop these new global goals at an international level and to leave sufficient flexibility for member states to develop their own implementation mechanisms.

But, I am also convinced of the need to recognise local authorities. Decentralisation should go hand in hand with an acknowledgement by the international community of local authorities and their democratically elected representatives.

It is a good tradition that mayors of major cities and other local leaders have a voice at a national level, where urban development and local governance are concerned. And there is no reason to limit their voice to the national level, if urban development is also an international issue - as is the case with the Sustainable Development Goals and Habitat III."

The immediate impact of his speech was limited but the voice of local authorities was slowly getting more attention. When the Governing Mayor attended the second PrepCom for Habitat III in spring 2015 in Nairobi he gave his presentation not in a small room but at a plenary session. This growing recognition was not achieved by him alone but it was an element in the tireless soft but constant advocacy by the Global Taskforce GTF, UCLG, Metropolis, ICLEI and other networks. And now after a few years of slow progress in SDG localizing and implementing it is them again who stimulate the discussion on a stronger role for local authorities within the UN system.

ICLEI's blueprint to enhance UN collaboration with local and regional governments

ICLEI is the association representing 1750 local governments for sustainability. The association is member of the Global Taskforce for Sustainable Development GTF mentioned in the first blog post. Frustrated by the slow progress of SDG localization and the limited role of local authorities therein ICLEI presented in September 2020 the draft of "A blueprint to enhance United Nations collaboration with local and regional governments". [1] With the document the network is calling for an inclusive new generation of multilateralism that addresses COVID-19 pandemic, responds to climate emergency and adopts a new deal for nature:

Local and regional governments must be at the heart of this new United Nations. Multilateralism is only as strong as the sum of its parts, and the participation of cities and regions in global processes – true multilevel participation – ensures that the voices of diverse communities around the world can be heard. A new generation of inclusive multilateralism that fosters and incorporates multilevel collaboration has the potential to strengthen collective global action at a time when it is greatly needed.

The blueprint is composed of four cornerstones for multilateral collaboration. The cornerstones are presented as a holistic approach to an inclusive multilateralism and each cornerstone is one level of interaction under this approach:

1. Global engagement through annual high level consultations with the Chief Executives of the UN System

2. Regional engagement through increased collaboration between the UN Regional Commissions and UN Host Cities

3. National engagement with the UN Country Coordinators through national associations and Local2030 hubs

4. Local engagement, by mobilizing additional resources to champion local and regional governments engaged in the work of the UN

The approach is pragmatically aiming at intensifying communication between the UN system, local governments and their associations including the above mentioned Global Taskforce. The blueprint asks for structural amendments and additional financing for increased collaboration but aims for the near future more at a gradual reform of the existing UN. ICLEI presented this proposal in September 2020 as work in progress. A full proposal is scheduled to be presented for adoption at the ICLEI World Congress on 14-17 April 2021 as well as to the Global Task Force of Local and Regional Governments.

[1] https://talkofthecities.iclei.org/a-blueprint-to-enhance-united-nations-collaboration-with-local-and-regional-governments/

GTF and UCLG: Leapfrogging into the age of a transformative sustainability by making territories and local communities central players in decision-making

The Global Taskforce of Local and Regional Governments (GTF) and United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG) acting as secretariat to the Taskforce took in fall 2020 an extraordinary step: Although involved since years in the nitty-gritty work of UN committees they took a step aside, ignored the current UN system for a moment and envisioned "The Role of Local and Regional Governments in the Future Global Governance of the International System" [1] . The result is refreshing, forward-looking and bold at the same time.

In the introductory chapter Making the Case the authors of the report point to the fact that the current pandemic has shown that our world can change in only a few months and how difficult it is to imagine a world in 5 months from now. And they use this unpredictable future to envision a scenario on their own:

The post COVID-19 pandemic recovery processes will be third and most important moment to determine whether the UN will be able to unite the people once again in harmony with the places and the planet they live on. Our choices will define whether cities and nations will be able to minimize social and economic damages and, at the same time, leapfrog into the age of a transformative sustainability for human societies and the planetary ecosystems that have been striving to nourish over the past couple of decades. (page 7)

The above paragraph is immediately followed by describing what the GTF and UCLG aim at:

We call for a more comprehensive system, one that acknowledges the realities of an urbanized and decentralized world, that puts service provision at the forefront and that takes care of those who take care of us. This can only be done by recognizing cities, territories and local communities as central players in decision-making. The question we are tackling here is the kind of system with the capacity to bring about the transformation that our communities are calling for. (page 7)

The authors imagine a future in which the seat at the global table for cities and regions is guaranteed, securing and enabling an impactful and permanent link between our communities and the world's global institutions. This would put an end to waiting of mayors for a speaking slot. In addition, the authors imagine a shift from an internationally dominated system to one that has cities and territories at the core. All this would reflect a new era of bottom-up and locally appropriate approaches and responses to global challenges. And multilateral organizations would look directly at local and regional governments for appropriate guidance (p. 18). This indeed would put the current UN system upside down.

Bold as the vision is it is envisioned for 2045 only. Thus, it is not a call for an immediate change which would not immediately impact the current Agenda 2030. Taking more time may be a wise decision because the vision is not a blueprint for implementation. It is modern vision as it addresses most of the current economic, social, environmental and political challenges but it also raises new questions, as will be discussed later in this paper.

The authors imagine a future in which the seat at the global table for cities and regions is guaranteed, securing and enabling an impactful and permanent link between our communities and the world's global institutions. This would put an end to endless waiting of mayors for a speaking slot. In addition, the authors imagine a shift from an internationally dominated system to one that has cities and territories at the core. All this would reflect a new era of bottom-up and locally appropriate approaches and responses to global challenges. And multilateral organizations would look directly at local and regional governments for appropriate guidance (p. 18). This indeed would put the current UN system upside down.

Bold as the vision is it is envisioned for 2045 only. Thus, it is not a call for an immediate change which would not heavily impact the current Agenda 2030. But let's learn from the past. As mentioned in the second post of this series, the fact that the successes and failures of the 6400 Local Agenda 21 initiatives in 183 countries have not been evaluated makes it under Agenda 2030 more difficult to choose the most promising path to localize SDGs. This mistake should not be repeated and therefore the current Agenda 2030 should be continuously monitored, it should be improved wherever possible and the future should be prepared.

In the next and final blog post of the series on 'localizing SDG' to be published later this week and based on the first three posts I want to reflect on what should and could be done within the next years.

[1] https://www.global-taskforce.org/sites/default/files/2020-09/LRGs_Visioning_UN75_Report.pdf - accessed on 24 September 2020

To read all posts of the blog „With burning patience“ follow the link
https://lnkd.in/dssagF w

Localizing the SDGs: Does the SDG Implementation Require a Reform of the Way the United Nations works? (2/4 posts)

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Mon, 11 Jan 2021 09:40:33 GMT

2. Efforts to localize the SDGs (2015 and 2020)

Note on this series of blog posts

The UN Secretary General and others admitted in 2020 that the implementation of the Agenda 2030 and the Sustainable Development Goals SDGs is off track. To put it back on track there is an urgent need to improve and accelerate implementation of SDG. But does that include local action only or does it need also an improved enabling environment and would that require changes in the way the UN and the member states work? Guided by this question I am launching with the next week on my new blog 'With burning patience' a series of four posts on this burning issue of localizing and implementing the SDG.

Post 1: The UN in 2015 prepared the SDG but no appropriate enabling environment and implementation mechanism
Post 2: Efforts to localize the SDG (2015-2020)
Post 3: Local actors call for a seat at the table of international decision-makers to improve SDG implementation (public on 11 Jan 21 or earlier)
Post 4: Does localizing SDG require a reform of the way the United Nations works? (public on 13 Jan 21 or earlier)

To read all posts of the blog 'With burning patience' please follow this link
https://www.ugraute.de/blog-1

The challenge of implementing SDGs with unclear means of implementation

To write about the SDG localization and implementation is not easy. In deed, many national and local SDG policies, programmes and projects have been launched. In addition, there are numerous progress reports. However, the overall picture is mixed and the success at risk. When presenting the Sustainable Development Goals Report in early 2020 the Secretary-General of the United Nations António Guterres summarized the situation as follows:

The Sustainable Development Goals Report 2020 brings together the latest data to show us that, before the COVID-19 pandemic, progress remained uneven and we were not on track to meet the Goals by 2030. Some gains were visible: the share of children and youth out of school had fallen; the incidence of many communicable diseases was in decline; access to safely managed drinking water had improved; and women’s representation in leadership roles was increasing. At the same time, the number of people suffering from food insecurity was on the rise, the natural environment continued to deteriorate at an alarming rate, and dramatic levels of inequality persisted in all regions. Change was still not happening at the speed or scale required. [1]

In spite of available Thematic and SDG Reviews, Voluntary National Reviews (VNR) and complimentary Voluntary Local Reviews delivered it remains difficult to get a full picture of the state of implementation and to outline the ideal enabling environment and procedures to implement the Agenda 2030 and its SDGs.[2] VNR are no independent reports but voluntary reports by national governments. It is the exception that a country, like Germany in 2016, develops its VNR together with civil society and private sector representatives. In case of Germany the country even shared the speaking slot at the High Level Political Forum (HLPF) with civil society. But even here it is still the view of one country and not an independent external monitoring or evaluation. Unfortunately, at the end of the predecessor agendas, i.e. the Millennium Development Goals (MDG) and the Rio Process which followed the UN Conference in Rio de Janeiro in 1992, no thorough evaluation was carried out. Therefore, at the end of MDG and Rio Process in 2015 the member states took their decision to launch the new Agenda 2030 without being informed by a thorough evaluation of MDG and Rio Process. And now in early 2021 we again only now that there is not enough progress but there are no clear recommendation how to change that. Member states still see no need to develop and adopt a result based implementation mechanism for the Agenda 2030. Instead, the implementation was delegated to the member states and its up to member states when they come up with a VNR.

This all is a pity because part of the resolutions of the Rio Conference in 1992 was the Local Agenda 21. 6400 local initiatives in 183 countries have been launched with reference to the Local Agenda 21 aiming at mainstreaming sustainable thinking and action. Not all of them were successful and only few exist until today but for the localization of SDG a thorough evaluation of the Local Agenda initiatives would have been an enormous treasure. Especially a better understanding on how many of them failed would be helpful to set up the implementation structure to localize SDG. [3]

Without a proper implementation structure, necessary resources and monitoring indicators member states and the UN embarked into the implementation phase. Certainly, the Agenda 2030 was good to protect the sovereignty of member states represented by their national governments but the prize for it is that localization and implementation of SDG became in parts a matter of chance. This is a problem because the Agenda 2030 is crucial for the preservation of life on earth and for our future development. Therefore, it doesn't come at a surprise that the UN Secretary General acknowledged that SDG implementation is off track five years after its launch.

Even the member states already in 2019 were no more satisfied and committed, among other things, to:

“Strengthening the high-level political forum; we pledge to carry out an ambitious and effective review of the format and organizational aspects of the high-level political forum and follow-up and review of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development at the global level during the seventy-fourth session of the General Assembly with a view to better addressing gaps in implementation and linking identified challenges with appropriate responses, including on financing, to further strengthen the effective and participatory character of this intergovernmental forum and encourage the peer-learning character of the voluntary national reviews.” [4]

The German Institute for International and Security Affairs suggested in February 2020 that when celebrating the UN’s 75th anniversary, member states should strengthen the HLPF, as the UN’s “home of the SDGs”, ensuring the forum is fit for purpose to support them in their efforts to master the decade of action and delivery. Unfortunately, that statement came about the same time when attention shifted to the Corona pandemic and eventually no reform of the HLPF was adopted at the UN's 75th anniversary summit in September 2020.

But let's not end the blog here with a negative conclusion. Instead, let's indicate some of the guidance materials and tools which were produced either by UN agencies or other stakeholders. They are important as they provide information on what is needed for a successful localization and implementation of SDG. In addition. local stakeholder can use them as guidance when developing their own activities.

[1] United Nations (UN) (2020): The Sustainable Development Goals Report 2020, https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/report/2020/

[2] Compare Voluntary National Reviews Database at https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/vnrs/

Global Environmental Strategies (IGES) (2020): State of Voluntary Local Reviews 2020: Local Action for Global Impact and Achieving the SDGs.

[3] Local Agenda 21 Survey. A Study of Responses by Local Authorities and Their National and International Associations to Agenda 21. ICLEI/UNDPCSD, 1997.

Local Governments’ Response to Agenda 21: Summary Report of Local Agenda 21 Survey with Regional Focus, ICLEI, 2002.

[4] UNGA, Political declaration of the high-level political forum on sustainable development convened under the auspices of the General Assembly (A/RES/74/4) (New York: UN, 15 October 2019), para. 2; Beisheim, Marianne: Reviewing the HLPF’s “format and organizational aspects”– what’s being discussed? Assessing current proposals under debate. German Institute for International and Security Affairs, Working Paper Nr. 1, February 2020.

Guidance Tools to Localize SDGs

The Global Taskforce of Local and Regional Governments (GTF) was set up already in 2013 to bring together and coordinate the joint advocacy work of the major international networks of local governments. GTF includes UCLG, ICLEI, metropolis, CCRE/CEMR, FMDV, C40 Cities, the Global Parliament of mayors and other member networks. The Global Taskforce has participated actively in the SDG and Habitat III processes, and has bought the voices of local leaders to the international debates on financing for development, disaster risk reduction and climate change. Of cause, such a strong network of local authorities has a keen interest in the subject of localizing the SDG.

In 2016 the Global Taskforce in cooperation with UNDP and UN-Habitat launched the Roadmap for Localizing the SDGs aiming to support local and regional governments and other local stakeholders in implementing the 2030 Agenda at local level. The Roadmap reflects the voluntary character of the Agenda 2030 and SDGs. It doesn't provide advise on formal procedures to set up implementing structures, funding provisions and rules for accountability and transparency. Instead, it has a strong supply orientation and appeal character and wants to motivate and provide support to local stakeholders interested in implementing the agenda.

The Roadmap is composed of five parts:
- Awareness-raising
- Advocacy
- Implementation
- Monitoring
- Where do we go from here? as a forward looking final section

As one of the more recently published sources I would like to recommend the 2020 published Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) Guidebook and Toolkit of the Community Foundations of Canada and the Charles Stewart Mott Foundation. It is primarily addressed at the 191 local community foundations in Canada but the toolkit can be inspiring as much for local stakeholders in other countries and contexts.

Important is also the work done with a focus on world regions. To be mentioned is for instance an initiative of PLATFORMA and the Council of European Municipalities and Regions (CEMR). They launched in cooperation with UCLG in July 2020 the study ' THE 2030 AGENDA Through the eyes of local and regional governments ’ association'. [1] Already in November 2008 in Marseille, European Ministers responsible for urban development endorsed the creation of a common European Reference Framework for Sustainable Cities (RFSC). Today RFSC provides a web application to guide cities on their own path towards sustainability (visit www.rfsc.eu).

Also very active is the Asia and Pacific region. I recall reviewing the draft of the publication ' THE FUTURE OF ASIAN & PACIFIC CITIES Transformative Pathways Towards Sustainable Urban Developmen t' published by ESCAP and UN-Habitat in 2019.

The "report is an attempt to reimagine the urban future. It projects a picture of a future that is prosperous, resilient and inclusive. It analyses possibilities for sustainable development by asking what kind of policy options could help cities in the region localize and meet the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development." [2]

The roadmaps, guidebooks, studies and other sources not mentioned here are important even if the enabling environment for SDG implementation is not sufficient. They allow stakeholders at the local level to go ahead and do the local groundwork for a more sustainable development considering the specific context of their municipality and territory. They are all forward looking and aim at fostering efforts to localize SDG.

[1] https://platforma-dev.eu/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/CEMR-PLATFORMA-SDGs-2020-EN-Final.pdf (accessed on 8 January 2021)

[2] https://www.unescap.org/sites/default/d8files/knowledge-products/Future%20of%20AP%20Cities%20Report%

202019.pdf (accessed on 8 January 2021)

International Guidelines on Urban and Territorial Planning (IG-UTP)

Last but not least, I have to mention that there are other guidance documents and toolkits by other organizations. They may have existed already at the time when the Agenda 2030 was launched and sometimes their importance is underrated. One outstanding example is the International Guidelines on Urban and Territorial Planning (IG-UTP). They were adopted by the Governing Council of the United Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN-Habitat) in spring 2015, i.e. even prior to the adoption of the Agenda 2030 and prior to the adoption of the New Urban Agenda (NUA) at the Habitat III conference in 2016. [1]

In my own advisory work I had to take note more than once that for mayors, urban planners and other local stakeholders it is not always easy to understand why the UN adopted the NUA on top of the Agenda 2030 without clearly linking the two and without a coordinated implementation mechanism for the two. Instead, while it is not easy to implement the NUA, it is a lot easier to communicate the value added of other guidance tools like the IG-UTP which was also produced by experts in the framework of UN-Habitat.

Just have a look at the 12 Key Principles as described in the Guidelines (see table). They provide a snapshot of both, the complexity of challenges and the how to do of integrated planning for sustainable development. With ambitious agendas like Agenda 2030, SDG and NUA there is the challenge of the 'last mile', i.e. the translation of the global agenda and goals into the specific context of a municipality or territory. This is again an issue of the implementation mechanism. It needs to be assured that the implementation of the goals is operational at all levels of governance. SDG (and NUA) are not self-explanatory. The more complex and interrelated global goals the more it is important to translate them into the specific context and day-to-day work situation of local authorities and other stakeholders. In this respect the IG-UTP can help a lot. The Guidelines are no local master plan by themselves but at least its 12 Key Principles and 114 action-oriented recommendations have been developed from a practitioners point of view.

[1] Link to the IG-UTP and IG-UTP Handbook:

https://unhabitat.org/project/international-guidelines-on-urban-and-territorial-planning-guidelines-or-igutp

It will be important to not loose the momentum of the above and other on-going activities because they are indispensable for goals achievement. However, available roadmaps, toolkits and guidelines cannot and don't claim to be a substitute for a proper implementation mechanism and enabling environment. Such mechanisms and enabling environment need to be well thought-out linking the global, national and local parts of the development pillar. And, of course, to support transparency and accountability they need to describe tasks, roles and responsibilities for all actor groups involved.

The next two blog posts will discuss changes proposed to better localize SDG and what that could mean for the way the UN works.

New Paragraph

Localizing the SDGs: Does the SDG Implementation Require a Reform of the Way the United Nations works? (1 of 4 posts)

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Thu, 07 Jan 2021 12:33:36 GMT

1. The UN prepared in 2015 the SDGs but no appropriate enabling environment and implementation mechanism

In this first post I will look at some basics of the relationship between the international, national and local level of governance in relation to sustainable development. For a blog this first post may be a bit long (3 pages + references) but the enabling environment for SDG achievement is key for the understanding and the multilevel system of governance provides the backbone for the localization of a global agenda. So, I hope the length is appropriate.

Note on this series of blog posts

The UN Secretary General and others admitted in 2020 that the implementation of the Agenda 2030 and the Sustainable Development Goals SDGs is off track. To put it back on track there is an urgent need to improve and accelerate implementation of SDG. But does that include local action only or does it need also an improved enabling environment and would that require changes in the way the UN and the member states work? Guided by this question I am planning to publish in the course of the upcoming week on my new blog 'With burning patience' a series of four posts on this burning issue of localizing and implementing the SDG.

Post 1: In 2015 the UN prepared and adopted the SDG but no appropriate enabling environment and implementation mechanism
Post 2: First efforts to localize the SDG between 2015 and 2020 (public on 9 Jan 21)
Post 3: Now local actors call for a seat at the table of international decision-makers to improve SDG implementation (public on 11 Jan 21 or earlier)
Post 4: Does localizing SDG require a reform of the United Nations? (public on 13 Jan 21 or earlier)

Main picture of the four posts: UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon joins local leaders from around the world at the World Mayors Assembly at Habitat III in Quito in 2016.

To read all posts of the blog 'With burning patience' please follow this link
https://www.ugraute.de/blog-1

The Contradictory Relationship between the United Nations and

Local Authorities in the Field of Sustainable and Urban Development

Divided by the principle of sovereignty of member states

The UN is known for its Charter, the General Assembly, the Security Council and ECOSOC, but in the end the value its member states and the public attribute to the UN depends on what are the organization’s achievements and its local impacts within member states. In spite of this, the 70-year-old UN remains a traditional international organization in its basic structure, where decision-making is the sovereign right of national governments, which are then responsible for the implementation within their own countries.

As laid down in its Charter (UN, 2005), the organization is based on the principle of ‘sovereign equality of

all its Members’ (Art. 2, 1). Paragraph 7 of Art. 2 reads as follows:

Nothing contained in the present Charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are

essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state or shall require the Members to submit such matters to settlement under the present Charter.

Local and other authorities at a sub-national level are not members of intergovernmental bodies, and are only indirectly represented by their national government.

Committees of cities and regions or economic, social, cultural and environmental councils representing the voice of non-state actors, including local authorities, have been established by constitution or law within the European Union and the African Union, and a number of other cases. However, they do not exist at the global level. Intergovernmental bodies of the UN, including ECOSOC, are composed of national representatives.

Member states may and do ask the UN for ground support in their country, but intergovernmental bodies of the organization have to agree for a mandate to be issued. The UN and the respective member states then have to sign a Host Country Agreement (HCA). The conditions related with this procedure are laid down in Chapter IX of the UN Charter (UN, 2005).

While the UN has only faced minor changes of its charter over the past 70 years, the world has changed dramatically. Together with globalization, the number and intensity of interactions beyond national borders keeps growing, and so does the number of state and non-state actors. Meanwhile, there are uncounted transactions and forms of governance involving public and private stakeholders at all levels (AGNEW, 2009). As much as the understanding of AGNEW (2009) may reflect reality, the UN Charter is still based on the abstract state as the foundation of international cooperation, and the UN as an organization has to cope with both the Charter and reality. Given an increasingly globalized world and growing interrelations and interdependencies between actors, constellations and policies, the UN is searching for more comprehensive answers to the complexity of the present day. Thus, it is increasingly important to interact directly with what the UN calls the Major Groups of non-state stakeholders. Therefore, the UN tries all kinds of tools and methodologies and opens dialogues with all stakeholders including local authorities – but only as long as it does not require a notable reform of the institution and procedures.

The growing relevance of cities in the world

Cities face a growing relative importance due to urbanization, population growth and the concentration of economic activities in urban environments (UN, 2014a , p. 13). While urbanization is a global trend, population growth and rapid urbanization mainly take place in developing countries. This adds to the pre-existing challenges, especially in least developed countries (LDC), where the institutional and regulatory framework is often weak and authorities struggle even to provide basic services. Certainly, conditions for urban and regional development are not the same everywhere and therefore problem-solving requires a sound knowledge of the specific context in each city and region. In spite of all these differences and given the economic size, population density, diversity and political relevance, cities with an innovative edge are hubs of development. Cities represent the transformative power necessary for development and for achieving the SDGs (UCLG, 2014). They also realize the need to look beyond the limits and to cooperate with partners at the national and international levels, as stated in the Buenos Aires Declaration of METROPOLIS (2015):

For this reason, cities and regions exchange knowledge and experience with other local and regional authorities and contribute to national and international dialogues. Looking at how other cities have solved a problem is a simple way of seeking advice, and helps to solve problems in one’s own city. In other cases where there are no model solutions, exchange and cooperation can help to search jointly for solutions. […] No city or region, however big or powerful, has the capacity to influence the global agenda on its own. Local authorities from different parts of the world need to build close alliances to be heard in global forums and to be able to influence international decision-making processes. This is why networks of cities and local governments are crucial in today’s world.

Urban development and local governance as the key to agenda implementation

Some of the 17 SDGs (cf. Table 1), especially SDG 11, include direct linkages to urban development. In addition, SDGs and targets relate to many subjects like soil erosion, desertification, reforestation, quality of drinking water, poverty eradication, empowering of girls, primary education, or energy efficiency in buildings, industry, agriculture and transport goals, and many related targets need to be localized. According to the GLOBAL TASKFORCE (2015), all SDGs have at least one target with a territorial dimension. Considering this, it is not surprising that the role of local authorities received high attention right from the beginning of the agenda process. Already at the ‘Cities Leadership Day’ in Rio de Janeiro on 21 June 2012, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon said that ‘ The road to global sustainability runs through the world’ s cities and towns.’

The first proposals of SDGs also gave special attention to cities also by the first proposals of SDGs. One of the proposals was presented by the High-Level Panel of Eminent Persons on the Post-2015 Development Agenda (2013), which was co-chaired by UK Prime Minister David Cameron. Another proposal was developed by the SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT SOLUTIONS NETWORK (SDSN) (2013a) together with Jeffrey Sachs, Director of the SDSN Secretariat. Both groups had a strong impact on the agenda’ s development.

Several voices called for a stronger consideration of local and particularly urban matters, as well as for a better involvement of local actors. This was done, for example, in the context of the Global Thematic Consultation on Governance and the Post-2015 Development Framework. This consultation was carried out between September 2012 and March 2013 in response to an increasing demand for an open and inclusive dialogue expressed by various actors, especially civil society. The stages for the consultation included the Internet and several meetings, including a global conference in Johannesburg, South Africa, in 2013. Summarizing the consultation, the two co-organizing UN agencies, the UN Development Programme (UNDP) and the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), came to the following conclusion with regard to the coordination of policies and cooperation:

Coherence among policies within and across governance levels, including national ownership of an international framework, is imperative: A new global framework must be aligned with national policies, budgets, and local delivery. Without such vertical alignment, it is likely that a new framework will remain aspirational and unachievable. (UNDP and OHCHR, 2013, point 3, p. 6)

Further on, the position was specified:

Strengthening local governments and local development is critical for ensuring empowerment, civic participation and better service delivery: Local-level indicators must be included in any future development framework, because local governments are the primary point of institutional contact for the majority of individuals. From service delivery to wider programmes for citizen empowerment and civic participation, policies need to focus on individuals and communities rather than merely on geographic areas. (point 8, p. 7)

The HIGH-LEVEL PANEL (2013), which included among its members only one urban representative (the president of the United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG) and mayor of the city of Istanbul), has chosen this view on local authorities: ‘Local authorities form a vital bridge between national governments, communities and citizens and will have a critical role in a new global partnership’ (p. 10). Following this, the report used more drastic words: ‘Cities are where the battle for sustainable development will be won or lost’ (p. 17).

Underscoring the relevance of local action while ignoring the necessary enabling environment for local agenda implementation

In spite of the strong arguments for a prominently positioned urban SDG, the reports quoted failed to make proposals on how better to engage local actors in more formalized cooperation at the international level. The report of the HIGH-LEVEL PANEL (2013) explicitly stated that ‘it is beyond the scope of this report to propose options for the reform of the UN […]’ (p. 21). The SDSN report made no specific suggestions for the implementation of SDGs. Instead the SDGs aim at inspiring those working on the implementation to act within their respective responsibility (SACHS and JEREMIC, 2013; SDSN, 2013b).

In spite of backlashes, the discussion on the role of local authorities and other stakeholders had an impact on the governance structure of the new agenda. Already in September 2013, a High Level Political Forum (HLPF) was established following the General Assembly resolution A/RES/67/290. The Forum is reviewing now every year the progress made and identify challenges ahead. Many member states have already submitted Voluntary National reviews (VNR). Thus, the forum is practically the main platform of the UN monitoring and coordinating the agenda implementation towards sustainable development. It meets every year under the auspices of ECOSOC, and every four years under the auspices of the General Assembly. The resolution enhanced the engagement of stakeholders. Major groups and other stakeholders have been granted comprehensive participatory opportunities in the HLPF. According to paragraph 15 of the resolution, representatives of Major Groups and other relevant stakeholders are allowed to attend all official meetings of the forum while retaining the intergovernmental character of the HLPF. They also have access to all official information and documents, intervene in official meetings, submit documents and present written and oral contributions; make recommendations; and organize side events and round tables, in cooperation with member states and the Secretariat. In addition, the resolution encourages Major Groups and other stakeholders to establish autonomously and maintain effective coordination mechanisms for participation in the HLPF.

It is certainly true that the Major Groups with their independent organizations and networks should establish and maintain their own coordination mechanisms, but the measures taken are not sufficient to unlock their full potential and to include them into the management and accountability mechanisms of SDG implementation. Saying that Major Groups and especially local authorities may (or may not) contribute to the work of the HLPF is as if the lead partner of the urban development project told the other partners that they may or may not join meetings in which the progress of the project is discussed. In this respect, the UN relies on its own system and the clear division between the international and the national responsibilities. The governments of the member states are expected to get involved and to coordinate all relevant stakeholders within the national context. What sounds like a measure to reduce complexity of interaction and cooperation does not consider reality, which is increasingly driven by interaction and collaboration beyond national borders. In the case of the SDGs, the traditional understanding of international relations as the cooperation of national governments confines the global partnership between UN and Major Groups to a mainly virtual interaction channelled through national governments. Thus, national governments have more responsibility and there could be the risk that SDG implementation in certain countries is curbed by weak capacities at the national level. In contrast, stakeholder engagement at all levels of the multilevel systems of governance would make it possible to share responsibility and unlock the full potential required to achieve the ambitious goals of the agenda. Unfortunately, without a proper implementation mechanism adopted together with the Agenda 2030 a big muddling through started and local authorities and their associations had to live with the framework provided.

In the next blog I'll look at the state of localizing SDG and on some sources of support local actors can get. I am afraid that the next post will also make visible how difficult it is to get a full picture of SDG localization. The implementation of SDG is decentralized and, thus, external analysts like me and actors in international organizations are likely to know only a part of the activities.

References

AGNEW J. (2009) Globalization and Sovereignty. Rowman & Littlefield, Lanham, MD.

METROPOLIS (2015) A New Urban Agenda for the World – Ideas and Recommendations from a Metropolitan Perspective. Declaration of Buenos Aires

GLOBAL TASKFORCE OF LOCAL & REGIONAL GOVERNMENTS FOR POST-2015 DEVELOPMENT AGENDA TOWARDS HABITAT III (2015) Local Authorities Major Group’s (LAMG) Position Paper March 2015. Published with ICLEI, nrg4sd and UCLG, Barcelona

HIGH-LEVEL PANEL OF EMINENT PERSONS ON THE POST-2015 DEVELOPMENT AGENDA (2013) A New Global Partnership: Eradicate Poverty and Transform Economies through Sustainable Development. 30 May. New York, NY.

SACHS J. and JEREMIC V. (2013) The United Nations in the Age of Sustainable Development. Office of the President of the General Assembly, The High-Level Advisory Panel, United Nations, New York, NY

SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT SOLUTIONS NETWORK (SDSN) (2013a) An Action Agenda for Sustainable Development. Report for the UN Secretary General. Prepared by the Leadership Council of the SDSN, 6 June 2013, New York, NY.

SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT SOLUTIONS NETWORK (SDSN) (2013b) Why the World Needs an Urban Sustainable Development Goal. Note prepared by the SDSN Thematic Group on Sustainable Cities, supported by UN-Habitat, UCLG, Cities Alliance and ICLEI. 18 September 2013, New York, NY.

UNITED CITIES AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS (UCLG) (2014) Third Global Report on Local Democracy and Decentralization, Basic

Services for All in an Urbanizing World. UCLG, Barcelona.

UNITED NATIONS (UN) (2005) Charter of the United Nations and Statute of the International Court of Justice. UN, New York, NY.

UNITED NATIONS (UN) (2014a) World Urbanization Prospects – 2014 Revision. UN, New York, NY.

UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME (UNDP) and OFFICE OF THE HIGH COMMISSIONER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS (OHCHR) (2013) Global Thematic Consultation on Governance and the Post-2015 Development Framework. Consultation Report. UNDP and OHCHR, New York, NY.

Parts of this post were originally published in paper: Ulrich Graute, 2016. " Local Authorities Acting Globally for Sustainable Development ," Regional Studies , Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 50(11), pages 1931-1942, November.

Remote work: Overcoming the silo of the home office

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Fri, 01 Jan 2021 17:55:57 GMT

Business Disruption and Development in Times of Corona

Originally published on LinkedIn in November 2020 this paper is addressed primarily to those who use the current pandemic to review own business and life strategies. However, it may be inspiring for Human Resource managers and others.

For myself the paper was a preparatory step stimulating me to revise my website and to develop a Social Media Marketing Strategy.

Please find attached the paper for your download free of charge or visit the

original post of the paper on LinkedIn of 16 November 2020 by following this link:

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/graute_business-disruption-and-development-in-times-activity-6734026476049440768-9RDk

Consulting: What's an independent policy analyst, governance and management expert doing all day?

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Fri, 01 Jan 2021 17:55:53 GMT

Advisors not necessarily know better but their external view helps others to better understand their own situation, challenges and opportunities

Years ago, when one of my daughters attended kindergarten the kids at lunch time shared what their parents were doing for a living. One said teacher, another said doctor and so on. And when they turned to my daughter, well, she didn't try to explain that I work on policy analysis, governance and management. Instead, she said something like "He does things that people don't fight with each other and work nicely together". Good try. Well, I would like to leave it there but since I am often asked by younger colleagues what my work is about I wrote down these lines. In doing so I use as example my experience in Saudi Arabia, one of the countries where I work since more than 10 years as manager and policy analyst and governance expert.

Working as Senior Advisor for Socio-economic Governance at the United Nations in New York (UNDESA, 2008-13) I was in charge of managing a project supporting National Development Planning in Saudi Arabia and I supervised six senior advisors of the UN working at the Ministry of Economy and Planning (MEP). I mostly worked from New York but went on regular missions e.g. for Tripartite Reviews (UNDESA, UNDP and MEP) to Riyadh. In this time I learned a lot about the country, its political system and governance.

In 2014 I had set up my own consultancy and in 2015 I was invited by the UN Programme for Housing and Urban Development (UN-Habitat) to review the System of Regional Planning in Saudi Arabia. I went on five study missions to Saudi Arabia and worked as international expert in cooperation with UN-Habitat and a team of national experts. At the Saudi Urban Forum in 2016 I got the chance to present the findings. https://www.futuresaudicities.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/Review-of-Regional-Planning-in-Saudi-Arabia.pdf

Later (2017-19), I worked as consultant based at the Headquarters of UN-Habitat in Nairobi in Kenya. From Nairobi I supported among others the Future Saudi Cities Programme. We organised a transformative training programme for urban planners of the Kingdom to implement the International Guidelines on Urban and Territorial Planning (IGUTP). https://cdn.website-editor.net/591dbde05fae4fe9957ff6ba93e3185b/files/uploaded/IG-UTP-Riyadh%2520Report.pdf and https://gsutp.urbanpolicyplatform.org/Content/Publications/igutp-handbook-final.pdf

In addition and based on my prior experience and expertise I also drafted the governance part (chapter 5) for the Saudi Cities Report 2019 published in spring 2020. https://www.futuresaudicities.org/state-of-saudi-cities-reports/

Being in Nairobi, UN-Habitat used my presence to let me also contribute to regional planning aspects of city profiles like those of Abha and Jazan. https://www.futuresaudicities.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/ABHA-EN.pdf https://www.futuresaudicities.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/JAZAN-EN.pdf

Most recently, I was invited to co-host on 1 June 2020 a private sector workshop organized by MEP and Oliver Wyman on the Saudi Arabian Roadmap to Sustainability. Also in 2020, UN-Habitat uses my expertise to contribute to the State of the Yemeni Cities report.

Last but not least, I would like to highlight that - while I write my texts on my own - I usually work as member of national and international teams. Therefore, I owe thanks to all those listed in the imprints of above mentioned publications and to many more. For more information on how my Saudi specific country experience relates to my overall profile and work as senior advisor in other parts of the world please see my LinkedIn profile and my website www.ugraute.de.

Link to the original LinkedIn post of 9 June 2020:

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/graute_policymaking-governance-managingchange-activity-6676093523206385664-6J2t

With burning patience - Good governance and management for peaceful and sustainable development

183:685934447 (Ulrich Graute) — Fri, 01 Jan 2021 17:55:48 GMT

With burning patience

Dear reader,

Welcome to my blog 'With burning patience'.

In January 2021 I began blogging based on facts and my own experience but with empathy. I mostly write about themes I am especially concerned about in my life and work as international affairs expert: United Nations, sustainability, local government, national development, and international cooperation.

Yes, it is a very broad field from the very local to the global. But so is our world.

During the Corona pandemic people in all countries on earth have learned that e.g. the outbreak of a virus in one part of the world can have a major impact on every country, city and person on earth.

During the different phases of my professional life I repeatedly realized that many of our problems are due to a lack of ability to link the dots and having no implementation strategy and structure. While we have learned that the world is complex we are not good enough in contextual thinking and working. When there is a bigger challenge we tend to divide it into smaller pieces which seem to be more easily to be handled in our day-to-day life. However, complex and interrelated problems cannot be solved without looking across the borders of countries, policy levels, policy sectors, cultures etc and to link the dots.

Yes, that is demanding and can be frustrating. We have to keep growing up to the challenge. We need patience and we certainly have to burn for the search of solutions. Trying to do that makes this blog a learning exercise for the reader but also for me as author.

Squaring the circle - Blogging about a vast, multi sector and multi-level field of work while focusing on the dynamic interplay of actors and on interface management

As senior advisor I like new challenges and I like to move across and along borders of policy fields, levels of governance, disciplines. I am used to work on policy development, governance and management while moving up and down all spatial scales of the system of multi-level and multilateral cooperation from the local to the global like moving up and down the Eiffel Tower.

Who prefers to think in boxes may find difficulties to put me in the box of a single profession. My profile may be rather one in between and across typical professions. Or you may want to compare it to other professions ... let's say ... to that of a mechanic or welding operator who produces, positions and links the different pieces needed to build a larger product like a tower. The difference is just that I bring together people, institutions, subjects and support their result-based cooperation process. The Governing Mayor of the City of Berlin described my profession once as interface management.

As a blog it poses a additional challenge for me: as a rule, the blog posts are relatively short. So, I have to be brief and still informative and inspiring. I hope you already in the past enjoyed my blog posts or that you will enjoy them future my blog posts.

Ulrich Graute

Blog editor

P.S.: Oh yes, the blog won't be perfect. If you should find typos or grammar mistakes please don't mind (but feel free to let me know).

Policies and Governance for Resilient and Sustainable Cities and Regions

Experience matters

To Master AI we have to train ourselves, not only AI Models and Applications

Do we have to overcome laziness to master AI? And what laziness?

Transforming a Global Movement for Safe and Ethical Use of AI

Transforming a Global Movement for Safe and Ethical Use of AI into a Sustainable and Agile Organization in a Dynamic Policy Environment

Trends and Signals for 2026 - The new APA 2026 Trend Report Artificial Intelligence and urban and rural development

BUILDING A GLOBAL MOVEMENT FOR SAFE AND ETHICAL ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE NEEDS TO INCLUDE AN URBAN LENS

What makes a perfect team of Congress General Rapporteurs?

Activity Report of ISOCARP's 2023-2025 Scientific Committee

International Photo Competition for Routledge Book "City Economies In The Global South: Growth, Inclusion, and Sustainability"

What makes cities really smart are the people behind technology

What would a conscious AI say about human efforts on Smart Cities?

To be Human in an Age of Artificial Intelligence

To be Human in an Age of Artificial Intelligence

Towards an Age of International Non Governmental Organizations

A World Planning Congress as a Super Puzzle and Creative Process

From a Super Puzzle to a high quality, inspiring and impactful Congress Programme

﻿ Track Rapporteurs and their Tracks

The UN making itself redundant – the case of the United Nations Human Settlement Programme (UN-Habitat)

UN-Habitat Draft Strategic Plan 2026-2029

There is no alternative to keep building a world community 80 years after World War II

Urban Sprawl as part of the solution for the affordable housing crisis in the USA?!

We need the United Nations to be part of the solution, not of the problem

Anatomy of an AI System

What supply chain stands behind an AI system? The case of the Amazon Echo as an anatomical map of human labor, data and planetary resources

About the challenge of providing advice on governance and development in times of disruption and transition

Urban politics, planning and economy in the Global South in times of fast developing AI

AI, Politics and Cities

The 500 bn US$ Stargate Project - Places seem to matter more, Urban Planning and AI governance less or not at all

The new 500 billion US$ Stargate AI Infrastructure Project demonstrates that Places and Investments matter for development, while planning standards might be sidelined

The Stargate Project

Learning to work hands-on for peace from former US-President Jimmy Carter

The United Nations risks drowning in its mandates, conferences and external expectations. Could Artificial Intelligence help the UN?

THE GLOBAL STAGE FOR CITIES AND REGIONS AT THE UN CLIMATE CHANGE CONFERENCE BAKU (COP29), NOVEMBER 2024

Planning New Inclusive Cities using Smart Tech and Artificial Intelligence

Ethical use of Artificial Intelligence in Planning - Join our Urban Conversation on 11 October 2024 at the 60th ISOCARP World Planning Congress in Siena, Italy

Urban Conversation: AI applications as tools and co-pilot to make cities more inclusive, prosperous and sustainable

Why and how I reviewed my website and CV with help of generative AI, ChatGPT

The ethical use of AI is not a nice add-on to a new wave of technological innovation but should be regarded as an integral part of AI-aided urban planning

Concerns about the ethical use of AI in urban planning echo existing concerns regarding human performance and trustworthiness

Learning machines and the soft power of AI

Human Compatible - AI and the Problem of Control

TOWARDS A MORE REALISTIC SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT AGENDA 2030

2024 Gerd Albers Award

Call for 2024 Gerd Albers Award

Being senior advisor in times when easy answers are rare

International Organizations like the UN are struggling if not failing to cope with the many crises - but can I do any better as independent advisor?

﻿

Artificial Intelligence in Urban Planning: Risks and Opportunities - AcSS Policy Briefing

Artificial Intelligene in Planning

The Future of the United Nations and the Second Law of Thermodynamics

Artificial Intelligence II - AI as co-pilot in urban and regional planning and international cooperation

Imagine, in future planners will have a co-pilot!

AI and the interrelated web of sustainable development goals

And what comes next?

Artificial Intelligence I - Travelling with a rocket still under construction - AI as a promising but also scary change-maker

Travelling with a rocket still under construction - AI as a promising but also scary change-maker

Disrupt yourself instead of getting disrupted?!

Travelling with a rocket still under construction

UN Classics: IGUTP - International Guidelines on Urban and Territorial Planning by UN-Habitat

UN-Habitat's most downloaded publication ever: The International Guidelines on Urban and Territorial Planning

2024 Conference Centrality in the Age of Dispersion

Call for Abstracts opened

Ulrich's CV in Pictures since the late 1970s

Engaged since a European Forum in 1979, turned Professional in 1989 and since 2014 Independent Consultant in support of International Cooperation and Peace

Jordan: Municipal services to assist refugees and to strengthen climate and social resilience in the Kingdom

________________________________________________________________________________

What is MSSRP?

Keeping climate policy and sustainability policy separate – was it a mistake? Yes, it was!

Quality of Life and Enhancing Territorial Governance

What would be the cost if we wouldn’t have the United Nations?

Tinder or United Nations – Whom would you trust more to find a way to save the planet with?

People, planet, prosperity, peace, partnerships and 'leaving no one behind' – all pillars of the UN sustainability agenda are in peril now!

Tinder recommends swiping as the way to find someone with whom to save the planet

How to get big things done – The High Level Political Forum (HLPF) in New York

Why? Really? Why do we have the 2030 Agenda?

Let’s get back to the drawing board and do big things better by not only organizing new summits but by better planning the implementation

How to get big things done – The High Level Political Forum (HLPF) in New York

The Quality of Life Initiative at HLPF

Track Rapporteurs and their Tracks

UN agencies committed to promoting equitable urbanisation, including in Ukraine

UN-Habitat's scoping mission to foster support activities

Wrocław University of Science and Technology 28-29.09.2023.
Paper proposal now with new deadline on 30. April 2023

Ambitions and limitations for city networks in their cooperation with member states