Blog Layout

Localizing the SDGs: Does the SDG Implementation Require a Reform of the Way the United Nations works? (1 of 4 posts)

Ulrich Graute • Jan 07, 2021

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.


Policies and Governance for Resilient and Sustainable Cities and Regions

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

by Ulrich Graute • 08 May, 2024
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

by Ulrich Graute • 25 Apr, 2024
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

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

by Ulrich Graute • 25 Apr, 2024
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.

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

by Ulrich Graute • 28 Mar, 2024
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.

2024 Conference Centrality in the Age of Dispersion

by Ulrich Graute • 21 Feb, 2024
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

by Ulrich Graute • 26 Jan, 2024
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

by Ulrich Graute • 25 Jan, 2024
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

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

by Ulrich Graute • 14 Nov, 2023
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

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

by Ulrich Graute • 08 Oct, 2023
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

by Ulrich Graute • 26 Sept, 2023
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.
More posts

Contact Ulrich Graute

Share by: