Localizing the SDGs: Does the SDG Implementation Require a Reform of the Way the United Nations works? (2/4 posts)

Ulrich Graute • 11 January 2021

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 Development' 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

< Older Post Newer Post >

Policies and Governance for Resilient and Sustainable Cities and Regions

What makes a perfect team of Congress General Rapporteurs?

by Ulrich Graute • 12 December 2025

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

by Ulrich Graute • 7 December 2025

ISOCARP ScientificCommittee 2023-2025 Activity Report 7 December2025

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

by Ulrich Graute • 28 November 2025

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

by Ulrich Graute • 7 November 2025

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?

by Ulrich Graute • 7 November 2025

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

by Ulrich Graute • 6 September 2025

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

by Ulrich Graute • 15 August 2025

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

A World Planning Congress as a Super Puzzle and Creative Process

by Ulrich Graute • 21 July 2025

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

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

by Ulrich Graute • 20 May 2025

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

by Ulrich Graute • 8 May 2025

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.