Blog Layout

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

Ulrich Graute • Jan 14, 2021

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:
  1. Supporting public health, basic human rights, and social protection systems;
  2. 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;
  3. Fostering a green recovery through sustainable industry, decarbonisation, and a broader knowledge base for climate action;
  4. 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


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: