Global Policy · 2019 · 260 citations · 12 references
Development Studies (Infrastructure Engineering)EngineeringSdg IndicatorsEconomic DevelopmentSustainable DevelopmentPolicy AnalysisEnvironmental PolicySustainable Development GoalsCultural PlanningOpen DataPublic PolicyUn Sustainable Development GoalTechnology PolicyInformation ManagementSustainable Development GoalSustainable GoalPolicy PlanningSustainable SystemsEquitable DevelopmentBusinessKnowledge ManagementSustainabilitySpecial IssuePolitical ScienceBig Data
The special issue examines how politics and knowledge shaped the Sustainable Development Goals, with open, transparent processes in the Open Working Group and Post‑2015 consultations challenging the MDG paradigm and setting more transformative, ambitious targets. The authors question whose interests data serve and how data shape knowledge, highlighting the democratic governance of SDG indicators and knowledge for development. The analysis shows that many SDG targets and indicators suffered ambition slippage—sometimes due to definitional challenges, other times because of political contestation—while the rise of big data is transforming data production, dissemination, and the epistemology of information.
Abstract The papers in this special issue provide accounts of the politics and knowledge that shaped the Sustainable Development Goals ( SDG s). The open and transparent processes in the Open Working Group ( OWG ) and Post‐2015 agenda consultations challenged the MDG paradigm and set more transformative and ambitious goals. But across many goals, there was slippage in ambition when targets and indicators were selected. In some cases, this is due to genuine difficulty in defining a suitable indicator. In other cases, there is clearly a contestation about the agenda, and indicators are used to reorient or pervert the meaning of the goal. The accounts of the negotiations– concerning inequality, sustainable agriculture, access to justice, education, environment – show how the selection of an indicator is purportedly a technical matter but is highly political, though obscured behind the veil of an objective and technical choice. The papers also highlight how the increasing role of big data and other non‐traditional sources of data is altering data production, dissemination and use, and fundamentally altering the epistemology of information and knowledge. This raises questions about ‘data for whom and for what’ – fundamental issues concerning the power of data to shape knowledge, the democratic governance of SDG indicators and of knowledge for development overall.
12