The President of the General Assembly Interactive Dialogue
“Elements for a Monitoring and Accountability Framework
for the Post-2015 Development Agenda”
Panel Discussion II: Existing Review Mechanisms
Thursday, 1 May 2014, ECOSOC Chamber, United Nations HQ, New York
Joining Forces Through “Mutual Accountability” to Achieve the SDGs by 2030
Statement by Dr. Paul Zeitz
Global Development Incubator (GDI)
http://www.globaldevincubator.org/
@GlobalDevInc @paulzeitz
Mr. President, Excellencies, Honorable Chairperson, fellow panelists, those of you watching on UNWebTV, and
fellow global citizens, I want to thank you for the opportunity to join this interactive dialogue. My name is Dr. Paul
Zeitz, and today I represent the Global Development Incubator (GDI), an independent non-profit organization
whose mission is to support innovative organizations and initiatives to create large-scale social change.
Our work is focused on exploring innovative monitoring and accountability mechanisms, as we believe this is a
critical determinant for the success of the SDGs. We salute the Member States and the UN for creating the Open
Working Group and this interactive dialogue, as these open processes are creating the potential for a watershed
moment in global cooperation.
The SDGs are different from the MDGs. They will be a broader set of goals; they will be universal and countrydriven; and many more stakeholders are involved in design and implementation than ever before. Strategies to
mobilize the massive increase in financing required to achieve the SDGs are being developed by the
Intergovernmental Committee of Experts on Sustainable Development Financing, the Global Partnership on
Effective Development Cooperation, and others. Now we must take on the challenge of building an innovative
SDG accountability mechanism through an ongoing inclusive approach, as its future legitimacy require openness.
It is critical that the boundaries of stakeholder engagement continue to broaden beyond the development
community and beyond traditional north-south & donor-recipient paradigms.
In that vein, GDI recently initiated a comprehensive review of the existing monitoring and accountability
mechanisms operative during the MDG era. This includes reviewing those led by multilaterals, intergovernmental, private sector, civil society, individual accountability tools, and multi-stakeholder mechanisms –
and what we are finding is extraordinary.
There are a plethora of efforts, yet most are operating within their own silos, with little or no linkages or
coordination. Given this starting point, we heartily salute the initial efforts of the Member States to create new
SDG accountability mechanisms, such as the High Level Political Forum. Additionally, we recommend that
Member States and all other stakeholders join forces to establish a pluralistic and open multi-stakeholder “mutual
accountability” mechanism that is complementary and connected to the intergovernmental UN review processes.
Mutual accountability, an open data monitoring system, and broad-based youth and citizen engagement are the
triple engines needed to guide nations and people towards concerted action that will ensure the enduring success
of the SDGs.
1
Five Key Attributes Recommended for a SDG ‘Mutual Accountability’ Mechanism
In the initial phase of our review, we identified five key attributes of existing monitoring and accountability
mechanisms that we believe are essential for the SDG era to catalyze bold and transformative action:
Attribute 1. Inclusive & Multi-stakeholder Governance
The emergence of the broad-based multi-stakeholder SDG movement requires the creation of new institutional
platforms to realize SDG “mutual accountability.” Our review found successful accountability models where multistakeholder inclusion is the hallmark of governance. We know, for example, that the success of the Global Fund to
Fight AIDS, TB, and Malaria (Global Fund), GAVI, and the Global Partnership on Education can partially be
attributed to a balanced representation of governments, civil society, and the private sector. The conferring of
voting rights to all stakeholders is the new norm in 21st century governance structures. Another example is the
UN-led Every Woman Every Child platform that includes a wide range of stakeholders in its governance structure.
Finally, the Open Government Partnership (OGP) is another important model, whose operational structure
includes actors in governments, civil society, and the private sector at the country and global levels.
Attribute 2. Universal, Voluntary, & Commitment-based Approach
A key insight from our research is that for the SDG agenda to be successful, we have go beyond simple
accountability rhetoric and move to a “commitments-to-action” model. This too, is in fact, not new. There are
several successful models of stakeholders voluntarily using a commitment-based approach. Shared and joint
commitments by partners from governments, civil society and the private sector can inspire faster & bolder
action, can garner enhanced citizen and media attention; and can contribute to the mobilization of resources
from internal and external sources.
Sharing of best practices, innovation, leveraging of new markets, and the application of new technologies can also
be stimulated by these collaborative and committed-based approaches. There are important lessons to be learned
from the success of the Clinton Global Initiative (CGI), the Open Government Partnership (OGP), the Sustainable
Energy for All partnership and others models, where periodic commitments to action are voiced and made in
public fora. The Open Government Partnership (OGP) offers a model where participating countries make
voluntary commitments for action, domestically within their own borders, and they are also given the opportunity
to make commitments towards global and/or regional efforts. This critical feature levels power and enables all
countries, rich or poor, to be equally responsible for action.
Attribute 3. Independent Review Mechanism
Our review also suggests that “commitments-to-action,” must be paired with an “Independent Review
Mechanism” or IRM. An IRM would allow local, regional, and global experts to objectively assess technical
soundness, ambition, and assess progress towards the “commitments to action.” The African Peer Review
Mechanism (APRM) and AIDS Watch Africa (AWA) are peer review models that warrant further consideration.
Another example is how the Every Women Every Child initiative utilized a WHO-convened Independent Expert
Review Group to monitor progress towards commitments made. Finally, the Open Government Partnership (OGP)
is a model that uses local institutions for conducting independent reviews.
2
Attribute 4. Broad-based Youth & Citizen Engagement
As part of the “MDG era” there has been a rolling appreciation for citizen engagement in the monitoring and
accountability efforts. Nevertheless, we know that authentic citizen engagement in institutional platforms can
transform policy, mobilize resources, and empower bolder action. The recent experience of the Arab spring
uprisings and the increased level of activism being seen around the world is catalyzing major political
transformations, with both huge risks and opportunities for the SDG agenda. Our review suggests that now is the
time to generate greatly enhanced models of youth and citizen engagement as part of the SDG “mutual
accountability” mechanism. Local youth- and citizen-driven monitoring and accountability mechanisms are
essential for improving budget transparency and service delivery outcomes. If citizens are enabled to pay
attention, respond, engage, and take responsibility and action, then everyone can be empowered to foster an
enabling environment for mutual accountability and measurable results.
Attribute 5. Open-Sourced, Transparent, Data-Driven Action
There is a lot of discussion underway about how to operationalize a data revolution in support of the SDGs.
Official global and national statistics are essential. However, we now know that what has been labeled as “official
data” must now be supplemented by other sources. Over the past 10 years we have developed the tools,
technologies, and techniques to gather different kinds of data in unprecedented ways. We have identified seven
major categories of data that need to be considered:







global reporting systems and surveys;
country reporting systems and surveys;
open data from governments, the private sector, and institutions on “commitments to action”;
dynamic social data;
citizen-generated data;
environmental and geospatial data; and
global indices, such as the Human Development Index, the Open Budget Index, etc.
We believe that a unified hub of static and dynamic data can now be created. This can be accomplished through
the creation of an open-sourced data platform and standards that ensure inter-operability of both quantitative
and qualitative data from multiple sources and institutions across the SDG agenda. Over time, and with
appropriate governance, open-sourced data that is generated from multiple sources and at multiple levels of
operation can be fully linked: from the local/city level, to country level, to regional level, and ultimately to the
global level.
Obviously this proposition is complex, and the reality of politics and logistics have to be addressed, but we know
that an integrated monitoring and accountability data systems is technologically possible to build. We also know
we can begin to build immediately if we join forces to connect existing data sources, hubs, and aligned new
ventures, such as the No Ceilings: Full Participation Project and the Paris 21 proposed Global Partnership on
Development Data. Robust use and visualization of open data and evidence will provide the basis for transparent
measurement and tracking systems to monitor progress towards “commitments to action,” targets, and the SDGs.
The World Bank Group IFC Standards on Environmental and Social Sustainability and the UN Global Compact’s
“Communication on Progress,” are important examples of how accountability and transparency norms are also
being applied to the private sector. In fact, many of the tools that will drive a new way of doing business in the
collection of data rest in the private sector. The newly launched UNEP Live and recent experiences with the opensourced search for debris from the Malaysian Airways Flight 370 are important examples of what is possible if we
can make SDG-related data open, vibrant, engaging, and relevant.
3
Call for a Multi-Stakeholder SDG Monitoring and Accountability Mechanism
The ambition of the post-2015 SDGs as a successor to the MDGs is incredibly exciting in its paradigm-busting
breadth and ambition. This also makes it more challenging and complex to ensure “mutual accountability” for
results. Given the advances in human cooperation and technology, we know that the SDG era can usher in and
foster a new culture of “mutual accountability.” I am here to offer a realizable practical vision of stakeholders
joining forces to design and launch:






an innovative and open SDG-wide monitoring & accountability mechanism that ensures authentic and
robust multi-stakeholder engagement; designed as complementary and connected to the UN intergovernmental review processes;
where stakeholders make “commitments to action” on a periodic basis,
where there is an independent review mechanism,
where there is a open data revolution-driven monitoring and accountability hub,
where broad-based youth & citizen engagement is enabled, and finally,
where mutual accountability is practiced in ways that positively incentivize bolder and faster action and
impact.
These approaches can and should operate and be connected from the municipal level—including from big cities,
small villages, districts, nations, regions and the global community.
A multi-stakeholder SDG-wide mutual accountability mechanism will help mobilize and sustain a diverse range of
financial resources that are needed to achieve the SDGs. Such an accountability mechanism would allow
resources from internal and external and public and private sources to clearly target the most pressing needs. The
evidence needed for action will be driven by shared data and common knowledge.
I strongly recommend that Member States and other stakeholders should act immediately to design a
complementary multi-stakeholder SDG accountability mechanism for launch by September 2015. If at least 12
countries mobilize stakeholders and step forward with a first iteration of country- and city-level “commitments to
action” at the time of the proposed launch, then we will have generated the momentum needed to galvanize the
sustainable development agenda forward in 2016 and beyond. Without the launch of such a multi-stakeholder
mutual accountability mechanism, we fear that we all will be left with another empty declaration and lost hopes.
I conclude with the wise words of the late Nelson Mandela, a man who knew that change was a long walk, and a
hard climb. As he famously said, “It always seems impossible until it's done.” Mr. Mandela understood
commitment and he understood when the time was ripe for a new way of doing things. I believe that all
stakeholders can and must generate the courage and political will necessary to bring forth “mutual
accountability” so that together we can create a world that could be defined by the achievement of the
Sustainable Development Goals by 2030.
For more information and a copy of GDI’s preliminary concept note for a multi-stakeholder monitoring and
accountability mechanism (a.k.a. Global SDG Partnership), please contact Dr. Paul Zeitz at: paulszeitz@gmail.com
4