This past Friday, the William & Mary Policy Review officially published and mailed Volume 7, Issue 2! This issue focuses on international policy, and features the following articles:
- A Comparative Look at International Approaches to Social Enterprise: Public Policy, Investment Structure, and Tax Incentives – Mystica M. Alexander
- Food for Thought: Improving the Canadian Genetically Modified Food Safety Assessment Process by Integrating the Precautionary Principle as a Guiding Framework – Anna Poliszot
- The Trouble with Justice in the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals 2016-2030 – Ingo Keilitz
- William & Mary Policy Review Symposium Transcript: Justice Concerns with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals – Discussion by Ingo Keilitz, Steven Sharp, and Jeremie Amoroso
As a preview, here is the abstract from the article by Ingo Keilitz:
In this paper, the author argues that Goal 16 of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), and its associated 12 performance targets and 21 proposed provisional indicators, as well as the SDGs package as a whole adopted by the United Nations in September 2015, are not sufficiently specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound. He explores two intertwined problems at the root of the problem with Goal 16—peace, nonviolence, safety, and security; access to justice, and just and inclusive societies; and effective, inclusive, and accountable institutions. The first problem lies in the lack of conceptual clarity and imprecise definitions of the goal. The second is the difficulty of translating the stated ambitions of the goal, targets and indicators into actionable performance measures of success and, ultimately, meaningful development outcomes. The author argues these problems may be more acute for Goal 16 and its 12 associated targets and 21 indicators than those of the SDGs as a whole.
The goal needs to be made measurable and actionable in order for it to have a positive impact on sustainable development by 2030, the deadline set by the UN, comparable to that of the narrower predecessor Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), which expired at the end of The paper concludes with the recommendation of three courses of action that the author believes will result in a cohesive framework, including a set of precise indicators that constitute a balanced scorecard for assessing progress toward the elements of Goal 16— peace; just and inclusive societies; and effective, accountable and inclusive institutions. First, formulate detailed operational definitions and instructions for the performance indicators and associated targets; second, streamline the proposed provisional indicators to a more limited number of measures, i.e., a vital few trimmed from the current 21 provisional indicators; and, third, ensure that countries and their statistical offices and performance measurement departments take ownership of the framework of indicators.
The articles can be found on the Policy Review website. We hope that you will enjoy the insightful analyses provided by the authors on social enterprise, Canadian GM food policy, and the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals, as well as the lively discussion found in the transcript of the Policy Review’s 2016 Symposium.
The staff of the William & Mary Policy Review