Abstract
This paper proposes a framework on Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) evaluation, arguing that attainment of the 17 goals and 169 related targets depends significantly on practice-based monitoring and evaluation. The SDGs’ 15-year time frame can helpfully be divided into three 5-year phases: a planning phase driven by proactive evaluation and evaluability assessment, an improvement phase characterized by formative evaluation and monitoring, and a completion phase involving outcome and impact evaluations. Under these phases, in order not to miss the SDGs’ fundamental philosophy of “no one left behind,” local relevance must be considered when evaluating SDG programs, particularly to capture the overarching concepts applicable across the 17 goals, such as educational dynamics and resilience.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Notes
The total number of indicators identified was 232 as of March 2017. Report of the Inter-Agency and Expert Group on SDG Indicators (E/CN.3/2017/2), Annex III.
(Owen 2006, Chap. 9–10) emphasizes the important role of evaluation in the formative stages of new interventions using the notion of “proactive” and “clarificative” forms of evaluation.
Goal 2 of the MDGs was an educational goal, to achieve universal primary education, with a set of indicators such as primary school enrolment and adult literacy.
(UNDESA 2016, pp 26–27) categorizes SDG indicators into three groups (Tiers 1–3). Tier 1 is the group of the indicators with an established methodology and data already widely available. Tier 2 is that with an established methodology but insufficient data coverage. And Tier 3 is that for which a methodology is being developed. Three out of five Target 4.7-indicators are categorized into Tier 3 (UNESCO-UIS 2016, p 54), and there are still 40% of all indicators categorized into Tier 3.
References
Adger WN (2000) Social and ecological resilience: are they related?. Prog Hum Geogr 24:347–364
Adger NW, Hughes TP, Folke C, Carpenter SR, Rockström J (2005) Social-Ecological Resilience to Coastal Disasters. Science 309:1036–1039
Antwi EK, Otsuki K, Saito O, Obeng FK et al (2014) Developing a Community-Based Resilience Assessment Model with reference to Northern Ghana. J Integr Disaster Risk Manag 4:73–92
Bamberger M, Segone M, Tateossian F (2016) Evaluating the Sustainable Development Goals: with a “no one left behind” lens through equity-focused and gender-responsive evaluations. https://www.evalpartners.org/sites/default/files/documents/evalgender/Eval-SDGs-WEB.pdf. Accessed 19 July 2017
Biggs R, Schluter M, Schoon ML (2015) Principles for building resilience sustaining ecosystem services in social-ecological systems. Cambridge University Press, New York
Carpenter SR, Walker BH, Anderies JM, Abel N (2001) From metaphor to measurement: resilience of what to what? Ecosystems 4:765–781
Folke C (2006) Resilience: the emergence of a perspective for social-ecological systems analyses. Glob Environ Chang 16:253–267
Hollnagel E, Pariès J, Woods DD, Leveson N (eds) (2006) Resilience engineering: concepts and recepts. Ashgate Publishing, Aldershot
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (2014) Summary for policymakers. In: Climate change 2014: impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability. Part A: global and sectoral aspects, Contribution of Working Group II to the Fifth Assessment Report. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK
Japan International Cooperation Agency (2017) Sell electricity by measure in a non-electrified community, mundi 46:16
Owen J (2006) Program evaluation: form and approaches, 3rd edn. Allen & Unwin, Crowds Nest
Patton MQ (2015) A transnational global systems perspective: in search of the blue marble evaluation. Can J Progr Eval 30(3):374–390
Rossi PH et al (2004) Evaluation: a systematic approach, 7th edn. Sage Publication, CA
Saito O, Boafo YA, Jasaw GS, Antwi EK, Kikuko S, Kranjac-Berisavljevic G, Yeboah R, Obeng F, Gyasi E, Takeuchi K (2017) The Ghana model for resilience enhancement in semi-arid Ghana: conceptualization and social implementation. In: Saito O, Kranjac-Berisavljevic G, Takeuchi K, Gyasi E (eds) Strategies for building resilience against climate and ecosystem changes in sub-Saharan Africa. Springer, NY
Schwandt T, Ofir Z, Lucks D, El-Saddick K, D’Errico S (2016) The International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED) Briefing. (http://pubs.iied.org/17357IIED). Accessed 26 April 2017
Smith M (1990) Program evaluation in the human services. Springer, NY
UN General Assembly resolution (2015) 70/1 on “transforming our world: the 2030 agenda for Sustainable Development” adopted on 25 September 2015, paragraph 72
UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UNDESA) (2016) Report of the secretary-general: progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals. United Nations, NY
UN Evaluation Group (2016) Report of the United Nations Evaluation Group evaluation practice exchange 2016 seminar 25–26 April, 2016. WIPO, Geneva
UNESCO-UIS (2016) Laying the foundation to measure sustainable development goal 4. UNESCO-UIS, Quebec
Walker BH, Salt D (2006) Resilience thinking: sustaining ecosystems and people in a changing world. Island Press, Washington, DC
Walker BH, Carpenter SR, Anderies J, Abel N, Cumming G, Janssen M, Lebel L, Norberg J, Peterson GD, Pritchard R (2002) Resilience management in social-ecological systems: a working hypothesis for a participatory approach. Conserv Ecol 6(1):14
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to express thanks for the financial support received from the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science through the Grant-in-Aid for Challenging Exploratory Research (No. 16K13348).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Handled by Osamu Saito, United Nations University Institute for the Advanced Study of Sustainability, Japan.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Yonehara, A., Saito, O., Hayashi, K. et al. The role of evaluation in achieving the SDGs. Sustain Sci 12, 969–973 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-017-0479-4
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-017-0479-4