Search

From the local to global level, indicators and reports are produced and published to support the transition towards sustainable development. Building from two European-level science–policy workshops, this perspective essay discusses the types of risks involved with such sustainability reporting. The analysis is rooted in the framework of the UN 2030 Agenda and sustainable development goals (SDG). As a globally adopted framework, it provides an example of how risks are either recognised and framed, or non-recognised. Well recognised risks include data availability for SDGs and siloed preparation of indicators, while risks receiving less attention are ritualistic reporting lacking a critical evaluation of the limitations of the SDG framework itself. These different risks are likely to reinforce each other. A specific risk is a too narrow focus on one-way communication aiming to inform individual policy decisions. Risks related to SDGs are best managed with iterative, integrative and interactive knowledge production fostering holistic understanding. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In 2015, all 193 member states of the United Nations (UN) agreed on the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. The special section contains the following articles: The special section opens with a conceptual article (Eckert et al. [10]) discussing the surprising fact that the risk concept is almost absent in the SDGs, and similarly, most risks assessments are narrowed down to sectoral approaches without references to the SDGs. The agreement comprises 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), specified by 169 individual targets, and a common understanding that these global goals need to be treated as being interconnected and interdependent rather than handled separately or even confined in silos (Dodds et al. [7]; UN [24]). [Extracted from the article]