IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/glopol/v14y2023i4p600-610.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Boundary experts: Science and politics in measuring the Sustainable Development Goals

Author

Listed:
  • Thor Olav Iversen

Abstract

The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) purport to cleanly separate politics and technical matters, embodied by the political negotiation of goals and targets, and the technical creation of an indicator framework. This article analyses how this boundary between science and politics is managed in practice. The statisticians tasked with selecting indicators through the Inter‐agency and Expert Group on Sustainable Development Goal Indicators (IAEG‐SDGs) are seconded to a global process from national statistical offices. Boundary management requires acceptance of certain normative and political aspects of creating an indicator framework, such as claims to national relevance. Others, like overt national intervention, are however considered impermissible. Each statistician must manage their role as a boundary expert that experience irresolvable tensions due to representing specific countries while being mandated to propound scientific practices and norms. Building on this empirical inquiry, the article sketches out a new normative ideal for knowledge pluralism in the measurement of sustainable development. It argues that indicator processes would benefit from more pluralistic indicator bodies than the IAEG‐SDGs. Including diversified knowledge and perspectives from civil society and international organisations would explicate already existing political contestation. It would also contribute to capturing more of the complexities of sustainable development in future monitoring frameworks through consideration of a broader selection of methodologies.

Suggested Citation

  • Thor Olav Iversen, 2023. "Boundary experts: Science and politics in measuring the Sustainable Development Goals," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 14(4), pages 600-610, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:glopol:v:14:y:2023:i:4:p:600-610
    DOI: 10.1111/1758-5899.13247
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.13247
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1758-5899.13247?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Thor Olav Iversen & Ola Westengen & Morten Jerven, 2023. "Measuring the end of hunger: Knowledge politics in the selection of SDG food security indicators," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 40(3), pages 1273-1286, September.
    2. Weber, Heloise & Weber, Martin, 2020. "When means of implementation meet Ecological Modernization Theory: A critical frame for thinking about the Sustainable Development Goals initiative," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    3. Sakiko Fukuda‐Parr & Desmond McNeill, 2019. "Knowledge and Politics in Setting and Measuring the SDGs: Introduction to Special Issue," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 10(S1), pages 5-15, January.
    4. Elaine Unterhalter, 2019. "The Many Meanings of Quality Education: Politics of Targets and Indicators in SDG4," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 10(S1), pages 39-51, January.
    5. Nancy Y. Kim & Yoorim Bang & Eun Mee Kim, 2022. "Women’s Empowerment Without Power: Strategic v. Practical Interests in SDGs and the Voluntary National Reviews," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 13(3), pages 371-389, June.
    6. Haas, Peter M., 1992. "Introduction: epistemic communities and international policy coordination," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 46(1), pages 1-35, January.
    7. Rolf Lidskog & Göran Sundqvist, 2015. "When Does Science Matter? International Relations Meets Science and Technology Studies," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 15(1), pages 1-20, February.
    8. Alicia Ely Yamin, 2019. "Power, Politics and Knowledge Claims: Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights in the SDG Era," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 10(S1), pages 52-60, January.
    9. Desmond McNeill, 2019. "The Contested Discourse of Sustainable Agriculture," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 10(S1), pages 16-27, January.
    10. Richard Jolly, 2010. "The MDGs in Historical Perspective," IDS Bulletin, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 41(1), pages 48-50, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jeanie Bukowski, 2017. "A “new water culture†on the Iberian Peninsula? Evaluating epistemic community impact on water resources management policy," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 35(2), pages 239-264, March.
    2. Sotiria Grek, 2022. "The education Sustainable Development Goal and the generative power of failing metrics [The Learning Metrics Task Force 2.0: Taking the Global Dialogues on Measuring Learning to the Country Level]," Policy and Society, Darryl S. Jarvis and M. Ramesh, vol. 41(4), pages 445-457.
    3. S. Vögele & K. Govorukha & P. Mayer & I. Rhoden & D. Rübbelke & W. Kuckshinrichs, 2023. "Effects of a coal phase-out in Europe on reaching the UN Sustainable Development Goals," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(1), pages 879-916, January.
    4. Marlee Tichenor & Sally E Merry & Sotiria Grek & Justyna Bandola-Gill, 2022. "Global public policy in a quantified world: Sustainable Development Goals as epistemic infrastructures [The ethics of a formula: Calculating a financial-humanitarian price for water]," Policy and Society, Darryl S. Jarvis and M. Ramesh, vol. 41(4), pages 431-444.
    5. Fukuda-Parr Sakiko & Smaavik Hegstad Thea, 2018. "“Leaving No One Behind” as a Site of Contestation and Reinterpretation," Journal of Globalization and Development, De Gruyter, vol. 9(2), pages 1-11, December.
    6. Thor Olav Iversen & Ola Westengen & Morten Jerven, 2023. "Measuring the end of hunger: Knowledge politics in the selection of SDG food security indicators," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 40(3), pages 1273-1286, September.
    7. Kenji Otsuka, 2022. "Co‐optation in co‐production: Maintaining credibility and legitimacy in transboundary environmental governance in East Asia," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 39(6), pages 771-797, November.
    8. Ina Tessnow-von Wysocki & Alice B. M. Vadrot, 2024. "Pathways of scientific input into intergovernmental negotiations: a new agreement on marine biodiversity," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 325-348, September.
    9. Kari De Pryck, 2021. "Intergovernmental Expert Consensus in the Making: The Case of the Summary for Policy Makers of the IPCC 2014 Synthesis Report," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 21(1), pages 108-129, Winter.
    10. Siegel, Karen M. & Bastos Lima, Mairon G., 2020. "When international sustainability frameworks encounter domestic politics: The sustainable development goals and agri-food governance in South America," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    11. Claude Paraponaris, 2017. "Plateformes numériques, conception ouverte et emploi," Post-Print halshs-01614430, HAL.
    12. Büthe Tim, 2010. "Engineering Uncontestedness? The Origins and Institutional Development of the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC)," Business and Politics, De Gruyter, vol. 12(3), pages 1-64, October.
    13. Andrew B. Whitford & Derrick Anderson, 2021. "Governance landscapes for emerging technologies: The case of cryptocurrencies," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(4), pages 1053-1070, October.
    14. Barry Eichengreen and Fabio Ghironi., 1997. "European Monetary Unification and International Monetary Cooperation," Center for International and Development Economics Research (CIDER) Working Papers C97-091, University of California at Berkeley.
    15. Frank Biermann & Thomas Hickmann & Carole-Anne Sénit & Marianne Beisheim & Steven Bernstein & Pamela Chasek & Leonie Grob & Rakhyun E. Kim & Louis J. Kotzé & Måns Nilsson & Andrea Ordóñez Llanos & Chu, 2022. "Scientific evidence on the political impact of the Sustainable Development Goals," Nature Sustainability, Nature, vol. 5(9), pages 795-800, September.
    16. Roland Königsgruber, 2010. "A political economy of accounting standard setting," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 14(4), pages 277-295, November.
    17. Mateos-Garcia, Juan & Steinmueller, W. Edward, 2008. "The institutions of open source software: Examining the Debian community," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 333-344, December.
    18. Catherine Long, 2017. "Delegated Service Authority: Institutional Evolution of PEPFAR Health-Based Program Implementing Units in Tanzania," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 8(3), pages 303-312, September.
    19. White, Joseph, 2013. "Budget-makers and health care systems," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(3), pages 163-171.
    20. Creplet, F. & Dupouet, O. & Kern, F. & Mehmanpazir, B. & Munier, F., 2001. "Consultants and experts in management consulting firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(9), pages 1517-1535, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:glopol:v:14:y:2023:i:4:p:600-610. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/lsepsuk.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.