IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v16y2024i23p10649-d1536887.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

What Does SDG Monitoring Practice Tell Us? An Analysis of 120 Voluntary Local Reviews

Author

Listed:
  • Iraklis Stamos

    (European Commission, Joint Research Centre (JRC), 41092 Seville, Spain)

  • Luis Vivas

    (European Commission, Joint Research Centre (JRC), 41092 Seville, Spain)

  • Iria Enrique Regueira

    (European Commission, Joint Research Centre (JRC), 41092 Seville, Spain)

  • Cecilia Bertozzi

    (European Commission, Joint Research Centre (JRC), 41092 Seville, Spain)

Abstract

This paper examines how local governments monitor the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) through voluntary local reviews (VLRs), focusing on localised practices from 2016 to 2024. Given the crucial role of local authorities in SDG implementation, the research aims to analyse differences in monitoring approaches and indicator usage across various types of local governments worldwide. The analysis involved 120 VLRs, using both quantitative methods to assess the number of indicators per goal and semantic clustering techniques to explore thematic patterns. Results show that cities are the most active in SDG localisation, especially for goals aligned with urban governance, such as Goal 11 (Sustainable Cities) and Goal 4 (Quality Education). Some goals, such as Goal 15 (Life on Land) and Goal 17 (Partnerships), are less frequently monitored, reflecting challenges in translating national objectives to local contexts. Semantic clustering highlighted both strong alignments and gaps in SDG indicator usage, particularly for overlapping goals. The paper underscores the need for more tailored, context-specific indicators for local authorities to effectively monitor SDGs, while highlighting the leadership role that cities play in this process.

Suggested Citation

  • Iraklis Stamos & Luis Vivas & Iria Enrique Regueira & Cecilia Bertozzi, 2024. "What Does SDG Monitoring Practice Tell Us? An Analysis of 120 Voluntary Local Reviews," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(23), pages 1-26, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:23:p:10649-:d:1536887
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/23/10649/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/23/10649/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    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:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:23:p:10649-:d:1536887. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.