In Agenda 2030, the world s governments expressed their determination to foster peaceful, just and inclusive societies which are free from fear and

Transcription

1 2

2 In Agenda 2030, the world s governments expressed their determination to foster peaceful, just and inclusive societies which are free from fear and violence. They set ambitious targets for reducing all forms of violence in all countries, for ensuring access to justice for all, and for building effective, accountable and inclusive institutions. Through this research proposal, New York University s Center on International Cooperation, and the Small Arms Survey, which is part of the Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies, will form a partnership that draws on our respective expertise in international relations, international development, and the use of evidence to inform the policies needed to tackle global challenges. Our work will build the intellectual foundations, evidence and alliances that will accelerate the delivery of these targets, while helping ensure that the peace and justice sustainable development goal is integrated with Agenda 2030 s broader vision, and supports the delivery of the other global goals. 1

3 Background Time to deliver Agenda 2030 As UN member states negotiated Agenda 2030, New York University s Center on International Cooperation consistently highlighted the need to move beyond the debate about the wording and number of the new goals and targets towards a rigorous consideration of the challenge of delivery (from the what of the new agenda to the how). Any delay in implementation will make it impossible to meet ambitious targets in just 15 years, given the need to shift business- as- usual trajectories well before A slow start will have political consequences, sapping momentum and tempting national and international actors to look outside the United Nations for normative and strategic leadership: Without high- profile commitments to delivery over the first five years of the new agenda, the longer- term vision to 2030 will struggle to gain credibility, while the world s capacity to undertake collective action will continue to erode. 1 By focusing on delivery, we have drawn attention to the investment, capacity, partnerships and innovation that the new agenda will need to be successful. We have also identified the High- Level Political Forum (HLPF) in 2019 as a milestone towards which all stakeholders should be working. According to the Agenda 2030 declaration, the HLPF is not only for enforcing accountability, but should encourage the sharing of experiences, including successes, challenges and lessons learned. If this positive aspect is emphasized in the early years of the new agenda, it could encourage a race to the top as countries and sectors attempt to demonstrate leadership and gain first mover advantage. The 2019 HLPF is especially important as it will be the first opportunity for leaders to review progress. CIC has argued that this forum should explicitly be positioned as a delivery summit with all international and national actors challenged to use it as a showcase for the progress they have made in delivering the new goals. Promoting peaceful and inclusive societies During the period in which the SDGs were developed, the Small Arms Survey (SAS), which is located in the Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies, focused on the need for a peaceful and inclusive societies goal to address the global burden of violence that acts as an impediment to sustainable development and which is one of the major reasons that large numbers of people are left behind by development, especially in fragile, conflict, and violence affected situations. In its work on SDG implementation, CIC has focused in particular on the challenges associated with delivering SDG16: the promotion of peaceful and inclusive societies. In April 2014, at the request of the President of the General Assembly, we reviewed the debate around the proposed SDG16. Drawing on a series of interviews with member states and other actors, we found: Support for the need to foster peaceful, non- violent and inclusive societies, but widespread disagreement as to how this objective can be achieved within the context of the post development agenda. 2

4 SDG16 faced opposition, at least in part because of a lack of understanding of the scale of the obstacles that insecurity and weak governance pose to sustainable development. There was also skepticism that targets on tackling violence, improving access to justice, and strengthening institutions would be effectively implemented, with some fearing that development would take a back seat to narrowly- defined national security objectives. A lack of confidence in the ability to measure progress also led some to challenge the viability of goals and targets for peaceful societies. Through our research, CIC and SAS have built the case that SDG16 can be effectively implemented through partnerships, policies, and interventions that are sustained over the long- term. Quick wins are important to build confidence, but meaningful progress requires a commitment that lasts for the duration of Agenda 2030 and beyond. Early investment in data, evidence and measurement systems will demonstrate both the scale of the burden of violence and the broader consequences of weak institutions and a lack of access to justice. Knowledge and disaggregated data will build the ground for the implementation of the new development agenda and for understanding the impact of the SDG policies. As the process of building the indicators framework for SDG16 is still ongoing, many (including UN Member States) acknowledge that official data alone will not be sufficient for providing the big picture on the implementation of the SDGs. A data revolution is essential to underpinning SDG16. This work is especially important in a world where a growing humanitarian and emergency workload can see attention switching from crisis to crisis, and where all countries see a highly unequal distribution of violence and access to functioning institutions. Delivery of the MDGs was supported by steady reductions in violence and improvements in institutional quality. The SDGs, which are many times more ambitious in scope, can only succeed if these trends are reinforced and accelerated. A cross- cutting delivery challenge The implementation of SDG16 is critical to the two most important cross- cutting themes for Agenda 2030: the commitment to reach the furthest behind first on the one hand, and principle of universality (goals and targets for the entire world, developed and developing countries alike ) on the other. To leave no- one behind, there must be a more effective response to the concentration of all forms of poverty income and non- income in countries and communities where violence is high and institutions are weak. A lack of capacity to deliver in these settings must also be confronted. More effective policies are needed to transform institutions and to interrupt cycles of violence, sustaining peace and supporting development over a generation or more. But at the same time, universality encourages us to look beyond a subset of fragile states to the role played by violence, injustice, and weak institutions in entrenching inequality in all countries, with a disproportionate impact on women, children and other vulnerable groups. Across the issues raised by SDG16, middle and high income countries face pressure to show they are willing to take action domestically, rather than expecting a small number of aid- dependent, conflict- affected countries to take the burden of delivering this goal. The dual focus on leaving no- one behind and tackling universal threats to sustainable development means that delivery strategies for SDG16 will need to be highly innovative, drawing on evidence, analysis and best practice from multiple sectors, and tailoring them to very different country settings. 3

5 Platforms for collective action will be needed that transcend the one- way modalities of the MDG era, that support high levels of innovation, and that are able to strengthen the evidence for what works, where, and why. It will also be important not to tackle SDG16 in isolation. Insecurity is a binding constraint to the delivery of many other SDGs. This makes it essential that approaches to delivering economic and human development priorities are designed through a peaceful and inclusive societies lens. Growing environmental pressures, which entrench poverty, drive migration, and create further insecurity, also require integrated approaches that help societies become resilient to a range of chronic stresses and acute shocks. SDG16, in other words, is a cross- cutting challenge for all three of the economic, social, and environmental pillars of sustainable development. Its delivery will require new types of analysis, evidence, and partnership. And it will place fresh demands on countries of all income levels, both to act alone and to engage in innovative forms of collective action. Foundations for delivery Agenda 2030 is now entering its start- up phase, as governments set priorities and international coalitions align themselves behind them. For those committed to SDG16 delivery, a quick start is essential, ensuring that sufficient progress is made within the first five years of the new agenda to provide a platform for accelerating progress in the 2020s. Through this new research proposal, CIC and SAS will build the intellectual foundations and alliances that will enable progress to be made ahead of the HLPF in We will also ensure that SDG16 is integrated with efforts to deliver the rest of Agenda 2030 and does not become a new silo with little connection to broader sustainable development concerns. The research program will draw on our respective expertise in creating the ideas, analysis, evidence and policies that will underpin successful delivery of SDG16. It brings together two globally respected research institutes that have a track record in acting as a resource for governments as they tackle the challenges of violence, conflict and instability, weak institutions, and a lack of access to justice, and that have deep global networks, including with research partners in the global south. Based in New York, CIC has long experience helping member states navigate the political and operational complexities presented by international cooperation in what is an often an unstable global environment, handling the sensitivities that are inevitable as states attempt to find common ground. From its base in Geneva, SAS also has deep networks of both member states and international institutions, and has a particularly strong track record in developing the data and evidence that underpins effective policymaking. 4

6 5

7 6

8 Proposal Action Platform for SDG16 implementation Building momentum Despite the scale of the challenge of delivering SDG16, strategies and implementation plans are relatively underdeveloped. This is a new goal and must be delivered from a standing start. The contrast with other SDGs, such as those for health, energy or nutrition, is clear. For these SDGs, there is a shared understanding of the scale of the challenge implied by each target, the strategies that are most likely to close the gap between the SDG target and business- as- usual trajectories, and the investment needed to support these strategies. This provides the conceptual underpinning for delivery, enabling a multitude of actors including national governments, CSOs and civil society, businesses, international organizations, foundations, and the scientific community [to] be mobilized around shared goals [in order to] solve a complex long- term investment challenge. 2 For goals where delivery is furthest advanced, a platform or network has emerged that can act as an admiral for a flotilla of partnerships, alliances, campaigns and programs not captaining any of the ships, but providing sufficient guidance that they sail in roughly the same direction. For SDG16, in contrast: We lack a long- term roadmap for what we re trying to achieve. Data and evidence are not aligned to the goal or targets, which have been set without reference to business- as- usual trajectories, a review of evidence on what works, or the development of an investment case for effective delivery. We have insufficient data to establish trends and to demonstrate whether or not SDG16 targets are being met. The expertise needed for delivery is fragmented across different fields. The lack of an integrated analysis of the problem or common ground on cost effective solutions has inhibited the emergence of integrated, multi- sectoral responses that are able to support the innovation at scale needed for transformative delivery. The link is often weak between evidence- based policymaking and practice in the field. Data from official sources will not be enough. Data dealing with peaceful and inclusive societies include important data gaps, methodologies that are still under development or are beyond the scope of what state statistical offices use so far. Not only may data not be accessible but they may be open to manipulation. Civil society, private sector and academia have an important role to overcome some of these challenges, directly as data providers and in fostering debate on access, quality and use of data. Partners are not working together effectively. This is the result of an historical lack of interaction between those working to prevent violence, those from the development community who aim to tackle fragility or increase access to justice, and those from the humanitarian field. Links to those working on other goals are even weaker. CIC and SAS therefore propose a new research program that will initially identify gaps and opportunities in the delivery of Agenda 2030 as a whole, and then focus on SDG16 with the expectation that opportunities under other goals will be taken forward through other initiatives (including a program of 7

9 research on transformational delivery of the agenda as a whole that has been designed by CIC). The research will be implemented with a range of partners, initially over two years. A two- year extension could then be considered, taking the program to the 2019 High- Level Political Forum. The first part of this research program will have the following elements: Building awareness of delivery opportunities and gaps among member states. Development of an action platform that will increase actor power and alignment, act as convener and catalyst for greater innovation and ambition, and build a strong link with practice in the field. Knowledge partnerships between state institutions, multi- lateral and international organizations, and private and civil society actors will allow for developing effective and inclusive monitoring systems capable to provide and use big data for peace and development. The second part of the program will have the following elements: Thought leadership will galvanize a debate on responses to the challenges posed by SDG16 and help build commitment to evidence- based solutions. Capacity building will help strengthen capacity to monitor progress and to strengthen the implementation of evidence- based strategies. The action platform will also be used to build links with alliances that have formed around other Agenda 2030 priorities. 8

10 Objectives We seek support for the first part of the research program, which will build consensus on delivery gaps and opportunities, strengthen measurement, and launch the delivery platform. Once this work is underway, we will develop the second part of the program thought leadership, capacity- building, and cross- sectoral linkages. This will allow us to expand the range of funders and other partners who are supporting the program. Part 1 Objective 1: Foster consensus on delivery gap areas in Agenda 2030 Why? What? Who? Member states (in particular, G77 countries) want to see that all elements of Agenda 2030 are taken seriously and that all gap areas, not only SDG16, are addressed An analytical paper on partnership gaps in Agenda 2030, and two seminars (one in New York and one in Geneva) reviewing gaps Member state missions, international organizations, the private sector, civil society actors and foundations CIC worked during 2015 on an analysis of the lessons from partnerships, the strengths and weaknesses of partnerships for SDG delivery, and those areas that have clear gaps in delivery partnerships. We also explored strategies to accelerate delivery of Agenda Several member states and UN entities have indicated that it would be useful to have a more general discussion on delivery gaps and opportunities. An analytical paper presenting this could be finalized quickly in January 2016 on the basis of existing work. Two workshops would then be proposed in New York and Geneva bringing together stakeholders. The workshops will have a mirror format, although invited stakeholders would vary slightly to take advantage of the different institutions present in New York and Geneva. The workshops would produce short outcome documents on gaps and opportunities in delivery, which amongst other uses could feed into the March 2016 partnership forum. Different stakeholders would then take up opportunity areas in which they have interest and expertise. Two gap areas that will undoubtedly be highlighted are SDG10 and SDG16, which lack coordinated delivery mechanisms. Other gaps may emerge through the process of analysis and debate. CIC will also continue to explore the broader challenges posed by Agenda 2030 through a proposed project on transformative delivery. This work will be integrated with SAS s role in Geneva developing and facilitating a SDG Hub at the Maison de la Paix. The Hub brings together the Graduate Institute for International Studies and Development as well as several other organizations active in the peace and security sector (such as the Center for Democratic Control of Armed Forces, the Geneva Center for Security Policy, the Geneva International Center for Humanitarian Demining, Interpeace, and others). The Hub is currently discussing how the Maison de la Paix and international Geneva can support the implementation of the SDGs. 9

11 Objective 2: Better global data on peaceful and inclusive societies, as a tool for implementing the delivery of SDG16 Why? How? Who? Work on delivering SDG16 will require maintaining and improving the capacities to monitor key aspects of peaceful and inclusive societies A central data hub located at the Small Arms Survey in Geneva on key aspects of SDG16; regular analytical contributions on trends in key indicators and in- depth analysis on specific issues relevant to SDG16 States, international organizations, academia and research institutions, civil society engaged in the discussions on monitoring and delivering the SDGs The process leading to the adoption of the SDGs has been accompanied by calls for a data revolution. Knowledge and disaggregated data will build the ground for the implementation of the new development agenda and for understanding the impact of the SDG policies. As the process of building the indicators framework for SDG16 is still ongoing, many (including UN Member States) acknowledge that official data alone will not be sufficient for providing the big picture on the implementation of the SDGs. This is a particularly important challenge for SDG16 where we are a long way from having the quality, accessible, timely and reliable disaggregated data [that] will be needed to help with the measurement of progress and to ensure that no- one is left behind. 3 As we have argued on page 8, knowledge partnerships will be needed between actors from all sectors if we are to effectively monitor the SDGs and use big data to boost peace and sustainable development. Building on pioneering work conducted in the frame of the Global Burden of Armed Violence (GBAV) 4 reports in 2008, 2011, and 2015 and on the databases on violent deaths *, small arms and insecurity developed by the Small Arms Survey, this component aims at strengthening the global data infrastructure on the main indicators for SDG16 (violence and insecurity, security and justice providers, accountable institutions) by actively collecting and analyzing data beyond that which is included in the official SDG architecture. This information and analysis will be used for problem identification and progress monitoring, and will be available to support relevant global, regional, and national processes. Under this objective, we will: Analyze existing data sources and the demand from key partners and stakeholders for SDG16- related data, identify data gaps and the potential for using, adapting or extending data for supporting SDG16 implementation. * As of early 2015, the violent deaths database combines statistics on homicides for 201 countries and territories from a range of existing international, regional, national, and sub- national sources. Homicide statistics are integrated with data from sources focusing on armed conflict fatalities or violent deaths from situations of severe political instability and associated levels of political violence. Data is accompanied by a set of metadata to record its methodological features and sources. This will include data on forms of violence such as interpersonal and collective (in armed conflict and in non conflict situations), and both lethal and non- lethal, helping exposing violence that is often hidden in plain sight. Such information will complement and go beyond the formal indicators for SDG16. 10

12 Develop a data hub on SDG16 that will be accessible for all partners, improving capacity for evidence- based implementation of SDG16. This will initially focus on the burden of violence, with one data update per year providing an update in trends on key indicators under SDG16 (for example, violent deaths, weapons, perceptions of security). In parallel, we will explore the potential to connect the data hub to existing data related to access to justice. The methodology and approach piloted in year 1 would be then expanded in year 2 of the project, assuming a successful proof of concept. Efforts will be conducted not only to update existing data sets but also, through specific data mining exercises, to expand coverage of data, especially on gender, location, and instruments and also on other relevant issues. Developing technical tools, instruments and approaches relevant for SDG16 monitoring, evaluation and implementation. Objective 3: Create an action platform to coordinate and accelerate the delivery of SDG16 Why? What? Who? We lack a mechanism to bring stakeholders together around SDG16 delivery challenges A platform that will develop and implement an action plan for the investment, policies and programs we need to build peaceful and inclusive societies Governments, existing partnership platforms, international organizations, the private sector, civil society actors and foundations who wish to lead on SDG16 delivery SDG16 is a new goal that was not covered in the MDGs: few structured mechanisms exist for its implementation. Twenty- three initiatives are registered under SDG16 with the UN s Partnerships for SDGs Platform, but only a small minority are primarily focused on SDG16: those that are directly linked cover only a small part of the SDG16 targets. None cover all three dimensions of the goal (peace, justice, institutions). In contrast, other sectors have well- developed platforms that increase strategic alignment with the global goal framework. Every Woman Every Child, for example, acts as a global movement to mobilize international and national action by governments, multi- laterals, the private sector and civil society to address the major health challenges facing women and children around the world. 5 It was designed to tackle the fragmentation caused by vertical funds, partnerships and programs and has launched a global strategy for 2016 to 2030, with objectives and targets aligned to the SDGs. 6 A five- year delivery plan is currently being prepared. SDG16 is not ready for a formal initiative of this kind as yet, but there is potential to bring together interested stakeholders with the policy leverage, technical expertise and finance to bring coherence to delivery. This group would help align its members strategies, identify opportunities and obstacles to 11

13 implementation, and act as a clearing house for best practice in the field and a platform for connecting countries that require expertise and assistance. Meeting first in Spring 2016 (again, in mirrored meetings in Geneva and New York), the group would review the concepts behind SDG16 as it was negotiated; baseline levels and trajectories in SDG16 targets; and lessons from other delivery partnerships. It will start to develop a vision for an action platform, including agreeing on further analysis and planning to be presented to a subsequent meeting in Fall It will also review some of the cross- sectoral issues involved in the SDG16 targets in order to consider how different parts of the UN development system, the wider multi- lateral system, and civil society can support the goal and to identify other stakeholders who might become part of an action platform. This will lead to the development of a non- paper on opportunities for accelerating SDG16 delivery, reflecting national experiences, global policy initiatives, new cooperation and financing instruments, indicators and milestones for measuring progress. This initial discussion may also provide some input to the Summer 2016 HLPF. In Fall 2016, the group would meet to consider the non- paper on accelerating delivery and start to develop a shared strategy or joint action plan on delivery. In the first half of 2017, partners will finalize this action plan, and the platform will be formally launched at a high- profile (ministerial level) event. Partners for these initiatives will include: International organizations and major partnerships those with a mandate directly related to SDG16 (IDLO, UNODC, GFPRoL, etc.), with a broad development remit (UNDP, World Bank), who focus on a particular group (UNICEF, UN Women) or bring a particular skillset (e.g. WHO for violence prevention). Partnerships that are focused one of the SDG16 s dimension (Global Partnership to End Violence Against Children, Open Government Partnership) will also play a critical role. Member states countries who bring strong domestic experiences to share and/or a diplomatic track record and financial resources and wish to play a pathfinder role for SDG16 as a whole or for one of its dimensions. Interested member states could include Brazil, Switzerland, Turkey, Argentina, Morocco, Mexico, Netherlands, South Africa, Peru, Philippines, Qatar, and United States. We will also target regional or other informal groupings of states that have identified SDG16 as a priority within Agenda 2030, such as the conflict- affected or post- conflict countries within the g7+, especially as they respond to the review of the pilot phase of the New Deal (which is being conducted by CIC). Foundations and NGOs, such as the Small Arms Survey, the Open Society Foundations, International Commission of Jurists, Saferworld, Igarape, South African Institute of International Affairs, and also national bar and police associations. 12

14 Part 2 Objective 4: Deepen the intellectual foundations for successful delivery of SDG16 Why? Fresh ideas, evidence and analysis are needed to build shared understanding of how SDG16 can be delivered What? Who? Landmark publications, with strong narrative and visuals, that build shared awareness of the scale of the challenge and the nature of the solutions A task force that brings together thought leaders from multiple sectors and draws on the analytical power and data of key international and national actors Each year, we propose deepening the debate on SDG16 by focusing on a resonant theme that has the potential to influence the policy debate. For each theme, we will form a small multi- sectoral Task Force that will draw on the expertise and analysis of major international and national actors. This networked model will increase ownership and the influence of the research. The output will be a landmark report that will have a high- profile launch with global media profile. The first theme will explore the potential for investment in systematic, sustained and large scale violence prevention interventions to achieve significant reductions in all forms of violence and related deaths everywhere (SDG16.1). The report will argue that just as target 1.A halve absolute poverty became a headline deliverable for the MDGs, violence reduction has the potential to become a resonant dimension of the SDGs for policymakers, campaigners, and the general public. The research will be published at an important time. Recent years have seen rapid improvements in data on the burden, distribution, and impact of various forms of violence, but this has yet to be correlated to the violence- related SDG targets. There is growing evidence on how cycles of violence can be interrupted, but perspectives on violence prevention are currently fragmented across many different sectors (public health, criminal justice, conflict prevention, education, child protection, gender, etc.). To deliver SDG16, policymakers need a greater understanding of what policies and programs are likely to prevent violence most effectively, combined with a sense of the likely impact of a failure to reduce violence on their broader plans to meet their obligations under Agenda The research will: Draw on existing data sources and reports (the WDR2011, Global Burden of Armed Violence reports and databases updated through objective 2 of the proposal, the Global Status Report on Violence Prevention, UNICEF s statistical analysis of violence against children, the OECD s forthcoming report on violence in fragile states, etc.). Provide an overview of the global distribution of the major forms of collective and interpersonal violence, and the implications of this distribution for the SDGs. Set out evidence for what works to prevent violence, focusing on a limited set of interventions that have the greatest potential to lead to major reductions in the burden of violence. Quantify the impact of effective delivery of these interventions on SDG16 and on other SDGs (poverty, health, education, etc.). 13

15 Make recommendations for delivering SDG16.1 and other violence- related targets, and for strengthening data, evidence, and implementation capacity. Partners for this research are likely to include WHO, UNICEF, UNODC, the World Bank, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the University of Cambridge Violence Research Centre, and others with whom CIC has been working on the development of an evidence- based package of interventions to prevent violence against children. The launch could be at a second Global Violence Reduction Conference late in 2016 or this conference could be used to debate and finalize a draft. In the second year, we will explore a theme related to the justice pillar of SDG16. Objective 5: States and other relevant stakeholders have access to expert advice and specific capacity building services for sustained engagement in violence monitoring Why? How? Who? Policy uptake of data and research needs political will to engage in evidence- based policy making; skills and capacities are needed both at policymaking and technical level on how to translate global goals into adapted national targets and indicators Training modules and tools for measuring, monitoring and evaluating violence and insecurity Academic/research institutions, civil society organizations and state institutions working on monitoring the SDGs What gets measured, gets done. Accurate and reliable data on the scope, scale, and causes of all forms of armed violence is vital for shaping policy, developing responses, and monitoring progress. However, uptake of research results and analysis does not happen automatically but is ensured by a constructive collaboration with governments and other relevant partners that will be developing the measures to reduce and prevent violence. The Small Arms Survey has regularly supported the monitoring component of international diplomatic initiatives such as the Geneva Declaration on Armed Violence and Development (GD). 7 Survey staff and experts have been involved in the consultations on the indicators for the SDG framework and have regularly worked in support of national/local data collection and monitoring institutions in regions such as Central America, East Africa, and Asia. Furthermore, the Survey has consistently been called on by national governments, inter- state organizations (such as the EU, AU, Commonwealth Secretariat, OSCE, Pacific NATO, Islands Forum, and CARICOM), regional inter- governmental organizations (such as UNREC, UNLIREC, UNRCPD, RECSA) and UN agencies (such as UNODC, UNDP) to provide expert advice, policy recommendations (and training) on small arms control measures, and legislative reform, as well as assessments of national compliance with international and regional commitments. The Small Arms Survey will continue to engage in relevant international and regional initiatives relating to security provision through violence reduction and small arms control, and to catalyze the development and implementation of adapted solutions by knowledge creation and expert analysis. This component will look at how SAS expertise can be used to inform relevant processes as well as to strengthen capacities of relevant violence monitoring systems at international/regional/national level. 14

16 Outputs Outreach to relevant multi- lateral and/or regional and national initiatives through briefings and orientations events related to data collection, monitoring and analysis for security provision, Agenda 2030, fragility, SALW control and eradication of violence against women and girls. Development of a tool and associated training package on monitoring violent deaths / small arms / security and justice (or other relevant issues developed in collaboration with NYU CIC and the project partners, for example on violence and education ) that can be used for the monitoring of selected aspects under SDG16. Engagement of SAS experts for strengthening capacities of existing selected violence monitoring systems through training and coaching (delivery of training package; focusing on 2-3 pilot institutions that can play the role of regional centers then providing support to a larger regional network of institutions). (Co- )Organization of one outreach or expert event per year on adapting global SDG16 indicators at the national/local level these meetings will provide the opportunity to support national policy making and violence monitoring systems (VMS, or violence observatories ), in translating and adapting global level indicators into a national indicators framework. An Issue Brief (IB) aimed at advancing the research agenda on violence observatories. The paper will look at what works in establishing violence monitoring institutions, collecting practitioners experiences and lessons learned in developing and sustaining VMS. Objective 6: Strengthen integration between SDG16 and the rest of Agenda 2030 Why? How? Who? Violence, injustice, and weak institutions present substantial obstacles to the delivery of most SDGs Joint analysis and strategic development to explore implications of SDG16 for other sectors Agenda 2030 coalitions from fields such as education and health Work under this objective will focus initially in health and education, where SDGs will not be delivered without effective implementation of SDG16. In education, insecurity is a major determinant of failures of both access and quality, while targeting of education systems is on the increase. More broadly, weak governance leads to low returns on investment in education (both domestic and international finance). For health, the global strategy recognizes that the new health targets will not be reached in fragile settings due to conflict and violence, injustice, weak institutions, disruption to health systems and infrastructure, economic instability and exclusion, and inadequate capacity to respond to crises. For each of these sectors, we will run joint seminars in the first year under part 2 of the program exploring the role that the SDG16 action platform can play in increasing the effectiveness of sectoral delivery, working with Every Woman Every Child and the Global Partnership for Education. 15

17 This will allow the development of a joint plan of action for year 2 and beyond. For each sector, we will form working groups that will be co- hosted by the SDG action platform and the relevant sectoral partnership and which will tackle joint delivery challenges. 16

18 Impact The research program is divided into two interlinked parts with the following objectives, outputs and outcomes. Part 1 Objective Outputs Outcomes 1 Foster consensus on delivery gap areas in Agenda 2030 Seminar on Agenda 2030 delivery in New York Seminar on Agenda 2030 delivery in Geneva Growing awareness of gaps in Agenda 2030 delivery Consensus on how to move forward on SDG delivery Outcome document on delivery gaps and opportunities for Partnership Forum 2 Better global data on violent deaths, injuries and insecurity, as a tool for implementing the delivery of SDG16 Accessible databases on violent deaths, weapons and insecurity Development of methodology for connecting the database to sources on access to justice (year 1) and expanding data collection (year 2) Improved ability to assess, monitor and use effectively key issues related to violence, security providers, access to justice and weapons relevant for global processes Regular data updates (1 per year) and analysis on violent deaths trends (short publications on selected issues and trends) 3 Create an action platform to coordinate and accelerate the delivery of SDG16 Member state consultation and expert briefing Development of non- paper on delivery Formation of informal group and initial meetings Seminars with members of the Action Platform on Task Force work on violence prevention Shared platform for major actors creates strategic alignment Roadmap provides basis for acceleration of delivery Increased implementation and investment ahead of the 2019 HLPF Draft roadmap or SDG16 delivery High level event to launch roadmap and action platform 17

19 Part 2 Objective Outputs Outcomes 4 Deepen the intellectual foundations for successful delivery of SDG16 Peaceful and Inclusive Societies Task Force formed, with 12 global experts At least 20 key international and national stakeholders engaged in supporting Task Force Three briefing papers published Increased shared awareness of evidence based solutions Increased engagement in and political will for SDG16 delivery Strengthened partnerships and alliances for implementation Online submissions and consultation Report published Launch event [Repeat for new theme in year 2] 5 Building capacities for more effective monitoring, assessment and evaluation of key aspects of SDG16 implementation Training modules for violence monitoring institutions Tool- kits on SDG16 M&E Experience sharing workshops/expert meetings on specific aspects of SDG16 monitoring Improved capacities for collecting and using data and knowledge to implement relevant targets within relevant international the processes (SDG, Women Peace and Security, etc.) Publication (IB) 6 Strengthen integration between SDG16 and the rest of Agenda 2030 Seminar on SDG16 and health Seminar on SDG16 and education Joint plan of action for health Joint plan of action for education Strengthened alliances with other Agenda 2030 coalitions Greater investment and capacity for SDG16 delivery SDG16 and health joint working group SDG16 and education joint working group 18

20 Governance We propose holding two steering meetings per year with funding partners, either in the margins of other program meetings or virtually. These meetings will review the project s implementation and impact. They will also be instrumental for discussing outreach and strategies to increase the program s support and funding. Reporting will be completed according to funders needs (preferably annually when looking at outcomes). 19

21 Budgets Part 1 Action Platform & Global Data CIC: Estimated resources Part 1 Objective 1 Foster Consensus Total Staff/expert time analyzing SDG delivery gaps 96,000-96,000 Staff time for outreach, organizing and convening 38,000-38,000 NY and Geneva meetings, including travel 20,000-20,000 Publications and communications 2,000-2,000 Sub- total component 156, ,000 Part 1 Objective 3 Create an Action Platform Total Staff/expert time for member state consultation, briefing and 140, , ,000 meetings Staff/expert time for development of background papers 77,000 87, ,000 NY and Geneva meetings and travel 30,000 40,000 70,000 Publications and communications 17,000 28,000 45,000 Sub- total component 264, , ,000 Objective 1 and 3 total 420, , ,000 Indirect costs (NYU fiduciary/hr at 10%) 42,000 32,000 74,000 Total Part 1 462, , ,000 Funds from NL Contribution 95,000 11, ,000 Total Request for SDC Funding 367, , ,000 SAS: Estimated resources Part 1 Objective 2 Global Data Total Expert time for data collection, integration and analysis 140, , ,000 Expert time for developing and testing methodology for 40,000 40,000 80,000 integrating data sources on access to justice (year 1) and data collection and analysis (year 2) Expert time for data visualization and data sharing 30,000 30,000 60,000 Publications related to the component 20,000 20,000 40,000 Travel for outreach events 5,000 5,000 10,000 Sub- total component 235, , ,000 Administrative costs, IT, communication, infrastructure 24,000 24,000 48,000 (10% overhead) Total Part 1 259, , ,000 Funds from Core Contribution 33,000 33,000 66,000 Total Request for SDC Funding 226, , ,000 Overall Total Part 1 721, ,000 1,327,000 20

22 Part 2 Knowledge taskforce, links with other SDGs & capacity building CIC: Estimated resources Part 2 Objective 4 Intellectual Foundations Total Staff time - outreach for task force, convening, organization 50,000 56, ,000 Staff/expert time - data collection, analysis and recommendations 145, , ,000 Venues, travel 30,000 30,000 60,000 Publications and communications 5,000 5,000 10,000 Sub- total component 230, , ,000 Part 2 Objective 6 Integration of SDG Agenda Total Staff time, seminars, preparation and working groups - 24,000 24,000 Expert time joint plans of action - 48,000 48,000 Venues, travel, catering - 30,000 30,000 Publications and communications - 10,000 10,000 Sub- total component 112, ,000 Direct costs total 230, , ,000 Indirect costs (NYU fiduciary/hr at 10%) 23,000 35,000 58,000 Total Part 2 253, , ,000 SAS: Estimated resources Part 2 budget for objective 5 capacity building for SDG integration Total Staff and expert time capacity building component 80,000 80, ,00 Delivery of training modules 40,000 40,000 80,000 Travel for expert meetings 20,000 20,000 40,000 Co- organization of events and regional meetings 12,000 12,000 24,000 Sub- total component 152, , ,000 Administrative costs, IT, communication, infrastructure 15,000 15,000 30,000 (10% overhead) Total Part 2 167, , ,000 Overall Total Part 2 420, , ,000 21

23 Estimated program budget totals CIC Total Parts 1 and 2 715, ,000 1,451,000 SAS Total Parts 1 and 2 426, , ,000 Program total 1,141,000 1,162,000 2,303,000 CIC is a research center in the Faculty of Arts and Science (FAS) at NYU. CIC s director reports to the Dean of the faculty and ultimate oversight of the Center s activities through him rests with the board of governors at NYU. The Center is subject to all the university s personnel, management, and financial regulations. All CIC s grants are approved and supervised by the Office of Sponsored Programs with each agreement approved by the contract s office. Fiduciary duty for CIC s budget is the responsibility of the university. Oversight of CIC s expenditures is the responsibility of the FAS Senior Associate Dean (Fiscal and Administrative Affairs) and his accounts team. CIC s accounts included as part of the faculties and audited as part of the university s, which are available on its website. CIC shares with NYU the status of a tax- exempt 501 (3)(c) nonprofit under the US Internal Revenue Code. NYU has a longstanding track record in managing funds, administering an annual budget of over $2.892 billion. Established in 1999, the Small Arms Survey (SAS) is a global center of excellence whose mandate is to generate evidence- based, impartial, and policy- relevant knowledge on all aspects of small arms and armed violence. It is the principal international source of expertise, information, and analysis, and acts as a resource for governments, policymakers, researchers, and civil society. SAS is a project of the Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies in Geneva, Switzerland a leading institution of research and higher education dedicated to the study of world affairs, with a particular emphasis on the cross- cutting fields of international relations and development issues. SAS is supported by the Swiss Federal Department of Foreign Affairs and current contributions from the Governments of Australia, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Finland, Germany, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Support has also come from various United Nations agencies, including UNDP. 22

24 1 Alex Evans and David Steven (2015), What Happens now? Time to deliver the post development agenda, New York: Center on International Cooperation, New York University, available at content/uploads/2015/what_happens_now_april_2015.pdf, p Guido Schmidt- Traub and Jeffrey D Sachs (2015), Financing Sustainable Development: Implementing the SDGs through Effective Investment Strategies and Partnerships, available at content/uploads/2015/04/ SDSN- Financing- Sustainable- Development- Paper- FINAL- 02.pdf, p48 3 United Nations (2015), Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 25 September 2015 Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, available at 4 Geneva Declaration on Armed Violence and Development (2015), Global Burden of Armed Violence 2015: Every Body Counts, available at burden- of- armed- violence/global- burden- of- armed- violence html 5 Every Woman Every Child (2015), What is Every Woman Every Child?, available at is- every- woman- every- child 6 Every Woman, Every Child, (2015), The Global Strategy for Women s, Children s and Adolescents Health ( ) Survive, Thrive, Transform. New York: Every Woman, Every Child, available at 7 See Geneva Declaration on Armed Violence and Development, 23