UN OWG Proposed Target 4.7
RATING: POOR – First of all, the target contains too many diverse components each deserving a separate treatment and rating. Second, many of the components are nice-sounding keywords that are difficult to define: For example, what is “culture of peace and non-violence”? What exactly is a “culture of sustainable development”? If these are not defined well then the target risks being ineffective.
Setting the Right Global Goals
Just have three minutes? Watch the video:
You can read about our prioritization project, setting smart, cost-effective goals in this op-ed published around the world including Turkey, Ethiopia, Indonesia, Uganda, South Korea, Costa Rica and the Philippines.
Download the entire report
In our recent report, not just the target above, but all 169 targets have been assessed by 60 teams of the world’s top economists. The targets have been categorized into five ratings based on evidence of economic, social, and environmental costs and benefits. While we applaud that the UN Open Working Group's final outcome document contains 43 fewer targets than the previous document, we are concerned that many targets have simply been combined, therefore reducing the number of both phenomenal and poor targets assessed according to our cost-benefit analysis. Our new assessment includes suggestions for how these can be improved as reported in this article by the Financial Times.