Nexus governance for transformative change: Technical report of the Transform 2030 data set
Lead authors: Oscar
Widerberg, Cornelia Fast, Montserrat Koloffon, Philipp Pattberg
Contributing authors: Faradj Koliev, Ian Higham, Karin Bäckstrand, Julia
van Heese, and Essraa Hussein
oscar.widerberg@vu.nl
Contributing authors: Faradj Koliev, Ian Higham, Karin Bäckstrand, Julia van Heese, and Essraa Hussein
11 mei, 2023
Abstract
The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) aim to adress interconnected global challenges such as climate change, biodiversity loss and poverty reduction. Multi-stakeholder partnerships (MSPs) - including public, private and civil society organizations - play an important role in implementing the 2030 Agenda (see SDG 17 on Partnerships for the goals) and might offer a vehicle for creating synergies between issue areas and thus bring about transformative change. This technical report maps and analyzes a sample of existing and recently concluded transnational MSPs with the potential to address multiple SDGs simultaneously. It provides a detailed description of the background, methodology, and key observations from building a data set of MSPs that work on two or more SDGs, serving as an empirical basis for the multi-year project Transformative partnerships for sustainable development: Assessing synergies, effectiveness, and legitimacy of the UN’s multi-stakeholder partnerships across SDGs to achieve the 2030 Agenda (Funded by Formas under grant number 2020-00418).Key messages
MSPs have the potential to connect the environmental SDGs (notably climate change (13), water (6) and biodiversity (14 and 15)) in particular, with social and economic SDGs (notably energy, education, health and hunger).
Clean water and changing consumption and production patterns are the least connected SDGs through MSPs.
About 56% of MSPs in the sample show online activity, 22% have been concluded and 22% have no sign of online activity.
Large UN summits (e.g. Rio +20, UNFCCC COP21, and the UN Ocean Conferences) are popular venues for launching new MSPs or re-branding existing ones.
Public authorities, in particular international organizations and national governments, are most prevalent members in MSPs.
Nearly half of MSPs have knowledge dissemination as key function. The least frequently occuring function is finance and service provision.
1 Introduction
Multi-stakeholder partnerships (MSPs) between public, private and civil society organizations are expected to play an important role in implementing the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and the 2030 Agenda. In 2015, when the United Nations General Assembly’s adopted the 2030 Agenda and the SDGs, UN member states emphasized the role of MSPs through Goal 17 - Strengthen the means of implementation and revitalize the Global Partnership for Sustainable Development UN (2015). MSPs are expected to address challenges across geographies and to “mobilize and share knowledge, expertise, technology and financial resources” to support the implementation of Agenda 2030 (UN 2015, 27). Subsequently, the need to accelerate and scale up action was pronounced both through the launch of the Decade of Action in 2020 and at the Stockholm+50 conference in 2022. The 2023 SDG Progress Report also sound the alarm of insufficient action towards the SDGs (UN 2023). th A key feature to accelerated action is to understand and address the interconnected nature of global challenges such as climate change, biodiversity loss and poverty reduction (Prescott and Stibbe 2020). Climate change, for instance, is changing precipitation patterns which in turn puts pressure on ecosystems and local communities’ ability to sustain themselves and thereby undermine poverty alleviation efforts. Consequently, addressing environmental, social and economic SDGs together could generate greater benefits than focusing only on single targets. MSPs may be considered vehicles for creating synergies between two or more SDGs.
1.1 Why multi-stakeholder partnerships
MSPs set up to address global sustainability challenges proliferated substantially in the early 2000’s. Mega-conferences on sustainable development and environmental issues have proven to be fertile grounds for new MSPs to arise or old ones to reinvent themselves. During events such as the World Summit on Sustainable Development in 2002 and the Rio+20 Conference on Sustainable Development in 2012, as well as conferences in adjacent issue areas such as the COP21 to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in 2015 and the UN Ocean Summits, a relatively high number of new MSPs have been observed. Proponents of MSPs laud the rise of partnerships, emphasizing their potential to provide effective governance where governments and international organizations are incapable of acting on their own (Liese and Beisheim 2011). Public, private and civil society organizations could share resources and expertise to implement global development goals through networks, making the whole greater than the sum of the parts. Inter-sectoral cooperation could also increase legitimacy of global governance by engaging actors from various parts of society, including vulnerable and under-represented groups. Critics of MSPs, however, focus instead on the risks of outsourcing implementation to an indistinct and heterogeneous group of actors, enabling governments to reduce commitments made in inter-governmental fora, and masking and entrenching existing power-asymmetries - mainly favoring corporate business and NGO elites, with the UN’s and the SDG’s seal of approval, sometimes referred to as “blue-washing” (see e.g. Benner, Reinicke, and Witte 2004; Bäckstrand 2008; Zammit 2003). Existing research on MSPs launched over the past 20-years appears to fuel the critics’ fires. Beyond single cases of highly influential and visible MSPs such as Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance or the Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Partnership (REEEP), there is little systemic evidence supporting the narrative that MSPs are effective, legitimate and transformative. For instance, a review of 340 partnerships in 2012, found that over 60 % were inactive, lacked observable output or did not operate in line with their own ambitions (Pattberg et al. 2012). A more recent effort by Andonova and colleagues, explores a small but rich data set of MSPs for sustainability and concludes that neither the proponents nor the critics can be declared winners (2022). They point towards a “partnership paradox” which holds that partnerships make large promises without clarifying what they exactly deliver and call for more research, including new data and methodologies for studying various pathways to effectiveness (Andonova, Faul, and Piselli 2022, 275).
Recent literature on partnerships and the SDGs reignites the hope that institutional design and learning from the past could translate into more effective partnerships for achieving the 2030 Agenda. Horan, for instance, suggests to focus on the mismatch between demand and supply of partnerships for the SDGs; on the composition of actors; and conducive institutional arrangements for collaboration to improve effectiveness (Horan 2022a, 2019, 2022b). Others highlight the importance (and difficulty) of meta-governance (Beisheim and Simon 2018; see also Beisheim and Fritzsche 2021) and the changing character of partnerships to become more inclusive in terms of participation by actors from emerging and developing economies (Bull and McNeill 2019).
1.2 Why the Transform 2030 data set
Following in the footsteps of Andonova and colleagues, and heeding the call for more data and new methods, this report presents the Transform 2030 data set. The data set focuses on transnational MSPs that aim to connect two or more SDGs. It consists of a subset of entries from the Partnership Platform maintained by United Nations Division of Economic and Social Affairs (UN DESA), which is open for registration of voluntary commitments and partnerships to achieve the SDGs and functions as an engagement platform. As of March 2023, the platform hosts an impressive number of nearly 7,000 entries created by stakeholders that voluntarily register their initiatives (UNDESA 2022). The entries differ widely in type, size and ambition, however. Some are multi-million dollar endeavors with secretariats of permanent staff and resourceful partners spread across the globe. Others are actions taken by single individuals, companies, and local communities with limited resources or reach. Strictly speaking, few can be called transnational multi-stakeholder partnerships. In this report, we aim to stay close to the definition and operationalization of MSPs for sustainability used by global governance researchers including inter alia Andonova and colleagues (2022), Bäckstrand (2006), Beisheim and Liese (2014), Schäfferhof and colleagues (2009), and Pattberg and colleagues (2012) (see Annex 1 for methodological notes). However, we use a tiered approach to determining whether the MSPs fall within a narrow or broad definition of transnational MSPs.
The report is an output of the research project Transformative
partnerships for sustainable development: Assessing synergies,
effectiveness, and legitimacy of the UN’s multi-stakeholder partnerships
across SDGs to achieve the 2030 Agenda, funded by Formas, the Swedish
Research Council for Sustainable Development, the project comprises
international relations and political science scholars from Stockholm
University, Lund University and the Institute for Environmental Studies,
Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.
The aim of the research project is to explain the extent to which MSPs
are potential tools for effective, synergistic, and inclusive
governance. Furthermore, it assesses under what conditions UN
partnerships for sustainable development can contribute to achieve the
2030 Agenda and accelerate transformative shifts toward
sustainability.
1.3 Aim of this report
The aim of this report is twofold. First, describe the characteristics of the MSPs in the data set, including their partner composition, functions and the specific SDGs they connect, and, second, illustrate to what extent MSPs simultaneously address multiple SDGs. As a result of the mapping exercise, this report highlights key trends among a set of global MSPs and raises questions about its implications for their role in governing synergies between SDGs. Consequently, it provides entry points for future research about the effectiveness, legitimacy and accountability of MSPs within and beyond the Transform 2030 research project. Moreover, the report outlines the methodology for doing research on MSPs and is explained in detail in Annex 1 and 2 (for a comparable approach, see also Coenen, Glass, and Sanderink 2022). The outline of this technical report is as follows. In section 2 we presents our methodology. In section 3 we discuss our main findings by presenting descriptive statistics of the data set, including a preliminary analysis of the potential SDG synergies. Finally, in section 4, we draw conclusions from our findings, list key messages and provide suggestions for future research avenues.
2 Methodology
In this section, we briefly explain the methodological choices and steps taken to assemble the Transform 2030 data set. For technical information, please visit Annex 1 and 2 to this report.
The methodology for compiling the Transform 2030 data set consists of both automated methods (using computer-based techniques) and manual coding. It builds on, but also extends, the logic and proven methods, operationalizations and coding for gathering similar data sets, for instance, the CONNECT-data on international cooperative initiatives for climate change (Widerberg, Pattberg, and Kristensen 2016), forests (Dias Guerra et al. 2015), and, fisheries (Arnau et al. 2017); the CLIMENGO-data on initiatives in the climate-energy nexus (Sanderink et al. 2018), and; the Bio* data on biodiversity initiatives (Negacz et al. 2020). The following four steps were taken to assemble the data set.
First, we use the Partnership Platform as a source to find MSPs that fit the Transform 2030 project goals. The platform is maintained by United Nations Division of Economic and Social Affairs (UN DESA) and contains some 7,000 entries made by, what UN DESA refers to as “stakeholders”. All available information on the entries were downloaded from the website by building and running a web scraper. The scraping, carried out on February 2nd 2022, rendered 6936 entries. Duplicates were removed computationally by name of the entry, excluding 1137 entries, leaving 5799 for further analysis.
Out of 6936 entries on UN DESA’s Partnership Platform, we found 1137 duplicates.
Second, the Transform 2030 project is interested in MSPs working across two or more SDGs. Each entry on the Partnership Platform contains information regarding which SDGs the stakeholders themselves believe they contribute towards. However, such information is highly dependent on each stakeholder’s understanding and knowledge of the SDGs. To control for such biases in the data, we instead choose for a dictionary-based approach to identify which SDGs the entries target. It entails developing a dictionary of keywords for each SDG and their targets using the ‘Global indicator framework for the Sustainable Development Goals and targets of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development’. For instance, SDG 1 (No poverty) would be associated for words such as “poverty”, “land tenure”, and “social protection”. In total, 465 keywords and phrases were identified (see Annex 2 for a complete list). The dictionary was applied using automated content analysis to the descriptions of the 5799 entries from step 1, and those only addressing one SDG were excluded for further analysis. Also entries that did not provide a website were excluded, leaving 2452 entries for further analysis.
Data and descriptions of nearly 2,500 entries were examined to find which ones that could qualify as multi-stakeholder partnerships
Third, since stakeholders are given a large degree of freedom to upload whatever they see fit to the platform, the Partnership Platform comprises a heterogeneous set of initiatives, individual commitments, programs, projects, plans and partnerships. Determining among these what constitutes an MSP thus requires careful consideration. To determine which entries qualify as an MSP, the core team in consultation with the project members developed a protocol consisting of four questions by operationalizing Andonova’s definition of MSPs which reads “Voluntary agreement between public and non-state actors on a set of governance objectives and norms, rules, practices, implementation procedures, across multiple jurisdictions and levels of governance” (Andonova 2017). The protocol consists of four criteria: (1) if the entry involves different public, private or civil society organizations; (2) if the partners are based in more than one country; (3) if the entry targets more than one jurisdiction; (4) if the entry has a high or low level of institutionalization (tier 1 or 2), that were applied manually to the 2452 entries. Only entries that fulfilled all four criteria, were considered eligible for next steps, leaving around 371 entries for further analysis.
The MSPs in the data set adhere to a narrow or a broad definition of MSPs. The first group (“Tier 1”) apply a narrow definition of MSPs. The second group (“Tier 2”) apply a broad definition. In the description of the findings, we present both tiers separately. For examples and further discussion, please see Annex 1.
Four, the entries were coded across 48 variables, including basic information, partners, and function. Data from a pilot-project to the Transform 2030 project called PRIO, were subsequently merged with the entries, and further refined based on a 24-page code-book (further developing, expanding and refining a pilot project called “PRIO’s” project’s code-book) (see Koliev and Bäckstrand 2022). The code-book also contains detailed information for the coding of in step 3 (access the code-book here). The results of the coding are presented in the following sections.
For more detailed information on specific parts of the methodology, including caveats and remedies, please see the annexes.
3 Findings
This section describes the findings of the assembly of the Transform 2030 data set. It starts with an analysis of the MSPs level of activity. Second, a number of descriptive statistics are presented, including start and end-years, type of partners, most mentioned countries, and functions. Subsequently, it describes which SDGs that are most and less frequently connected by the MSPs revealing potential synergies. Finally, the conclusions summarize the main findings from mapping various characteristics and look ahead towards future research.
3.1 Activity level
The Partnership Platform encourages but does not require stakeholders registering an entry on their platform to provide evidence of any activity or impact. In previous iterations of the Platform, stakeholders were able to upload progress reports, however that feature is currently disabled. Few stakeholders, however, seem to have made use of the opportunity to upload progress reports. A pilot study to the Transform 2030 project looked at some 1,600 entries on the Platform and found that a mere 15% had provided a progress report (Koliev and Bäckstrand 2022). The findings resonate with earlier research on MSPs which suggests that many partnerships disintegrate after their launch. A 2012 review of 340 partnerships launched during the World Summit on Sustainable Development in 2002, showed that nearly 40% didn’t show any activity whatsoever five years after their presentation in Johannesburg (Pattberg et al. 2012; Bäckstrand and Kylsäter 2014). In the Transform 2030 data set, the numbers are not quite that as high. Out of 473 MSPs, 267 are currently active, while an additional 104 showed signs of having been active online before the COVID-19 pandemic hit in 2019. These make up in total 371 observations that are active and/or have been concluded.
57% of MSPs are active, 22% have been concluded and 22% show no signs of activity beyond the entry on the Platform
Figure 1. Level of activity in MSPs (n = 473)
Since we are mainly interested in currently or recently active, as well as, concluded MSPs, the following sections focus on the sample of 371 MSPs.
3.2 Start and end years
Environmental mega-conferences such as the World Summit on Sustainable Development, the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development in 2012 (Rio+20), the UNFCCC COPs 15 and 21, as well as, the UN Ocean Conferences, have become popular venues for launching or re-branding MSPs. UN DESA itself is seemingly aware of this, arguing that the Partnership Platform “brings together different registries launched in support of various UN conferences and processes dealing with sustainable development over the years” (UNDESA 2022). The Transform 2030 data set confirms this picture suggesting that the Rio+20 conference in 2012, UNFCCC COP21 in Paris in late 2015, the first UN Ocean Conference held in New York in 2017, functioned as important launchpads. Figure 2 plots the self-reported launch year of the MSPs, which makes it possible to study how the number of MSPs has evolved over time.
Figure 2. MSPs’ starting year
Figure 2 shows that 2014 is comparable to 2012 in terms of number of MSPs that were launched. This could potentially be explained by the 2014 Small Island Developing State (SIDS) Conference taking place. In 2015, the 2030 Agenda was launched in summer followed by the Paris Agreement being signed in autumn at the COP21 Climate Conference. We observe relatively high numbers of starting dates in 2015, and even higher in the aftermath of these two international events on sustainability, in 2016. Finally, the largest number of MSPs were launched in 2017, which is likely explained by the UN Ocean Conference. One can also speculate why no MSPs were launched in some years. For instance, the low number in 2020 could be due to the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, despite the fact that there were partnerships set up in response to the pandemic (e.g. the COVAX initiative, which is not featured on the Partnership Platform). The MSPs, launched before the adoption of the SDGs in 2015, initially were set-up to address the MDGs that were adopted in 2000. Finally, 90 MSPs have no information about their starting year, these been excluded from Figure 2.
Figure 3 provides an overview of the end year as stated by the MSPs. The most popular end year is 2030 which makes sense in terms of congruence with the 2030 Agenda. However, the data also suggests that many MSPs on the platform should already have been concluded.
75% of the MSPs have an end year before 2023
The majority of MSPs have 2020, 2021, or 2022 as end year, suggesting that many of them consider themselves time-bound initiatives with decisions on continuance decided at a later stage. The data quality however is similar to starting year, with 57 MSPs providing no end-date and one providing 2099 as end-date.
Figure 3. MSPs’ end year
The start and end year data could be interpreted in several ways. They demonstrate that mega-conferences fill an important function for MSPs as launchpads. It also suggest that the 2030 Agenda has become an anchoring point for many MSPs. The missing data on about 24% of the MSPs could either be understood as purposeful actions of the stakeholder entering the data, with no plan for an end-year, or as an unintentional act, where the data was simply omitted due to time or knowledge constraints.
3.3 Partners
MSPs in the past have often been launched, led, and maintained by international organizations and national government, sometimes in cooperation with large and resourceful NGOs (see e.g. UNEP 2018; Mert 2015; Pattberg et al. 2012). The Transform 2030 data set follows a similar pattern. Figure 3 provides an overview of the distribution of partners.
Figure 4. Number of MSPs per type of partner
International organizations (IOs) are the most common type of partner. In fact 67% (n=251) of all MSPs have at least one IO as a partner. These are of different sizes and have a varied geographical reach (e.g. global, regional). IO’s are perhaps logical partners for transnational MSPs, meaning that they have partners from and also target more than one country. The second most common partner type are national governments and state actors, which include different bodies of the state apparatus such as ministries and government agencies. Together, the two most common types of partners give the indication that MSPs have at least one partner that are connected to state governance, such as state funding, while non-government organizations (including not-profit organizations) and the scientific community (e.g. universities and research institutes) are present in slightly fewer MSPs.
Public authorities, including national governments and international organizations, are the most common type of partners in MSPs
Private actors such as corporations and businesses are part of approximately half of the MSPs. The least common type of partners are local governments (e.g. regions, municipalities) and labor unions. Perhaps again the focus on transnational MSPs is part of the explanation. While local governments do engage in global initiatives for the purpose of knowledge exchange and visibility, they also benefit from engaging in partnerships within their own national or regional jurisdiction. Moreover, labor unions tend to operate on a national scale within a certain legal framework rather than internationally. The mapping also showed that a handful have other MSPs as partners.
As a reminder, our data is limited to indicating which sectors that are represented in the MSPs, rather than describing the number of partners from each sector. This means, for example, that there could be, in total, more stakeholders from the scientific sector that act as partners in the MSPs than e.g. NGOs. In terms of total number of partners, however, the MSPs vary between being bilateral partnerships with two partners, to larger MSPs gathering over 700 partners. While most MSPs can be found evenly distributed along the range of 2-200 partners, a handful belong to the group of larger MSPs with 200-700 partners. By dividing the stakeholders that participate in MSPs into eight different types, we find that most MSPs are composed of partners from 2-4 different sectors, while only a few have as many as stakeholders from 6-8 different sectors working together.
3.4 Country
Studying which countries engage in MSPs could lead to important insights in terms of representation, inclusiveness and justice. MSPs have traditionally been led and dominated by countries in the Global North (see e.g. Mert 2015). While being an important issue, it is notoriously difficult to study. The Partnership Platform data quality is highly problematic when it comes to country representation and unfortunately, countries are not reported systematically by entries in the platform, and therefore could be pointing to different information including: Entries may report where their headquarters, Secretariat or offices are located; Entries may report the countries where their partners are located or active; Entries may report the countries that their work is targeting; The reported countries may be a mix of the above options. Considering these caveats, the distribution of countries provide useful indicators of where action is being taken. Figure 5 displays a list of countries that MSPs most often mention that they are connected to.
Figure 5. Countries with connections to MSPs in data-set (>8 threshold)
The 25 most commonly mentioned countries reported by 8 MSPs or more. Notably, among the 10 most mentioned countries, we find representation of at least one country from every continent (Africa, North America, South America, Asia, Europe, and Oceania). These frequently mentioned countries, however, also appear to correlate with countries hosting UN organizations. Six out of the 10 most mentioned countries by Tier 1 MSPs host at least two headquarters of UN organizations (United States, Kenya, France, Switzerland, the Netherlands, and Germany).
Furthermore, while among this cutoff of most frequently mentioned countries we find most countries to be European, the 2nd most mentioned countries belong to Oceania, which shows the strong connection of this registry to certain conferences, such as the Ocean Conference. While the US takes the first place among the most frequently mentioned countries, in terms of regions, the lowest representation is of countries from the Americas, among which we only find the US, and Brazil.
3.5 Functions
MSPs are generally engaging in “soft” governance functions such as providing venues for networking, knowledge-exchange, and information gathering. Looking at Figure 6 on functions in the Transform 2030 data set suggest that the trend continues and that the most common function carried out by the MSPs is knowledge dissemination, meaning that they in some way distribute knowledge or share experiences horizontally or vertically to other stakeholders.
Figure 6. Number of MSPs per type of function
Four functions - capacity building, participation management, technology transfer and training - share the spot for second most common functions. Moreover, the fact that these four functions had a similar placement along the scale can be explained by the fact that they are closely related. Capacity building often goes hand-in-hand with technology transfer and training activities.
MSPs appear to focus on “soft” governance functions including knowledge dissemination, training and capacity-building, rather than service-provision or finance.
Most MSPs (50%) perform three or four different functions, either simultaneously or at different stages throughout their lifetime. Furthermore, while not illustrated in the graph, the mapping also showed that 75% of MSPs report the type of resources they have at their disposal to carry out their functions and maintain their operations. This means that 25% either do not have resources such as staff, technical expertise or financing, or simply do not report on them. The results mirror previous findings in the global climate governance field, e.g. UNEP Emissions Gap Reports in 2018 where knowledge production and dissemination was the most common function (UNEP 2018). Norm-setting and financing/funding functions are, just as in our sample, less common. The results also support the recent findings from the PRIO data set, where finance was the least common function whilst technology and knowledge transfer and training and capacity building was the most common.
3.6 Synergies
The analysis on SDGs connections and potential synergies suggest that the majority of MSPs focus their work on two or three SDGs simultaneously, see figure 7. Thereafter, the distribution declines successively as the number of SDGs grows, with three and four SDGs being the second and third most common number of SDGs addressed by MSPs. Only a handful of MSPs address as many as seven, eight or nine SDGs at the same time.
Figure 7. Number of MSPs per number of SDGs addressed
Plotting the SDGs in a heatmap makes it possible to identify the degree to which SDG dyads are connected through MSPs. The environmental goals are particularly popular to connect in MSPs. While the most frequently featured dyad is SDG 3 (health) and SDG 4 (education), the second most popular dyad is between SDG 13 (Climate Action) and SDG 15 (Life on Land), which is included in 58 MSPs, followed by SDGs 14 (Life Below Water) and 15 (Life on Land), included in 50 MSPs. This points to opportunities for potential synergies within the climate-biodiversity nexus, as well as within the health-education nexus, but the most connected pairs are not between the three sustainable development areas (environmental, social, economic). The least connected SDG overall, is SDG 12 (Responsible consumption and production), which never appears in combination with 10 out of the other 16 SDGs, and is overall the least popular SDG in the focus of MSPs in the sample.
Figure 8. Overview of SDG dyads addressed by MSPs
While Figure 8 presents a gradient overview of how frequently SDG combinations are addressed by MSPs, we also performed a network analysis to zoom in on the most frequent combinations. This approach primarily consisted of projecting a bipartite network of MSPs and SDGs into two unipartite networks, connecting MSPs and SDGs. The network in Figure 9 presents how the 17 SDGs are connected.
Figure 9. Network in circle layout (most frequent connections in pink)
The pink lines in the network figure indicate that the pairs of SDGs that most MSPs address are Goal 13 (Climate Action), Goal 14 (Life Below Water) and Goal 15 (Life on Land) are connected most often. Out of the most commonly connected SDGs, Goal 13 (Climate Action) is connected to the largest variety of goals, followed by Goal 14 (Life Below Water) and Goal 3 (Health).
Clusters emerge around the nature, water and climate goals whereas economic SDGs are much less connected.
In contrast, Goal 2 (Hunger), Goal 5 (Gender Equality) and Goal 11 (Cities) only have strong connections to one other SDG each. In figure 9 the same data is shown but using an algorithm that cluster SDGs that are more tightly connected.
Figure 10. Clustering of SDGs in the network
The analysis clearly shows that the environmental goals (SDGs 13, 14, and 15) are forking a tight cluster in the network. In particular, SDG 13 on climate in particular is popular among the MSPs. Also the goals on energy, cities, health, and education are well connected and represented in among the MSPs. Economic goals, including SDG 12 on consumption and production and 9 on innovation are the least connected to the other SDGs.
4 Conclusion and Future Research
This report provides an overview of the Transform 2030 data set, including the methodology used for assembling and analyzing the data, as well as, a bird’s-eye view of the descriptive findings. The analysis of the data set has shown that the landscape of global efforts recorded in the Partnership Platform is highly heterogeneous.The relatively high number of active MSPs is a positive signal compared to previous research which found an even larger number of inactive MSPs emerging from the WSSD (see introduction). The final number of MSPs may seem small compared to the nearly 7,000 entries on the Partnership Platform, however, it is in the same order of magnitude of similar data-collection exercises in sustainable development, climate change and biodiversity (see e.g. Widerberg, Pattberg, and Kristensen 2016; Dias Guerra et al. 2015; Arnau et al. 2017; Negacz et al. 2020; Pattberg et al. 2012). The finding raises question of why there appears to be an upper limit for how many transnational MSPs there are working on sustainability at any given moment of time.
Second, in the Transform 2030 data set suggest that the environmental goals and targets, in particular SDG 13 (Climate Action), SDG 14 (Life Below Water) and SDG 15 (Life on Land) are most often connected by MSPs, followed by SDG 7 (Energy) and SDG 2 and 3 (Hunger and Health). SDGs 12 (Consumption and production) and SDG 9 (Innovation) are much less connected to other SDGs via the MSPs. The findings demonstrate where the largest potential synergies could be found but also which SDGs that still may require more attention from MSPs. Future research should focus on understanding why certain SDGs appear to be more connected than others, and whether the connections are the ones with the most transformative potential.
Third, the descriptive statistics suggest that the average partnership in our data set consists of partners from the Global North (in particular USA, France and the Netherlands) and an international organization. It was launched during one of the environmental and sustainable development mega-conferences and carry out soft governance functions such as knowledge sharing and dissemination. It connects two SDGs and is expected to have finishing date around 2030. Future research could aim to understand how institutional set-ups (e.g. partners, starting-year and function) of MSPs correlate with the SDGs that they combine. Are some type of MSPs more or less likely to address a combination of SDGs, and why is that the case? It also begs questions on longevity and stickiness. Why are some partnerships able to launch, attract partners and thrive during an extended period of time, whereas many seem to dissipate after launch or after a few years of operation?
Fourth, the Transform 2030 data set only shows where potential synergies between SDGs are most likely to happen. The next step would be to investigate actual synergies, trade-offs and conflicts between targets, as well as, whether MSPs are effective in achieving their goals. Moreover, are MSPs able to be effective while also fulfilling their promises of enhancing legitimacy in global sustainability governance through, for instance, inclusiveness.
Finally, how can the UN or other bodies be conducive for the landscape of MSPs to be effective? It raises the question of meta-governance, whether it is necessary and if so, in what shape and form. For instance, what changes, if any, could be made to the Partnership Platform to enable MSPs and analysts to better understand what works and under what conditions the promises of MSPs can be fulfilled.
5 References
Acknowledgements
This report, including the methodology for constructing the data set, has benefited greatly from input from all the project members of the Transform 2030 project, including the Scientific Advisory Board (see: “Transform2030 website”). The project is funded by FORMAS, the Swedish Research Council for Sustainable Development, under the name Transformative partnerships for sustainable development: Assessing synergies, effectiveness, and legitimacy of the UN’s multi-stakeholder partnerships across SDGs to achieve the 2030 Agenda (2020-00418).
Annexes
Annex 1 - Methodology
This annex contains technical information on specific steps of the methodology behind the Transform 2030 data set, in addition to the description of the methodology in Section 2.
Web scraping
The web scrapes was built using R-packages rvest and tidyverse. The data set is built on information scraped from the homepage of the UNDESA Partnership Platform on February 2nd 2022. Since
Text analysis
To determine which SDGs each MSP addressed, a dictionary-based quantitative text analysis was employed. The dictionary (see Annex 2) is based on the Global indicator framework for the Sustainable Development Goals and targets of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and was developed, tested, and revised by team-members at IVM and Stockholm University and contained 465 unigrams, bigrams and trigrams, i.e. combinations of 1, 2 or 3 words. Each SDG was assigned to a number of keywords or concepts and if the MSP’s mission statement included the keywords or concepts, it was assigned to that SDG. Three corpora were created with unigrams, bigrams and trigrams, each consisting of some nearly 3 million observations. The corpora were subsequently matched with the dictionary in a document-term matrix (DTM) consisting of some 23.000 observations.
## # A tibble: 6 × 5
## ID_T2030 name word SDG n
## <dbl> <chr> <chr> <chr> <int>
## 1 1 : Development of desert rangeland in Algeria. desertific… 15 1
## 2 1 : Development of desert rangeland in Algeria. drought 15 1
## 3 2 ‘’Electricity for all’’ adaptation 13 1
## 4 2 ‘’Electricity for all’’ electricity 7 15
## 5 2 ‘’Electricity for all’’ employment 4 1
## 6 2 ‘’Electricity for all’’ energy 7 13Example of document-term matrix
Operationalization and coding
To determine whether an entry on the UN DESA Partnership Platform could be considered an MSP we operationalized Liliana Andonova’s (2017) definition of MSPs, “voluntary agreements between public and non-state actors on a set of governance objectives and norms, rules, practices, implementation procedures, across multiple jurisdictions and levels of governance”, through the following four criteria.
Table 1. Operationalization of MSP definition
| Criterion # | Requirements |
|---|---|
| 1 | Does the entry involve partners from more than one of the following sectors: public, private, civil society? |
| 2 | Are the partners based in more than one jurisdiction? |
| 3 | Are the partners targeting more than one jurisdiction? |
| 4 | Does the entry display elements of institutionalization (e.g. governance objectives and norms, rules, practices, implementation procedures)? If yes, what level of institutionalization does the entry demonstrate? |
Based on this operationalization, each of the 2452 observations were manually coded to determine which entries fulfill all criteria of the definition and can thus be considered to be an MSP. The first three criteria are coded as dummy variables, to identify whether or not there are minimum two partners in the initiative that come from different sectors, are based in more than one jurisdiction and target more than one jurisdiction through their cooperation. The fourth criterion is a categorical variable that captures the extent to which observations describe “a set of governance objectives and norms, rules, practices, implementation procedures” (Andonova 2017). It differentiates between two tiers of entries indicating whether they adhere to a narrow or broad definition of MSPs. The operationalization is provided in Table 2, and was determined from the entries’ own descriptions about their organizational set-up and activities. We consider the focus of this project to lie within the entries that fulfilled all four criteria.
Table 2. Operationalization of the categorical variable on whether entries adhere to a narrow or broad definition of MSPs.
| Tier | Operationalization | Example from the Transform 2030 data set |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Entries that display a governance structure with rules, decision-making bodies and formal procedures (e.g. collective action networks) | Global Alliance for Buildings and Construction (GlobalABC): A global alliance of stakeholders that aims to transform the buildings and construction industry through five work areas and subsequent processes and projects, implemented by partners, steering committees and a secretariat. |
| 2 | Entries that display short-term, temporary or more loosely organized initiatives. Or entries that describe a part of/a product of a larger governance structure and goal (e.g. a project in a programme of an international organization). | iDiaspora: A project with the main output being a global engagement and knowledge exchange hub. It is open to partnering with stakeholders to disseminate their knowledge, but does not display substantial decision-making procedures etc. |
| 3 | Other types of activities (e.g. corporate sustainability strategies, sales products, country commitments) | Mobile Advisory Services LTD: A company’s strategy on how to align its activities with the goals of government ministries. |
Furthermore, in order to identify whether the MSPs are active or no longer perform their work, their level of activity was assessed by scanning their homepages and other relevant websites to identify their most recent activity. The main reasons for recording their activity are to identify which MSPs that are or have been in function, that thereby may be generating or may have generated effects through their work and could be researched further. In specific, their level of activity was coded according to the following categories:
Table 3. Operationalization of the categorical variable of activity level
| Activity level | Operationalization |
|---|---|
| Active | Evidence of activity since 1st January 2019 |
| Concluded | Evidence of concluded activities, or last activity was before 1st January 2019 |
| Inactive | Launch described on UN DESA platform or elsewhere but no additional information available. |
Lastly, additional variable coding was carried out for all the observations that qualified for the data set. While our scraping exercise captured the self-reported information about the partnership, such as the geographies they are connected to and the types of resources they self-report, the additional variable coding was carried out manually to translate self-reported information into a more reliable and uniform format with more easily comparable values. The latter capture information about the partnerships’ the number and type of stakeholders that participate in the partnerships and the functions of the partnership. In total, as a result of the scraping and the manual data collection, the Transform 2030 data set consists of 48 variables (see Transform 2030 data set code-book for further information).
Caveats and remedies
The methodology is subject to a set of limitations. First, the dictionary approach is sensitive to omitted keywords and sentences, potentially reducing the reliability of choosing MSPs addressing two or more SDGs. Being aware of this, the dictionary was carefully crafted and extensively discussed by researchers at Stockholm University and IVM through a series of iterations to identify ambiguous wordings. For instance, words such as “women”, “management” and “resources” were removed from earlier versions of the dictionary since they were difficult to attribute to one single SDG.
Another challenge is the intercoder reliability when coding the criteria of our MSP operationalization. To increase reliability, the coding team performed two rounds of reliability tests on random samples of entries. The commonalities and discrepancies were subsequently discussed and existing guidelines in the codebook were adjusted. During the coding process, the team also frequently consulted each other to ensure highest possible coherence. Furthermore, the observations in the data set underwent a second round of revision, since the variable coding was often conducted by a different coder than the coder for the MSP criteria. Nevertheless, despite the team’s effort to identify and mitigate methodological risks wherever possible, there may be cases and coding where human errors could still be found. All such cases are completely the responsibility of the report writers and can be communicated to the authors.
Further, it is important to note that although the Partnership Platform is probably the most complete source of partnerships for sustainable development, we cannot claim this to be representative data of the whole universe of transnational MSPs. It is hard to determine whether there is a language barrier that makes it difficult for some MSPs to register, or even be aware of platforms like this one. We noted some well known and established MSPs to not be registered in this platform. The reasons why stakeholders may or may not register is out of the scope of our research, but some potential explanations could be that they fail to perceive any added value from registering, they don’t have the administrative capacity to do so and manage possible extra tasks that may come with it, or the platform itself has not been given enough visibility for MSPs to even be aware of it.
A final caveat worth pointing out is that most of the data coded for every observation is based on their provided description on the UN DESA Partnership Platform. Given that the registration form on the platform has been updated on several occasions, the descriptions were not equal in format, with variations in the amount and type of information provided. Efforts were taken to double-check unclear instances by briefly visiting their websites, however in general it applies that the coded data is based on the descriptions.
Annex 2 - Dictionary
## # A tibble: 465 × 2
## SDG word
## <chr> <chr>
## 1 1 poverty
## 2 1 social protection
## 3 1 resource mobilization
## 4 1 sdg1
## 5 1 sdg 1
## 6 1 sdg_1
## 7 1 land ownership
## 8 1 ownership of land
## 9 1 land control
## 10 1 land tenure
## 11 1 microfinance
## 12 1 basic universal income
## 13 2 hunger
## 14 2 food security
## 15 2 malnutrition
## 16 2 food production
## 17 2 sdg2
## 18 2 sdg 2
## 19 2 sdg_2
## 20 2 nutrition
## 21 2 food insecurity
## 22 2 sustainable agriculture
## 23 2 agro-agriculture
## 24 2 undernourish*
## 25 2 undernourished
## 26 2 undernourishment
## 27 2 nourish*
## 28 2 nourishment
## 29 2 food insecurity experience scale
## 30 2 small-scale food producers
## 31 2 pastoral
## 32 2 family farmers
## 33 2 land quality
## 34 2 soil quality
## 35 2 soil erosion
## 36 2 plant banks
## 37 2 agriculture orientation index
## 38 2 agricultural export subsidies
## 39 2 food commodity markets
## 40 2 food price volatility
## 41 3 health
## 42 3 healthcare services
## 43 3 mental health
## 44 3 medical
## 45 3 sdg3
## 46 3 sdg 3
## 47 3 sdg_3
## 48 3 matern*
## 49 3 maternity
## 50 3 maternal
## 51 3 mortal*
## 52 3 mortality
## 53 3 newborn*
## 54 3 newborn
## 55 3 newborns
## 56 3 neonatal
## 57 3 epidemic*
## 58 3 epidemic
## 59 3 epidemics
## 60 3 disease*
## 61 3 disease
## 62 3 diseases
## 63 3 tuberculosis
## 64 3 malaria
## 65 3 4 hepatitis b
## 66 3 cancer
## 67 3 diabetes
## 68 3 chronic respiratory disease
## 69 3 drug*
## 70 3 drug
## 71 3 drugs
## 72 3 alcohol*
## 73 3 alcohol
## 74 3 alcoholic
## 75 3 mental well-being
## 76 3 universal health coverage
## 77 3 medicines
## 78 3 medicine
## 79 3 vaccines
## 80 3 vaccine
## 81 4 education
## 82 4 sdg4
## 83 4 sdg 4
## 84 4 sdg_4
## 85 4 learning opportunit*
## 86 4 learning opportunity
## 87 4 learning opportunities
## 88 4 primary education
## 89 4 secondary education
## 90 4 vocational education
## 91 4 tertiary education
## 92 4 learning outcome*
## 93 4 learning outcome
## 94 4 learning outcomes
## 95 4 learning outcome
## 96 4 learning outcomes
## 97 4 technical skills
## 98 4 vocational
## 99 4 employment
## 100 4 literacy
## 101 4 numeracy
## 102 5 gender equality
## 103 5 equal rights
## 104 5 empower*
## 105 5 empower women
## 106 5 women empowerment
## 107 5 empowerment of women
## 108 5 empower girls
## 109 5 empowerment of girls
## 110 5 empower
## 111 5 empowerment
## 112 5 empowering
## 113 5 discrimination
## 114 5 sdg5
## 115 5 sdg 5
## 116 5 sdg_5
## 117 5 gender
## 118 5 woman
## 119 5 physical violence
## 120 5 psychological violence
## 121 5 violence
## 122 5 marriage
## 123 5 unpaid work
## 124 5 domestic care
## 125 5 leadership opportunit*
## 126 5 leadership opportunity
## 127 5 leadership opportunities
## 128 6 sanitation
## 129 6 sdg6
## 130 6 sdg 6
## 131 6 sdg_6
## 132 6 access to sanitation
## 133 6 water access
## 134 6 water management
## 135 6 water availability
## 136 6 water safety
## 137 6 defecation
## 138 6 water quality
## 139 6 water pollution
## 140 6 industrial wastewater
## 141 6 industrial waste water
## 142 6 recycle water
## 143 6 reuse water
## 144 6 scarce water
## 145 6 water resources management
## 146 6 water resources cooperation
## 147 7 energy
## 148 7 renewable energy
## 149 7 electricity
## 150 7 sdg7
## 151 7 sdg 7
## 152 7 sdg_7
## 153 7 affordable electricity
## 154 7 modern electricity
## 155 7 affordable energy
## 156 7 renewable energy
## 157 7 sustainable energy
## 158 7 clean energy
## 159 7 modern energy
## 160 7 energy mix
## 161 7 energy efficiency
## 162 8 sdg8
## 163 8 sdg 8
## 164 8 sdg_8
## 165 8 sustain* economic growth
## 166 8 sustainable economic growth
## 167 8 inclusiv* economic growth
## 168 8 inclusive economic growth
## 169 8 full employment
## 170 8 productive employment
## 171 8 decent work
## 172 8 gross domestic product
## 173 8 gdp
## 174 8 gdp per capita
## 175 8 economic productivity
## 176 8 diversification
## 177 8 technological innovation
## 178 8 high-value added sectors
## 179 8 labour-intensive sectors
## 180 8 micro-sized enterprises
## 181 8 small-sized enterprises
## 182 8 medium-sized enterprises
## 183 8 youth employment
## 184 8 youth unemployment
## 185 8 child labour
## 186 8 forced labour
## 187 8 slavery
## 188 8 human trafficking
## 189 8 child soldiers
## 190 8 labour
## 191 8 labor
## 192 8 migrant workers
## 193 8 migrant female workers
## 194 8 international labour organization
## 195 8 international labor organization
## 196 8 ilo
## 197 8 sustainable touris*
## 198 8 sustainable tourism
## 199 9 sdg9
## 200 9 sdg 9
## 201 9 sdg_9
## 202 9 transborder infrastructure
## 203 9 sustainable industry
## 204 9 financial services
## 205 9 integration value chain*
## 206 9 integration value chains
## 207 9 integration market*
## 208 9 integration markets
## 209 9 retrofit industr*
## 210 9 retrofit industry
## 211 9 retrofit industries
## 212 9 resource-use efficiency
## 213 9 environmentally sound technologies
## 214 9 environmentally sound technology
## 215 9 environmentally sound industrial processes
## 216 9 research and development
## 217 9 r&d
## 218 9 private research
## 219 9 industrial diversification
## 220 9 high-tech industry
## 221 9 high-tech industries
## 222 10 migration
## 223 10 sdg10
## 224 10 sdg 10
## 225 10 sdg_10
## 226 10 global inequality
## 227 10 global equality
## 228 10 equal* among countr*
## 229 10 equality among countries
## 230 10 equal* within countr*
## 231 10 equality within countries
## 232 10 unequal* within countr*
## 233 10 inequality within countries
## 234 10 redistributi* polic*
## 235 10 redistribution policy
## 236 10 redistribution policies
## 237 10 fiscal polic*
## 238 10 fiscal policy
## 239 10 fiscal policies
## 240 10 financial soundness indicators
## 241 10 global financial market
## 242 10 global financial institution
## 243 10 international financial market
## 244 10 migrat* polic*
## 245 10 migration policy
## 246 10 migration policies
## 247 10 refugee*
## 248 10 refugee
## 249 10 refugees
## 250 10 oda
## 251 10 foreign direct investment
## 252 10 fdi
## 253 11 urbanization
## 254 11 urbanisation
## 255 11 human settlement
## 256 11 human settlements
## 257 11 public spaces
## 258 11 sdg11
## 259 11 sdg 11
## 260 11 sdg_11
## 261 11 city
## 262 11 cities
## 263 11 urban
## 264 11 affordable housing
## 265 11 slum*
## 266 11 slums
## 267 11 public transport
## 268 11 public transportation
## 269 11 road safety
## 270 11 ratio land consumption rate population growth
## 271 11 human settlement planning
## 272 11 human settlement management
## 273 11 urban planning
## 274 11 municipal waste manage*
## 275 11 municipal waste management
## 276 12 sustainable consumption
## 277 12 sustainable production
## 278 12 material footprint
## 279 12 food waste
## 280 12 food loss
## 281 12 food losses
## 282 12 food waste index
## 283 12 waste reduction
## 284 12 reduce waste
## 285 12 waste recycling
## 286 12 waste reuse
## 287 12 reuse of waste
## 288 12 procurement practice*
## 289 12 procurement practice
## 290 12 procurement practices
## 291 13 climate change
## 292 13 climate change mitigation
## 293 13 climate change adaptation
## 294 13 climate change impact reduction
## 295 13 climate change early warning
## 296 13 resilience climate change hazards
## 297 13 resilience climate change natural disasters
## 298 13 natural disaster*
## 299 13 natural disaster
## 300 13 natural disasters
## 301 13 combat* climate change
## 302 13 combat climate change
## 303 13 combatting climate change
## 304 13 mitigation
## 305 13 adaptation
## 306 13 disaster risk reduction
## 307 13 greenhouse gas emissions
## 308 13 ghg
## 309 13 green climate fund
## 310 13 gcf
## 311 13 united nations framework convention on climate change
## 312 13 unfccc
## 313 14 marine pollution
## 314 14 marine ecosystems
## 315 14 coastal ecosystems
## 316 14 marine technology
## 317 14 marine technologies
## 318 14 marine
## 319 14 maritime
## 320 14 coastal
## 321 14 fisheries
## 322 14 fishery
## 323 14 marine debris
## 324 14 maritime debris
## 325 14 eutrophication
## 326 14 debris density
## 327 14 marine area management
## 328 14 ocean
## 329 14 oceans
## 330 14 ocean acidification
## 331 14 maritime acidity
## 332 14 fish stocks
## 333 14 fish stock
## 334 14 overfishing
## 335 14 illegal fishing
## 336 14 unregulated fishing
## 337 14 destructive fishing practices
## 338 14 marine resource
## 339 14 marine resources
## 340 14 aquaculture
## 341 14 aquatourism
## 342 14 marine research
## 343 14 intergovernmental oceanographic commission criteria and guidelines on…
## 344 14 ocean health
## 345 14 marine biodiversity
## 346 14 small-scale fishers
## 347 14 fisheries
## 348 14 fishery
## 349 14 fishers
## 350 14 fisher
## 351 14 marine markets
## 352 14 marine market
## 353 14 ocean conservation
## 354 14 united nations convention on the law of the sea
## 355 14 unclos
## 356 15 terrestrial freshwater ecosystems
## 357 15 inland freshwater ecosystems
## 358 15 mountain ecosystems
## 359 15 terrestrial ecosystems
## 360 15 forest*
## 361 15 forests
## 362 15 desert*
## 363 15 deserts
## 364 15 land degradation
## 365 15 degradation of land
## 366 15 degrading land
## 367 15 degraded land
## 368 15 biodiversity
## 369 15 biodiversity loss
## 370 15 wetlands
## 371 15 wetland
## 372 15 mountains
## 373 15 mountain
## 374 15 land degradation
## 375 15 freshwater biodiversity
## 376 15 deforestation
## 377 15 afforestation
## 378 15 reforestation
## 379 15 forest management
## 380 15 managing forests
## 381 15 sustainable forest management
## 382 15 desertification
## 383 15 drought
## 384 15 droughts
## 385 15 flood
## 386 15 floods
## 387 15 flooding
## 388 15 floodings
## 389 15 mountain ecosystem*
## 390 15 mountain ecosystem
## 391 15 mountain ecosystems
## 392 15 mountain green cover index
## 393 15 extinction
## 394 15 threat* species
## 395 15 threatened species
## 396 15 threatened species
## 397 15 red list index
## 398 15 natural habitat degrad*
## 399 15 natural habitat degradation
## 400 15 poach*
## 401 15 poach
## 402 15 poaching
## 403 15 aichi biodiversity target 2
## 404 15 strategic plan for biodiversity 2011–2020
## 405 15 system of environmental-economic accounting
## 406 16 inclusive societies
## 407 16 inclusive society
## 408 16 rule of law
## 409 16 judicial
## 410 16 peaceful societ*
## 411 16 peaceful society
## 412 16 peaceful societies
## 413 16 violence
## 414 16 violent
## 415 16 death rate
## 416 16 death rates
## 417 16 child abuse
## 418 16 child abuse
## 419 16 abuse of children
## 420 16 child exploitation
## 421 16 exploitation of children
## 422 16 child trafficking
## 423 16 trafficking of children
## 424 16 child violence
## 425 16 violence against children
## 426 16 child torture
## 427 16 torture of children
## 428 16 corrupt
## 429 16 corruption
## 430 16 bribe
## 431 16 bribes
## 432 16 bribery
## 433 16 responsive decision-making
## 434 16 inclusive decision-making
## 435 16 participatory decision-making
## 436 16 representative decision-making
## 437 16 judiciary
## 438 16 fundamental freedom
## 439 16 public access information
## 440 16 crime
## 441 16 crimes
## 442 16 human rights
## 443 16 paris principle
## 444 17 global partnership
## 445 17 south-south cooperation
## 446 17 debt sustainability
## 447 17 debt financing
## 448 17 debt restructuring
## 449 17 debt distress
## 450 17 investment promotion regimes
## 451 17 north-south cooperation
## 452 17 triangular cooperation
## 453 17 fixed internet broadband
## 454 17 global technology facilitation mechanism
## 455 17 weighted tariff-average
## 456 17 macroeconomic dashboard
## 457 17 global partnership for sustainable development
## 458 17 multi-stakeholder partnerships
## 459 17 multi-stakeholder partnership
## 460 17 public-private partnerships
## 461 17 public-private partnership
## 462 17 resourcing strategies partnerships
## 463 17 sustainable development goal monitor*
## 464 17 sdg monitoring
## 465 17 monitoring sdgs5.1 Annex 3 - Active and Concluded Multi-stakeholder partnerships in T2030 data set
## # A tibble: 371 × 2
## `Name of multi-stakeholder partnership in database` Tier
## <chr> <chr>
## 1 10YFP Sustainable Food Systems Programme 1
## 2 21st Century learning and youth social entrepreneurship 1
## 3 50:50 The Equality Project 1
## 4 ACCOBAMS - Addressing impacts of ocean noise on cetaceans in the Medi… 1
## 5 Adapting forest policies to climate change in the MENA region for opt… 1
## 6 African Marine Waste Network 1
## 7 Alianza Shire: Energy access to refugees and host communities 1
## 8 Alliance 8.7 1
## 9 APRU network of experts, future leaders and policy makers addressing … 1
## 10 Baltic Sea region: Soil carbon sequestration and nutrient cycling to … 1
## 11 Batumi Initiative on Green Economy (BIG-E) 1
## 12 Billion Dollar Business Alliance for Rainwater Harvesting 1
## 13 Blue Carbon Initiative 1
## 14 Blue Solutions for a Healthy Blue Planet 1
## 15 Boosting Decent Employment for Africa’s Youth 1
## 16 Business Ambition for 1.5°C: Our Only Future 1
## 17 Cap-Net UNDP International Network for Capacity Development in Sustai… 1
## 18 Caribbean Challenge Initiative (CCI) 1
## 19 Cement Sustainability Initiative, The 1
## 20 Centre of Excellence for the Sustainable Development of SIDS 1
## 21 Certification for Sustainable Tourism (CST) 1
## 22 City Water Resilience Approach (CWRA) 1
## 23 Clean Seas 1
## 24 Clean Seas for a Cleaner Pacific 1
## 25 Climate and Clean Air Coalition (CCAC) 1
## 26 Climate Change platform 1
## 27 Climate Resilient Islands Partnership: An Inter-Regional Partnership … 1
## 28 Climate Technology Centre and Network (CTCN) 1
## 29 Climate-KIC 1
## 30 Congo Basin Forest Partnership, CBFP (Partenariat pour les Forêts du … 1
## 31 Connecting and Protecting Our Seas: Initiatives in the Baltic and the… 1
## 32 Conservation and Management of Cetaceans 1
## 33 Cooperative of development practitioners providing access to clean te… 1
## 34 Coordinating Body on the Seas of East Asia (COBSEA) 1
## 35 Coral Triangle Initiative 1
## 36 COWF GLOBAL HEALTH COALITION ENABLING LIVES THROUGH TECH 1
## 37 Dairy Science Park 1
## 38 Deep Sea Conservation 1
## 39 Developing networks on the environmental management of enclosed coast… 1
## 40 ECOWAS Centre for Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency (ECREEE) 1
## 41 Encouraging sustainable tourism to protect migratory species and supp… 1
## 42 Enhancing global ocean acidification monitoring and research 1
## 43 Equal Pay International Coalition 1
## 44 EQUALS: The Global Partnership for Gender Equality in the Digital Age 1
## 45 Every Woman Every Child 1
## 46 Facilitating global coordination and collaboration on ocean acidifica… 1
## 47 Fisheries and Shrimp Aquaculture Improvement in Asia 1
## 48 Fisheries Conservation in the Wider Caribbean Region through FAO'… 1
## 49 FOCUS (Fisheries Open Source Community Software) 1
## 50 Forum Compact - A Pacific Regional Enabling Mechanism to Achieve Sust… 1
## 51 GEF Strategic Partnership on the Black Sea and Danube Basin 1
## 52 Global Adaptation Network (GAN) 1
## 53 Global Agenda for Sustainable Livestock (GASL) 1
## 54 Global Alliance for Buildings and Construction (GlobalABC) 1
## 55 Global Alliance for Clean Cook Stoves (2nd SE4All Forum Commitments) 1
## 56 Global Bioenergy Partnership (GBEP) 1
## 57 Global Coral Reef Partnership 1
## 58 Global Fuel Economy Initiative (GFEI) - Relaunched to accelerate prog… 1
## 59 Global Industry Programs to Address Transboundary, Multi-Sectoral Oce… 1
## 60 Global Island Partnership (GLISPA) 1
## 61 Global Land Tool Network 1
## 62 Global LPG Partnership 1
## 63 Global Mercury Partnership 1
## 64 Global Network of Regional Sustainable Energy Centers (GN-SEC) - Towa… 1
## 65 Global Partnership for Effective Development Co-operation (GPEDC) 1
## 66 Global Partnership for Sustainable Development Data 1
## 67 Global Partnership for Sustainable Tourism 1
## 68 Global Partnership on Marine Litter (GPML), Global Partnership on Was… 1
## 69 Global Partnership on Nutrient Management 1
## 70 Global Partnership to End Violence against Children 1
## 71 Globally Important Agricultural Heritage Systems (GIAHS) 1
## 72 Green Growth Knowledge Platform (GGKP) 1
## 73 Healthy Environments for Children Alliance (HECA) 1
## 74 ICT4SIDS Partnership: Rapid Implementation of SDGs Through Latest Dig… 1
## 75 ICTs for Sustainable Energy (ISEP) 1
## 76 Initiative for the Adaptation of African Agriculture to climate change 1
## 77 International Alliance for COVID-19 Community Response (IACCR) 1
## 78 International and inter-institutional cooperation to define a model r… 1
## 79 International Centre for Education, Marine and Atmospheric Sciences f… 1
## 80 International Coral Reef Action Network (ICRAN) 1
## 81 International Decade of Ocean Science for Sustainable Development - T… 1
## 82 International Garden Cities Institute 1
## 83 International Health Partnership for UHC 2030 (UHC2030) 1
## 84 International Model Forest Network 1
## 85 International Partnership for Sustainable Development in Mountain Reg… 1
## 86 International Working Group Coordination for Plastic Pollution Reduct… 1
## 87 Issue based coalition on health and well-being 1
## 88 Japanese Technical Cooperation Project for Promotion of Regional Init… 1
## 89 Joint conservation and sustainable use of marine and coastal resource… 1
## 90 Joint Roadmap to accelerate Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning worldwide 1
## 91 Knowledge sharing for the protection and restoration of coastal blue … 1
## 92 Land Alliances for National Development (LAND) 1
## 93 Learning from the Sharp End of Environmental Uncertainty in SIDS 1
## 94 Liechtenstein Initiative – For a Financial Sector Commission on Moder… 1
## 95 Lighthouses Initiative 1
## 96 Local and regional governments at the heart of the Global Agenda 2030 1
## 97 Love Your Coast Open Sourced Capacity Building through Sport and the … 1
## 98 Making Cities Resilient 2030 (MCR2030) 1
## 99 Medicines for Malaria Venture 1
## 100 MEPSEAS: Marine Environment Protection of the South-East Asian Seas 1
## 101 Methane to Markets 1
## 102 Micronesia Challenge 1
## 103 OA Alliance Commitment to Combating Ocean Acidification 1
## 104 Ocean Industry Leadership and Collaboration for Ocean/SIDS Sustainabl… 1
## 105 One Planet Network 1
## 106 Online Access to Research in the Environment (OARE) 1
## 107 OpTIMUS - (Open Tools, Integrated Modelling and Upskilling for Sustai… 1
## 108 Pacific Island Women Caucus 1
## 109 Pacific Risk Management 'Ohana (PRiMO) 1
## 110 PacSIDS Ridge to Reef Programme Partnership 1
## 111 PALOP-TL 1
## 112 PANORAMA - Solutions for a Healthy Planet 1
## 113 Partnership between the Belgian Government, Belgian Scientific Instit… 1
## 114 Partnership for Clean Fuels and Vehicles 1
## 115 Partnership for Clean Indoor Air 1
## 116 Partnership for the Launch of the Sustainable Tourism Stewardship Cou… 1
## 117 Partnership on Sustainable, Low Carbon Transport 1
## 118 Partnerships for Future Young Leadership: Building Bridges without Ga… 1
## 119 Partnerships for gender equality in land ownership and control. Good … 1
## 120 Partnerships in the local implementation of coastal strategies and in… 1
## 121 PCSD Partnership – A multi-stakeholder Partnership for Enhancing Poli… 1
## 122 Platform on Disaster Displacement 1
## 123 Poverty-Environment Partnership (PEP) 1
## 124 Preserve and protect the marine environment against pollution by (pla… 1
## 125 Promote an economic, integrated, sustainable and inclusive developmen… 1
## 126 Promote and Facilitate the Conduct of Marine Scientific Research (MSR… 1
## 127 Promoting Environmentally Sustainable Transport (EST) 1
## 128 Promoting interdisciplinary research to achieve sustainable oceans 1
## 129 Promoting the International Partnership for Expanding Waste Managemen… 1
## 130 Promoting Urban Low Emission Development Strategies 1
## 131 Regional Model Forest Network for Latin America and the Caribbean 1
## 132 Renewable Energy Policy Network for the 21st Century 1
## 133 resilience.io city-region systems modeling for resilient decision-mak… 1
## 134 Roadmap to Oceans and Climate Action (ROCA) 1
## 135 SAFE (Sustainable Agriculture, Food, and Environment) Platform 1
## 136 Scaling Up Nutrition (SUN) 1
## 137 Scientific Capacity Building for Sustainable Development in Developin… 1
## 138 Seeing Blue: Youth Vision for the Ocean 1
## 139 SHAFE implemented through NET4Age-Friendly 1
## 140 Social Protection Systems and Floors Partnerships for SDG 1.3 1
## 141 Solutions for Youth Employment (S4YE) 1
## 142 St. Petersburg Initiative (SPbI) 1
## 143 Stopping Fish Bombing 1
## 144 Strengthen System-wide Emergency Response Preparedness, Response and … 1
## 145 Strengthening institutional capacity to enhance governance of the fis… 1
## 146 SUNx - Strong Universal Network 1
## 147 Supporting Comprehensive Sexuality Education in the Pacific 1
## 148 Sustainable Energy for All (SE4All) 1
## 149 Sustainable Ocean Initiative (SOI) 1
## 150 Sustainable tuna fisheries 1
## 151 Sustainable Water and Energy Solutions 1
## 152 The "4 per 1000" Initiative and its implementation 1
## 153 The Equal Pay International Coalition (EPIC) 1
## 154 The International Coral Reef Initiative 1
## 155 The Landscapes for People, Food and Nature 1
## 156 The Learning and Knowledge Development Facility (LKDF) 1
## 157 The Library Study Hall 1
## 158 The Pacific Partnership on Ocean Acidification 1
## 159 The Partnership for Maternal, Newborn & Child Health (PMNCH) pled… 1
## 160 THE PHILIPPINE LEARNING COMMONS AT NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF KAOHSIUNG (… 1
## 161 The SEED Initiative: Supporting Entrepreneurs for Sustainable Develop… 1
## 162 THE UNIVERSAL DIPLOMA in SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (UDSD) 1
## 163 The World Team Project: Sustainable Solutions Oceans Opportunities &a… 1
## 164 To support underserved youth to start, grow and sustain businesses– e… 1
## 165 To use the GSI model of pre-competitive collaboration to support acce… 1
## 166 Toilet Board Coalition 1
## 167 Updating the joint Baltic Sea Action Plan of the cities Helsinki and … 1
## 168 VinylPlus 1
## 169 Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH) for all Initiative 1
## 170 Western Indian Ocean Coastal Challenge (WIOCC) 1
## 171 White Water to Blue Water 1
## 172 WIPO GREEN 1
## 173 Working towards plastic free oceans 1
## 174 WORLD CAPITAL OF CULTURE AND TOURISM PROGRAMME FOR SDG 1
## 175 World Nuclear University 1
## 176 Zero Hunger Challenge (ZHC) 1
## 177 Better Than Cash Alliance (BTCA) 1
## 178 Task Team on CSO Development Effectiveness and Enabling Environment (… 1
## 179 The Coalition for Disaster Resilient Infrastructure (CDRI) 1
## 180 “Design Thinking in STEM”: Education project combining STEM education… 2
## 181 “Knowledge as a Chance” – Awareness program on family planning and se… 2
## 182 &#39;Science under Sail&#39; in the South Pacific for the #Go… 2
## 183 #iDeas2030: students from Guatemala, Bolivia, Spain and the Ivory Coa… 2
## 184 100 Million Trees by 2017 2
## 185 2030 Agenda Ambassadors Program 2
## 186 2KUZE 2
## 187 A corporate programme of the GEF implemented by United Nations Develo… 2
## 188 A joint ACCOBAMS/GFCM approach to mitigate bycatch and depredation in… 2
## 189 A Jurisdictional Implementation of the Micronesia Challenge 2
## 190 Acting for the Health of the Environment and the Protection of Oceans 2
## 191 Address Barriers to Floating Offshore Wind Energy Development through… 2
## 192 African Leadership in ICT for Knowledge Society Advancement 2
## 193 AseanReady: Promoting 21st-century skills training ready for the futu… 2
## 194 Aspen Management Partnership for Health (AMP Health) 2
## 195 Atlantic and Indian Ocean SIDS Integrated Water Resources Management … 2
## 196 Biodiversity for Sustainable Development in the Caribbean through Eco… 2
## 197 Blue Forests Project 2
## 198 Blue IES: Worldwide training course offer around integrating ecosyste… 2
## 199 BLUMES: BLUE Jobs and Responsible Growth in the Mediterranean through… 2
## 200 Bringing Biogas to Samoa 2
## 201 Building Capacities for Increased Public Investment in Integrated Cli… 2
## 202 Building Institutional and Political Capacity for Urban Sustainable M… 2
## 203 Capacity-building workshops and productive equipment on good practice… 2
## 204 Caribbean Centre for Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency (CCREEE) 2
## 205 Caribbean Energy Efficiency Lighting Project 2
## 206 CGIAR Challenge Program: 'Water and Food' 2
## 207 CGIAR Challenge Program: Biofortified Crops for Improved Human Nutrit… 2
## 208 Cities for Climate Protection Campaign 2
## 209 Clean Coastline (Ren Kustlinje) 2
## 210 Clean Sea LIFE - fighting marine litter in Italy 2
## 211 Climate and Oceans Support Program in the Pacific (COSPPac) 2
## 212 Coastal Fisheries Initiative - Latin America (CFI-LA) 2
## 213 Coastal Risk Resilience and Insurance 2
## 214 Community Climate Change Adaptation Assessment (C3A2) 2
## 215 Community Violence Reduction Adaptations During COVID-19 2
## 216 Competence Platform on Energy Crop and Agroforestry Systems for Arid … 2
## 217 CONTINENTAL NUTRITION ACCOUNTABILITY SCORE-CARD 2
## 218 Coral Triangle Initiative Australian Support Program 2
## 219 Creating Electronic ECOWAS with Global University System 2
## 220 Cross-boundary and inter-sectorial solutions for ecosystem-based mari… 2
## 221 Cross-country module course on formative assessment, teaching and lea… 2
## 222 Dams and Development Project (DDP) 2
## 223 Digital Incubation Center 2
## 224 Disability Hub Europe 2
## 225 Drones for Whale Research: SnotBot 2
## 226 Economic inclusion and empowerment of women 2
## 227 Economic opportunities for young men and women through inclusive yout… 2
## 228 EcoSanRes - International Network for Communications, Research and Ca… 2
## 229 Education, Training and Capacity Building 2
## 230 ELECTRICITY FOR ALL 2
## 231 Empowering international sustainable development actions through scie… 2
## 232 Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS), The 2
## 233 Environmental forecasting of the ocean: development of advanced predi… 2
## 234 Equalcity 2
## 235 EWC Innovation for Sustainable Development Fellows (#EWCinnovationfel… 2
## 236 Facilitate a Youth Movement for Our Ocean 2
## 237 Facilitating learning an sharing of good practices within and beyond … 2
## 238 FAO AgrInvest: Enabling sustainable private investment in agri-food s… 2
## 239 Financial Inclusion Initiative 2
## 240 Finding out how to transform war economies into peace economies 2
## 241 Fish Forward 2
## 242 Fostering biodiversity action in the outermost regions and overseas c… 2
## 243 Getting African fishing communities ready for the FAO International Y… 2
## 244 Global Ballast Water Management Project 2
## 245 Global Pilot Project for the OECD-FAO Guidance on Responsible Agricul… 2
## 246 Globally Important Ingenious Agricultural Heritage Systems (GIAHS) 2
## 247 Grand Challenge on Inequality and Exclusion Phase 2 2
## 248 Hand Hygiene for All initiative 2
## 249 Harmonizing Global Biodiversity Modelling (HarmBio) 2
## 250 Human Resources for Maternal Health 2
## 251 HUNGER FREE VILLAGES - Tilonia covid relief 2
## 252 iDiaspora 2
## 253 IHO Hydrography Capacity Building Programme for Coastal States 2
## 254 Implementation of the Arafura and Timor Seas Regional and National St… 2
## 255 Improving transitions from school to work through engaging youth in p… 2
## 256 Increasing the transparency of SDG data in developing countries (unlo… 2
## 257 Innovative management solutions for minimizing emissions of hazardous… 2
## 258 Integrated Water and Wastewater Resource Management in Atlantic and I… 2
## 259 Integrating Indigenous knowledge and State-of-Art Earth Observation S… 2
## 260 International Alliance for Responsible Drinking (IARD) 2
## 261 International Public Health Distributed and Online Learning Initiativ… 2
## 262 Interregional Project Promoting the Application of Nuclear Science an… 2
## 263 Invasive Species Compendium Consortium 2
## 264 Islands Diesel Replacement program (“the Islands program”) 2
## 265 ITC SheTrades initiative 2
## 266 KFF Entrepreneur Challenge 2
## 267 Language Digitization Initiative 2
## 268 LINK (Learning Innovation Network for Knowledge) Access Project - To … 2
## 269 Mangrove Restoration Potential Map 2
## 270 Marine Biodiversity Observation Network (MBON) 2
## 271 MEDIES: Mediterranean Education Initiative for Environment & Sust… 2
## 272 Mediterranean contents production: research and scientific disseminat… 2
## 273 Mediterranean Renewable Energy Program (MEDREP) 2
## 274 Mediterranean Water Knowledge Platform 2
## 275 Metrica6: how to create innovative eco-efficient solutions 2
## 276 Migration, Environment and Climate Change: Evidence for Policy 2
## 277 Mission Blue – SIDS Hope Spots Initiative 2
## 278 Mobilise cities and the innovation community to clean up the Baltic S… 2
## 279 Nansen Initiative 2
## 280 New Colombo Plan - Pacific Coordination Network 2
## 281 New tools to support the conservation and sustainable management of m… 2
## 282 No Wasted Lives 2
## 283 Northeast Asia Power System Interconnection (NAPSI) 2
## 284 Operationalizing the Global Initiative on Decent Jobs for Youth 2
## 285 Our Oceans Challenge 2
## 286 Pacific Adaptation for Climate Change (PACC) Project 2
## 287 Pacific Financial Inclusion Programme (PFIF) 2
## 288 Pacific Health Development Team: Bilateral Institutional Linkage Prog… 2
## 289 Pacific plastic pollution: A system for regional grassroots solutions 2
## 290 Passport to Employment: promoting the talent of Young People with Dis… 2
## 291 Pivex Smart Grid Smart City 2
## 292 Plastic Mining Cooperation is committed to start the Plastic Mining r… 2
## 293 Poverty-Environment Action for Sustainable Development Goals 2
## 294 Program of social support people living with HIV “Spotlight” 2
## 295 Promoting older persons wellbeing with an innovative ICT solution - D… 2
## 296 Promotion of Education for Sustainable Development for Bottom Billions 2
## 297 Protecting Children from Violence, Abuse and Exploitation in the Paci… 2
## 298 Raising awareness about marine conservation and sustainable resource … 2
## 299 Recommendations for Revising Japan's SDGs Implementation Guiding… 2
## 300 REDD as a Catalyst for a Green Economy (done in the context of the U… 2
## 301 Reimagine WASH: Making services climate resilient to tackle water sca… 2
## 302 Reimagine WASH: Water Security for All 2
## 303 Research and capacity development to support livelihood and food secu… 2
## 304 Resource Efficient and Cleaner Production Clubs (RECP Clubs) 2
## 305 Responsible Research and Innovation for ocean conservation and sustai… 2
## 306 ROADMAP OF OUTSTANDING EDUCATORS (ROOTS) 2
## 307 Safe Water System 2
## 308 Sailing in Partnership: Peace Boat Collaboration with AOSIS 2
## 309 SDG Hub - a global SDGs network for innovation and impact 2
## 310 SDG Impact Accelerator 2
## 311 Sea Pact funding support for Responsible Aquaculture Foundation (RAF)… 2
## 312 Sea Pact funding support for SafetyNet Technologies Pisces LED Light … 2
## 313 Sea Pact funding support for the University of North Texas (UNT) Prob… 2
## 314 setting up a rapid Response Mechanism for Higher Edcation in Emergen… 2
## 315 Shall We Talk Foundation - Project AngelLine 2
## 316 Shaping a Waste Free Future 2
## 317 Sharing ocean color images, marine environment information, and pollu… 2
## 318 Ship to Shore Rights – Combatting Unacceptable Forms of Work in the T… 2
## 319 Sino-Italian Cooperation program for Environmental Protection towards… 2
## 320 Smart Island Economies: the 10 Island Renewable Challenge 2
## 321 Social dialogue on youth employment and the future of work: The Natio… 2
## 322 Solvatten solar safe water heaters 2
## 323 Songs of Adaptation 2
## 324 Special initiative: Climate change and health in Small Island Develop… 2
## 325 Streamlining nuclear science and technology into classroom curricula … 2
## 326 Strengthening regional cooperation for the protection of the marine a… 2
## 327 Strengthening regional fruit fly surveillance and control in Latin Am… 2
## 328 Sustainable Pearls: Fostering Marine Conservation and Livelihoods in … 2
## 329 Sustainable transport connectivity in Asia and the Pacific 2
## 330 Swarovski Waterschool 2
## 331 Tackling ghost gear worldwide: Marking fish aggregating devices and h… 2
## 332 Taqeem Initiative: What Works in Youth Employment 2
## 333 Technical Platform on the Measurement and Reduction of Food Loss and … 2
## 334 The Bertarelli Programme in Marine Science 2
## 335 The Blue Ribbon Global 2
## 336 The development of Charter Cities 2
## 337 The Global Rain Water Harvesting Collective 2
## 338 The ICRI plan of Action 2016-2018 2
## 339 The Mont-Blanc Meetings – International Forum of the Social and Solid… 2
## 340 The Nexus Environmental Assessment Tool (NEAT+) 2
## 341 The Pew Ending Illegal Fishing Project 2
## 342 The Sio-Siteko Wetland – Community Based Environmental Managem… 2
## 343 Training economically vulnerable youth in socioemotional competencies… 2
## 344 Transformers Foundation: Transformers ED 2
## 345 Transforming Livestock Sector: Reduce carbon emissions, remove the re… 2
## 346 Transport, Health and Environment Pan European Programme (THE PEP) 2
## 347 Tuna from Responsible Fishing 2
## 348 UNEP Montreal Protocol OzonAction Programme 2
## 349 United Smart Cities (USC) 2
## 350 University of Bergen - SDG Bergen Initiative 2
## 351 University Scholars Leadership Symposium 2
## 352 Upscaling and Replicating the Initiative FROM RIDGE TO REEF. The inte… 2
## 353 Vestergaard Frandsen commits support to the UN Secretary-General'… 2
## 354 WASH Accountability for Sustainability programme 2
## 355 Water for Asian Cities 2
## 356 Water/ocean governance thought leadership, thematic expertise, techni… 2
## 357 Watergy - Addressing Municipal Water Challenges through Energy and Wa… 2
## 358 Women leadership in water & sanitation 2
## 359 Women's Economic Empowerment Driving Sustainable Development in … 2
## 360 World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) Climate Sm… 2
## 361 World Register of Marine Species (WoRMS) 2
## 362 World Social Capital Monitor 2
## 363 Ycenter Global UN SDG Program 2
## 364 Yellow Sea Large Marine Ecosystem (YSLME) 2
## 365 YOUNG AFRICAN LEADERS INITIATIVE - RLC EA 2
## 366 YouthAlert! (YA!) Child and Youth Peace Education Program 2
## 367 YouthCan! Global partnership for youth employability 2
## 368 YouthSpark: Digital Skills and Computer Science 2
## 369 Partnership on the Program for Developing Mechanisms to Reward the Up… 2
## 370 SDG 6 IWRM Support Programme 2
## 371 Towards sustainable aviation 2