1. Towards a Science-based Global Sustainable Development Report R. Alexander Roehrl, DESA/DSD ICSU-DESA-UNEP side event for HLPF, New York, 30 June 2014

2. How did we get there? Prototype Global Sustainable Development Report

3. Contributors

4. Prototype Global Sustainable Development Report Mixed multi-stakeholder approach for inputs

5. Lessons learnt from its preparation for future editions Assessment of assessments → thousands of assessments; many perspectives; multiple knowledge channels; bottom-up from national; Review of progress → IA needed to monitor inter-linkages between issues; traditional SDG progress monitoring report will not strengthen the science-policy interface; Future pathways towards sustainable development → global scale, 2050 time frame with milestones; UN platform and cooperation on SD scenarios and future pathways toward SDGs. Monitoring progress → remote sensing and “big data” approaches for assessing long-term SD progress and fill data gaps in poorest regions Climate-land-energy-water-development nexus → other clusters; local, national, regional, global; Science digests → useful way to engage young and highly specialized scientists in the HLPF Prototype Global Sustainable Development Report

6. Based on responses to UN questionnaire, the Secretary General recommends: Option 1: Conventional UN flagship publication model Option 2: Multi-stakeholder model linked to voluntary national processes Option 3: Intergovernmental Panel on Sustainable Development SG report E/2014/87 on “options for scope and methodology of a global sustainable development report”

7. Elements of agreement Value added Focus Capacity building Audience Priority issues Geographic scope Time horizon Emerging issues SG report E/2014/87 on “options for scope and methodology of a global sustainable development report” Coordination of report process Type of content Policy-relevant but not normative Periodicity Scientific methods How to inform HLPF Monitoring and accountability framework for SDGs/post-2015

8. Process Who drafts the Report? Who selected experts? What type of peer review? Who approves the Report? How to organize national and regional contributions? How are priority issues identified at national and regional levels? Scientific advisory group or working group? Scope Scope of scientific knowledge? How to choose the thematic focus of each edition? Link to national sustainable development process? Differences between the three options:

9. It’s time for scientists and other stakeholders to get involved! Thank you.