Source document: https://docs-lawep.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/1697636485136.pdf (Australia)
Responses to Terms of Reference: (a) The understanding and awareness of the SDG across the Australian Government and in the wider Australian community.

Key Message: Understanding of the SDGs is low, and typically not driven by government.
Research participants (current and past members of the Victorian Public Service), were directly asked if they were familiar with the SDGs: Approximately 1/3 were ‘not at all aware’ of them, a further third were only ‘slightly aware’ and indicated they were unable to provide any explanation of them.

Of those who did claim to be aware, a number were unable to demonstrate an understanding of them and may have confused them with other initiatives.
For example, many respondents discussed the Millennium Development Goals or the general notion of sustainable development as set out in the early 1990s, when asked to describe the SDGs.

A third of survey respondents considered the SDGs to have been developed by corporations.

When asked how likely it was that the SDGs would impact on the way the participants’ public sector organisation made decisions, only a third considered this to be so.
When asked about barriers to governments’ ability to implement the SDGs and/or sustainable development in general, a number of research participants pointed to a lack of civil society awareness of the SDGs.

It was considered that, as a result, there was no community agitation for government policy to achieve them.

It was also noted that there is no national narrative on the SDGs to raise awareness.
Based on current knowledge of the SDGs there is a risk that Australians and their governments will consider them to be primarily an issue for other countries and that we will fail to achieve the Goals.

(b) the potential costs, benefits and opportunities for Australia in the domestic implementation of the SDG; Key Message: Given the limited understanding of the SDGs, little has been done to quantify costs or identify opportunities for domestic implementation.
Many participants remarked, without provocation, that their understanding and knowledge of the SDGs was more directly tied to their own personal interest in sustainable development than any national or sub-national dialogue.

For example, it was considered more likely that government decisions would serendipitously ‘align with’ the outcomes of the SDGs than be directly considered in, or influence, agency directions.
It was suggested by one participant that the targets and indicators could be used as reference points for government policy, therein providing a link from the global to the local, and ensuring KPIs are based on an internationally agreed goal.
United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDG)Submission 109 (c) what governance structures and accountability measures are required at the national, state and local levels of government to ensure an integrated approach to implementing the SDG that is both meaningful and achieves real outcomes; Key Message: There is uncertainty over who has accountability for the SDGs.

Formal recognition and collaboration through a CoAG subcommittee could assist to overcome this and drive meaningful action.
A consistent theme is uncertainty over who is actively leading SDG implementation and integration within Australian government.

Even high-ranking officials in Victoria were unaware of DFATs lead in this space.

As a result, active implementation and integration is weak.

A CoAG subcommittee could assist to overcome this lack of integration across tiers of government.
The creation of a thematic oversight group (TOG) for each SDG relevant to domestic policy could help to wider the understanding of the SDGs within governments.

The creation of SDG TOGs could also provide an opportunity for information sharing, oversight and accountability, and enable Australia to meaningfully achieve the Goals.

Furthermore, the CoAG subcommittee that the TOGs reported into could then provide an integration function to mitigate the potential for siloed approaches.
Political cycles and ideology were also seen as potential hurdles to achieving the SDGs.

The specific inclusion of SDG targets and indicators in relevant legislation across the spectrum, i.e.

not only environmental legislation, may help to create awareness and impetus for the SDGs to be employed as standards or metrics for national and subnational policy.
This could help to shift the view some research participants held, that the SDGs are a nice aspiration but an unrealistic target that cannot drive domestic policy outcomes.

(d) how can performance against the SDG be monitored and communicated in a way that engages government, businesses and the public, and allows effective review of Australia’s performance by civil society; Key Message: Start an active dialogue.
One that breaks down the numerous goals, targets and indicators into something individuals, sectors, and government portfolios can meaningfully connect to and work toward.

It is clear that at present, there is no common dialogue on SDG implementation in Australia.

The loudest voices come from the academic and non-for-profit sector.

Starting and continuing the conversation would go a long way to engaging the community.
Similarly breaking down the targets and indicators to the national and sub-national level would make it easier for those working on projects that do align with, or could drive performance against, the SDGs to do so.

This research found only one example of government decisions made or underway that were directly seeking to connect the SDGs with a local problem or policy.
That approach was driven by the personal values of the senior leaders of the organisation, and a regulatory requirement for them to encourage consideration of sustainable development in government decision making.

Perhaps applying the latter regulatory requirement to other bureaucratic leaders and Ministers would broaden the scope of work underway to integrate and achieve the SDGs in domestic policy.

United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDG)Submission 109