Post on 27-Jun-2020
Brainstorming Session:
Designing Sustainable
Development Goals (SDGs)
30 January, 2013
Venue: Maple Hall, India Habitat Centre,
Lodhi Road, New Delhi, India
Session Summary
One of the main outcomes of the United Nations
Conference on Sustainable Development
(UNCSD), popularly known as the Rio+20
convened in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, in June 2012,
was the agreement by member States to launch a
process to develop a set of sustainable
development goals (SDGs). SDGs were
introduced in the run up to the Rio+20 by the
Government of Colombia and Guatemala and
later supported by many countries. The goals are
intended to advance sustainable development as a
further integration of its three dimensions:
economic, social and environmental. It is also
expected to guide and contribute to
transformative change as stipulated in the Rio+20
Outcome Document, The Future We Want (from
now on, it will be referred to as the Outcome
Document), in support of rights-based, equitable
and inclusive processes that enhance sustainability
at global, regional, national and local levels1.
The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI)
organized a Brainstorming Session on ‗Designing
Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)‘ in
light of the relevant terms agreed within the
Rio+20 Outcome document and the various
thematic priorities that are emerging for these
goals. The Session also brought to the table cross
cutting issues of gender and technology
1Rio+20 Outcome Document; Last accessed on 4th January‘ 2013 from http://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/futurewewant.html
innovation, governance and partnerships, and
regional perspectives on these goals.
The session had a multi stakeholder representation
including regional and international organizations,
academic and research institutes, development
practitioners, and policy and opinion makers.
This Summary document gives an overview of
issues discussed at the Brainstorming Session and
highlights the key issues. However the document
does not suggest to providing a comprehensive
account of the sessions. The session focussed on
the following broad topics: historical background to
SDGs and the role of UN agencies; key interfaces between
Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and SDGs;
thematic priorities for SDGs; and cross cutting perspectives,
governance and commitment for SDGs.
SDGs as an outcome of Rio+20 The Rio+20 Outcome Document (paragraph 245-
251) specifies that the SDGs would be useful in
pursuing focused and coherent action on
sustainable development. This was based also in
the observed success of the Millennium
Development Goals in helping different nations
prioritize towards a development agenda. The
SDGs, however, need to go beyond the
development agenda, to a sustainable
development agenda.
So should the SDGs become the new basis for
defining the post 2015 Development Agenda,
building on the experience with the MDGs? Or
should the SDGs be seen as complementary to the
MDGs? If SDGs are designed to complement
MDGs, it could allow the MDGs‘ focus on
poverty reduction to be matched by
complementary environmental goals and targets.
As per the Outcome document, the proposed
SDGs should be global in nature and universal in
application; covering both developing and
developed countries, keeping in mind common
but differentiated responsibilities (CBDR).
The process of developing
SDGs Member States during the Rio+20 resolved to
establish an “inclusive and transparent intergovernmental
process open to all stakeholders, with a view to developing
global sustainable development goals to be agreed by the
UN General Assembly2.‖ In launching this process,
member States outlined a number of criteria that
the SDGs should meet. Of the broader challenges
threatening the world‘s sustainable development
path, poverty eradication should remain as an
overarching goal of SDGs. Most of the discussion
has focused on the approach to developing the
goals themselves and how the SDG process could
be integrated with the on-going process to define
the broader post- 2015 development agenda or the
post-MDG agenda and in making both, developed
and developing countries accountable.
The Outcome of the Rio+20 Conference decided
the establishment of an Open Working Group
(OWG) in charge of SDGs. The OWG will
include 30 representatives nominated by Member
States from the five UN regional groups.
The Open Working Group was established on
15th of January 2013 by the decision of the
General Assembly3. Although there are 30
2 Report of Secretary-General‘s Initial Input to the Open Working Group on Sustainable Development Goals; Last accessed on 4th January‘2013 from http://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/1494sgreportsdgs.pdf
3 Refer to General Assembly Resolution Number A/67/L.48/Rev.1; Last Accessed on 28th February‘
representatives of the OWG, some of the
representations include more than one country.
The Member States have decided to use an
innovative, constituency-based system of
representation that is new to limited membership
bodies of the General Assembly. This means that
most of the seats in the OWG are shared by
several countries. For example, the first group
includes Algeria, Egypt, Morocco and Tunisia.
The groups which have two or more countries
would have processes, contributions and decisions
made within the group by all countries members
of that group, and they would then come out with
one document. One Member State was also left to
be nominated upon communication by the
African Group. In this way a total of 70 countries
are part of the OWG with 30 representations.
This Group is required to produce a report
containing proposals on sustainable development
goals for consideration and appropriate action by
the General Assembly during its 68th session
which will be convened in September 2013.
The Millennium Development
Goals (MDGs) and Sustainable
Development Goals (SDGs) The Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) are
eight goals, which were set forth following the
United Nations Millennium Declaration in 2000.
These eight development goals ranged from
eradicating poverty and hunger to reducing child
mortality and were targeted towards developing
countries. The MDGs had advantages as well as
drawbacks. Some of the advantages (to name a
few) were:
Their ability to galvanize global and national
concerns to address critical global issues,
They established clear and measurable time
bound targets, fostered greater coordination
on international development assistance and
2013 from http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/67/L.48/Rev.1&Lang=E
They were able to influence on national and
global design of policy processes.
However, there were drawbacks in terms of the
process. The process was a top-down exclusive
one, the MDGs were silent on many issues like
energy, human rights, governance, etc., there was a
one-way accountability only by developing
countries and there have been constraints on
available funding to achieve these goals. The
MDGs will end in 2015 and the Post-2015 agenda
is working towards what will happen after the
MDGs.
The SDGs will be based on the success of the
MDGs and work towards a set of goals which will
take into account all the points of the Outcome
Document. Sustainable development discussed
social and economic development keeping in
mind the limits of the planer. Although social and
economic development was addressed in the
MDGs, the limits of the planet were not.
There is however a debate on whether and how
the MDGs and SDGs should be connected, given
that the deadline for the achievement of MDGs is
2015. Views revolve around three options:
1. To finish what was started by the MDGs:
The MDGs included eight goals and twenty
one targets. Some of the target indicators did
not completely address the objective of the
goal. One example is from Goal 1 on
eradicating extreme poverty and hunger.
Although the goal seeks to eradicate extreme
poverty, the target is to halve the population
of people living below $1 a day. The target
could be further enhanced to completely
eradicating poverty. Therefore SDGs could
consider working on the MDGs and taking
them forward to achieve what the goals hoped
to achieve.
2. An MDG+ Process: This view holds that the
SDGs should add to the goals that the MDGs
missed out on. For example, goals on energy,
sustainable lifestyles, green economy, and
others. In this view, SDGs would be like an
add-on to the current MDGs.
3. A new, radical approach: Although there is
a need to obtain and sustain what the MDGs
tried to achieve, the SDGs need to be
formulated keeping in mind all the three
pillars of sustainable development and the
path towards SDGs should not just stop at
MDGs but look beyond it.
“A politically realistic view on the SDGs might
be an MDG+. But at the same time, SDGs
are an opportunity for member states to be
brave, aggressive and leaders in multilateral
conversations at the global level.”
Mr. Matthew Hammill, Economic
Affairs Officer, UNESCAP
“It is a once in a lifetime opportunity to
actually review the path taken by the MDGs
and to redefine a truly global sustainable
development agenda.”
Ms. Caitlin Wiesen, Country Director,
UNDP-India
Designing the Goals The Outcome document proposes that the SDGs
must be “action-oriented, concise and easy to
communicate, limited in number, aspirational, global in
nature and universally applicable to all countries while
taking into account different national realities, capacities
and levels of development and respecting national policies
and priorities”. The participants agreed with this
proposal, but suggested the avoidance of a long
list of goals and the associated documents.
While designing the goals, all three pillars of
sustainable development need to be kept in mind.
Two approaches which have been discussed are:
1. To have three separate set of goals: Social
goals, economic goals and environmental
goals
2. To include all the three pillars of sustainable
development in each goal: For example, in
terms of energy, all three dimensions on
energy could be looked at by dividing the
goals into sub-goals, i. Access (social), ii.
Improved efficiency (economic), and iii. Share
of renewable energy (environmental).
Thematic priorities for SDGs Some of the themes that the experts felt the SDGs
should cover are (not an exhaustive list):
1. Energy: This is a theme that was left out of
the MDGs despite it being an important
development issue. It must be explicitly
addressed within the planning for poverty
reduction (Goal 1) and for meeting the
broader MDGs. Including energy in term of
access, and not just looking at the service
provision is very important. Achieving
universal access to modern energy services;
improving energy efficiency; and increasing
the share of energy generated from
renewable resources should be considered.
In order to have a sustainable energy future,
biomass energy will need to play a central
role, though efforts should be made to
enable the use of modern fuels for those
who at present use traditional biomass for
cooking. It was also argued that that energy
and water need to be clubbed together given
the conjunctive use of these resources.
2. Habitat: Densification and high density
development are leading to fewer green
spaces and this is a worldwide phenomenon,
particularly in and around the cities. This
densification is further leading to lower
social cohesion or fewer spaces for social
interaction. It is important for the SDGs to
define goals that encourage taking corrective
action to address these concerns. What is
important is to look at the living conditions
in urban and peri-urban areas including
adequate housing, environmentally sound
urban development and expansion, and land
utilization, promoted through public
policies.
In developing countries like India, land use
changes in sub-urban and peri-urban areas
“Access to energy cannot be achieved if
we cannot measure the service. So service
needs to be a part of the metrics.”
Dr. Veena Joshi, Senior Advisor-
Energy, Embassy of Switzerland
are increasing, without adequate
infrastructure development (roads, water,
transport, etc.). At the building level,
problems are faced with respect to energy
use, water consumption, solid waste
generation, etc. Buildings in India consume
about 30% of the energy consumption, with
residential consumption higher than the
commercial sector. Even though this is the
case, more policies exist for the commercial
sector and none for the residential sector.
There is a need therefore to have micro
goals which look at the following issues:
a. Carrying capacity of land with respect
to water availability
b. Setting carbon footprint goals
c. Land suitability with respect to
planned development
d. Energy standards, energy quality
improvement, reducing energy
intensity in the habitat sector
Cost is a great concern and there is a need
for innovative financing mechanisms,
increasing the role of private sector and
encouraging not only quantitative results,
but also quality factors. For example,
besides reducing the water intensity and
avoiding wastage of water in built
environment, it is equally important to look
at the quality of water being supplied and
reducing the pollution generated by treating
and recycling.
3. Transport: A sustainable transport system
is one where infrastructure and services
grow with the growth in demand. Today,
there is a huge deficit in urban transport
facility delegated to cities. An SDG on
transport should address the following
issues:
a. Infrastructure for non-motorized
transport, i.e. walking, cycle, etc. and
focus on avoiding unnecessary
motorized trips with smarter planning,
pricing, and technology Some of the
means to achieve this is by using price
incentives like green surcharge on
fuels, green cess on insurance, taxes on
new cars to reduce congestion, better
information, and improved service
quality.
b. Road safety and security
c. Road networks, traffic management,
enforcement of laws, parking
limitations and management, smart
parking and car-sharing, vehicle
registration quotas, congestion pricing,
vehicle emission standards, and
intermodal freight and logistics
systems are important
4. Water: Some of the current challenges in the
water sector, highlighted for consideration
when designing SDGs, are as follows:
a. Declining per capita water availability
due to poor planning as well as
population growth
b. Increased competition for water
between agriculture, industry and the
domestic sector
c. Overexploitation of water and in
particular, ground water requiring
improvements in water use efficiency
and conservation
d. Pollution of surface and ground water
which calls for a need to bring in
aspects of quality targets and pollution
issues.
Provision of safe drinking water was one of
the targets of Goal 7 of the MDGs. The
targets itself was a problem, as it measured
access to improved water sources – those that
adequately protect the source from outside
contamination – rather than assessing the
quality, or reliability of the water supply, or
whether water sources were sustainable.
National and international/trans-boundary
issues need to be considered in the design of
SDGs, especially since there are no
international agreements on water. The
inequality factor needs to be reduced while
defining access to water. There is also a need
to look at co-benefits of water with other
natural resources (example Energy) to ensure
improved resource-use efficiency. While
addressing the challenge of providing access
to clean water for all, there is a need to link
the real cost of water, especially to those who
can afford it and by those who exploit the
resource. For this, the private sector also
needs to be included in the process of
designing the goals.
5. Oceans and Marine Ecosystems: There is
a range of problems being faced by the
oceans today ranging from climate change to
ocean acidification. Fishing is one of the
biggest food production systems in the world
and it is also a major source of livelihood.
However at the same time it also leads to
loss of marine biodiversity. This makes the
trade-off between livelihood and marine
environments very dominant.
There is a need to look at minimizing this
trade-off. Issues of socio-economic resilience
are important, especially when climate
change will also destroy the ecosystem due to
ocean acidification. SDGs should incentivise
the use of local knowledge for preserving the
ecosystem and its resources.
6. Disaster Risk and Resilience: Building
disaster preparedness and resilience were also
seen as important SDGs. Considerable shares
of GDP is getting lost due to disasters both in
developing and developed countries. Thus it is
important to ensure that development gains
are protected against these risks. In the
context of disaster risk, there is need to factor
uncertainty, and this needs to be accounted
for in the development planning. Poor people
tend to live in more unsafe and vulnerable
areas in any city and the problems are
multiplying because of this. There is a need to
consider social and biodiversity losses
resulting from disasters, especially in terms of
impacts on livelihoods and focus needs to
extend beyond rebuilding infrastructure to
rebuilding lives. Linkages could be created
between Hyogo Framework for Action
(HFA), MDGs and SDGs. Thus
mainstreaming disaster risk in the
“Our development process is not getting
immune to the exposure of risks (of
disasters) and this is a very important
point to be included in the sustainable
development agenda.”
Prof. Santosh Kumar, Head of the
Policy, Planning and Cross Cutting
Issues, National Institute of
Disaster Management
P
r
o
f
.
S
a
n
t
o
s
h
development process is important. It is also
important to note that no country has funding
for long-term disaster recovery and they
depend on external funding, loans, to finance
risk reduction and design long term responses.
Climate refugees and disaster resettlement
also need to be considered.
Alternatively, since disaster risk management
cuts across traditional development sectors
including health, education, infrastructure,
water and agriculture, and thus disaster
resilience could be integrated ―horizontally‖ in
a range of sector goals. For example, if a
global goal around education is adopted in the
post-2015 development agenda, an indicator
could include the percentage of primary
schools certified to be in conformity with
hazard resistant building standards relevant to
the region.
Besides these themes, participants also
discussed some issues that cut across these
themes and other thematic priorities that it
was felt should be considered under SDGs.
Cross cutting themes for
SDGs 1. Gender: Gender was a part of the MDG
Goal 3, however, the goal and indicator did
not talk about basic human rights issues and
at times, got the metric wrong. For example,
one of the targets talked about the number of
women in parliament and not the number of
women in the local level governments. These
two indicators would portray a completely
different picture in terms of women‘s
representation in government.
While designing the SDGs, it must be realised
that the world has completely changed since
the time of the MDGs and the indicators in
the MDGs, although crucial, do not highlight
a number of key relevant issues. Women are
participating increasingly in the economic
progress in the countries through their rising
levels of education and participation in labour
market. However this economic progress is
working in parallel with increasing violence
against women and other human rights issues
related to their existence. Gender inequality is
predominant in the unorganized sector and it
needs to be addressed in the SDGs.
On the one hand, women are seen to be
drivers of change, and on the other hand, they
are struggling to live a life of dignity. Gender
in the context of SDGs need to be an equity
based, transformative agenda and a cross-
cutting theme. Gender inequality and
discrimination are key barriers to progress on
human rights, development and peace and
security, and must therefore be central to the
post-2015 agenda, recognising that gender
inequality cross-cuts all other forms of
inequality. There must also be an explicit
―On one hand, women have already proved
themselves to be in the forefront and
accelerators of any development process and
on the other hand, they are still fighting to
lead a life of dignity.”
Ms. Kalyani Raj, Member-in charge,
All India Women‘s Conference
M
s
.
K
a
l
y
a
n
i
R
a
j
,
M
e
m
b
e
r
-
i
n
c
h
a
r
g
e
,
A
commitment to the implementation of human
rights agreements including the Convention
on the Elimination of all Form of
Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW)
and the Beijing Platform for Action
2. Resource use: Keeping in mind that the
Second Law of Thermodynamics is extremely
important to the existence of humanity, there
is a strong need to preserve resources and to
not only use them efficiently, but also reuse
them. Even though some argue that there are
no limits to growth, given that growth is
driven by knowledge, there is need to look at
better means to use resources as these can
impose limits to growth. There is need to
incentivise new technologies and practices to
better use these resources.
Technology can be applied to better meet
basic human needs — alleviating poverty,
creating improved livelihood opportunities,
reducing inequities and building
infrastructures.
3. Education, Access to Information, and
Participation: Universalization of education,
promotion of integrated education for
sustainable development, training for making
production and consumption processes
greener, increased participation of all
stakeholders in the goal setting and freedom
of information are important cross cutting
issues.
4. Consumption and Lifestyles: Sustainable
lifestyles refer to patterns of behaviour shaped
by personal and social interactions that are
influenced by environmental, cultural
technological and socio-economic contexts.
Goals that encourage equity, efficiency and
sufficiency in order to live within global
resource limits need to be identified. In this
context, it was also discussed that the Gini
coefficient could be used appropriately to
track inequality in use of energy, water and
other key resources.
Governance and commitment
for SDGs Some of the issues linked to governance and
commitment for SDGs include:
1. Timing: An important issue that is raising
concerns is that on the timelines for SDGs.
Should 2030 be considered as a target year or
end of the century be considered as the target
when society will be completely sustainable?
Or should the achievements of goals be
framed in smaller time frames, i.e. blending
results-based long-term targets for 2030 or
2050 with policy targets for the short term
and medium time frame with some high
priority goals?
2. Measuring goals: When goals and indicators
are being set, there is a need to ensure the
indicator is actually indicative of the goal. One
of the major drawbacks of the MDGs was
that the indicators did not completely match
“While designing the SDGs, can we focus on what is it that we absolutely cannot live with and use this as a basis for prioritizing action going up to 2030.” Dr. Leena Srivastava, Vice Chancellor TERI University and Executive Director-Operations, TERI
“We know what we need to achieve in
the end is a lifestyle change. So why not
set as a goal a lifestyle change or the
lifestyle we want.”
Dr Dirk Fransaer, Managing
Director, VITO, Flanders,
Belgium
the expected objectives for the goals. For
example, in the case of water, the indicator
was the proportion of population using an
improved drinking water source. The use of
the term source implied provision of
infrastructure and not necessarily provision of
safe drinking water. Therefore it is very
important to get the metric right and not
focus only on the delivery mechanism but the
delivery of the service itself.
3. Data availability: When developing the
goals, it is also important to define their
spatial and temporal coverage. This will then
be used to identify the data requirements and
their level of aggregation. Currently one of the
major concerns raised is the lack of availability
of data to be able to measure the goals and
track their progress.
From the temporal point of view, time series
data will be important that show trends, but
projections of the most likely trends may also
be required to help establish a basis for
preparing any policy-relevant scenarios for
meeting these goals.
From the spatial point of view, though
country may be an appropriate unit, but some
level of disaggregation will be required to be
able to look at sub-national trends. Further,
data disaggregated by sex, age, geography,
location will be critical to monitor the degree
of inclusivity and sustainability of any
development and to address the needs of the
most deprived and vulnerable groups. This
will require strengthening of the statistical
capacities in most countries.
4. Financing the SDGs: Financing is going to
be critical for the achievement of SDGs.
Given the current financial crises, and the
very real possibility that countries will not go
beyond their stated ODA commitments, there
is need, to look at innovative sources of
financing. Some of these could include:
a. The private sector
b. Improved public sector accountability
c. Voluntary initiatives
d. Paying taxes on financial transactions
e. Carbon tax (tax on airline tickets) to
fund development; etc.
5. Governance: This is going to be another
defining factor for the success of the SDGs.
Without good governance, most the targets
and goals would not be achieved, as in the
case of MDGs. The outcome document
clearly mentions the importance of
governance.
“We acknowledge that democracy, good
governance and the rule of law, at the national
and international levels, as well as an enabling
environment, are essential for sustainable
development, including sustained and inclusive
economic growth, social development,
environmental protection and the eradication of
poverty and hunger. We reaffirm that to achieve
our sustainable development goals we need
institutions at all levels that are effective,
transparent, accountable and democratic.”
The brainstorming session, to conclude, has
some key messages that are highlighted here:
Sustainable development goals could
assist in making the broad international
sustainable development agenda
practical
The MDGs were responsible for
spurring progress in tackling extreme
poverty, but they prioritized social
needs over economic and
environmental ones. Future
development goals as incorporated in
the SDGs will need to combine all the
three dimensions to be effective.
SDGs can serve as tools for countries
to measure their progress as well as
encourage further cooperation between
countries on sustainability issues,
considering all the three dimensions of
sustainability-social, economic and
environmental
Thematic priorities will need to be
carefully identified for the goals and
existence of cross-cutting issues and
minimization of trade-offs will need to
be ensured
Specific universal goals to address
global sustainability challenges, such as
climate change and loss of ocean and
marine biodiversity will need to be set.
New goals must speak to and inspire
not only governments and aid agencies,
but also the private sector, investors
and the public at large in making efforts
towards sustainable development.
For further details, please visit:
http://www.teriin.org/index.php?option=com_events&task=details&sid=565
Brainstorming Session Agenda Wednesday, 30 January 2013
Maple Hall, India Habitat Centre
10:00 AM– 2:00 PM
09:30 AM – 10:00 AM: Registration and Tea/Coffee
10:00 AM – 10:10 AM: Welcome Address by Dr Leena Srivastava, Executive Director
Operations, TERI and Vice Chancellor, TERI University
10:10 AM – 10:25 AM: Keynote Address: Mr Brice Lalonde, Former Executive Coordinator of
Rio+20, United Nations
10:25 AM – 12:15 PM: Thematic considerations for SDGs: Some
priorities
Chair: Dr. Prodipto Ghosh, Distinguished Fellow, TERI
Dr. Ligia Noronha, Executive Director, TERI
Panelists:
o MDGs and SDGs and Post 2015 Development Agenda, Ms.
Caitlin Wiesen, Country Director, UNDP-India
o Energy access, efficiency and sustainability
Dr. Veena Joshi, Senior Advisor-Energy, Embassy of Switzerland
o Sustainable Habitat
Ms. Mili Majumdar- Director, TERI
o Sustainable Transport
Shri B.I. Singal, Director General, Institute of Urban Transport
o Water issues Mr. Ashok Jaitly, Distinguished Fellow, TERI and Mr. Anshuman, Associate Director, TERI
o Marine Biodiversity and Conservation
Dr. Aaron Savio Lobo, Consultant, Natural Resource Management
o Disaster preparedness and building resilience
Prof. Santosh Kumar, Head of the Policy, Planning and Cross
Cutting Issues, National Institute of Disaster Management
12:15 PM– 12.30 PM Tea Break
12:30 PM –2:00 PM: Panel Discussion: Cross cutting Perspectives, Governance and
commitment for SDGs
Chair: Ambassador C. Dasgupta, Distinguished Fellow, TERI
Panelists:
o Gender perspectives
Ms. Kalyani Raj, Member-in charge, All India Women‘s
Conference
o Technology Innovations for addressing key sustainability
concerns
Dr Dirk Fransaer, Managing Director, VITO, Flanders, Belgium
o The challenge of reflecting all dimensions of sustainable
development in the new goals
Mr. Daniel Ziegerer, Director of Cooperation, Embassy of
Switzerland
o European Perspectives on the SDGs
Mr. Thierry Schwarz, Director, Intellectual Exchange, Asia-Europe
Foundation (ASEF)
o Perspectives on the SDGs from Asia Pacific and Latin
America and the Caribbean regions
Mr. Matthew Hammill, Economic Affairs Officer, UNESCAP
14:00 PM onwards : Lunch
List of Speakers/Participants Ms Kalyani Raj All India Womens Conference
Mr Theirry Schwarz Asia-Europe Foundation
Dr Aaron Savio Lobo Consultant - Natural Resource Management
Ms Kristin Meyer Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH
Mr Nilanjan Ghose Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH
Mr Daniel Ziegerer Embassy of Switzerland
Dr Veena Joshi Embassy of Switzerland
Ms Elodie Maria Sube European Union
Mr Arnoud Lust Flemish Institute for Technological Research (VITO)
Mr Dirk Fransaer Flemish Institute for Technological Research (VITO)
Ms Jot Prakash Kaur Global Compact Network India
Dr Brajesh Jha Institute of Economic Growth
Mr B I Singal Institute of Urban Transport
Dr Aparna Sawhney Jawaharlal Nehru University
Prof Santosh Kumar National Institute of Disaster Management
Ms Aastha Mehta The Energy and Resources Institute
Mr Anshuman The Energy and Resources Institute
Mr Aditya Ramji The Energy and Resources Institute
Ms Arpita Khanna The Energy and Resources Institute
Amb. C Dasgupta The Energy and Resources Institute
Ms C Sita Lakshmi The Energy and Resources Institute
Dr G Mini The Energy and Resources Institute Ms. Harsha Meenawat The Energy and Resources Institute
Ms Ipsita Kumar The Energy and Resources Institute
Dr Leena Srivastava The Energy and Resources Institute
Dr Ligia Noronha The Energy and Resources Institute
Mr Manish Kumar Shrivastava The Energy and Resources Institute
Ms Mili Majumdar The Energy and Resources Institute
Ms N Deepa The Energy and Resources Institute
Mr Nitya Nanda The Energy and Resources Institute
Dr Prasun K Gangopadhyay The Energy and Resources Institute
Dr Prodipto Ghosh The Energy and Resources Institute
Ms Ritika Sehjpal The Energy and Resources Institute
Mr Rohit Pathania The Energy and Resources Institute
Mr Sahil Malhotra The Energy and Resources Institute
Dr Shilpi Kapur The Energy and Resources Institute
Ms Shivanjali Sharma The Energy and Resources Institute
Mr Souvik Bhattacharjya The Energy and Resources Institute
Ms Trishita Ray Barman The Energy and Resources Institute
Mr Upinder S Dhingra The Energy and Resources Institute
Mr Brice Lalonde United Nations
Ms Caitlin Weisen United Nations Development Program - India
Mr Matthew Hammill United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific