E-Library

The Asia-Pacific Sustainable Development Journal (APSDJ) is a rebranded publication issued by the Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP). It builds on the success of two former ESCAP Journals – the Asia-Pacific Population Journal, launched in 1986, and the Asia-Pacific Development Journal, launched in 1994.

The fifth in the series of Inequality of Opportunity in Asia and the Pacific policy papers (following Education, Decent Work, Clean Energy and Children’s Nutrition) , this paper highlights why it is important to reduce inequalities in access to clean water and basic sanitation. It also introduces new ways of analyzing surveys to measure inequality of opportunity and to identify the shared circumstances of those “furthest behind” in 22 ESCAP member States.

Thailand is one of the countries in Southeast Asia which have explored options for integrating climate change into national planning and budgeting. It was also one of the first group of five countries to produce a Climate Change Public Expenditure and Institutional Review and has played a leading role in piloting analysis of how climate change affects the benefits from public expenditure.

The increasing intensity and frequency of climate related shocks, as well as it’s diverse, localised manifestations means that the costs of addressing climate change are likely to fall disproportionately on local government. Yet, in many countries climate finance is managed at the national level and is not effectively trickling down to the subnational level.

This Guidance Note serves as an introductory guide for stakeholders on how to create or refine a Climate Change Financing Framework (CCFF) – a strategic, whole-of-government plan to better manage, mobilize and target climate finance.

The 2018 Edition of the Youth Solutions Report | Supporting youth-led innovation to achieve the SDGs

The Social Outlook for Asia and the Pacific lays out new arguments and evidence for the critical and urgent need to increase investment in people, particularly in social protection.

The paper provides a comparative analysis of the Voluntary National Reviews (VNRs) that were submitted to the High-level Political Forum in 2017. The purpose of the analysis is to identify major commonalities and differences in countries’ approaches to implementing and reviewing the 2030 Agenda. A special focus was put on three main themes: institutional mechanisms, participation of non-state actors, and statistics and data.

Based on experiences from members of the Partners for Review network, this paper analyses participation of non-state actors in the review process of the 2030 Agenda and investigates how to make participation meaningful. The study focuses on the review process at the national level and defines ‘review’ as a process in which different stakeholders are engaged in a joint diagnosis of progress towards achieving the 2030 Agenda.

The paper provides a comparative analysis of the Voluntary National Reviews (VNRs) that were submitted to the High-level Political Forum in 2018. The purpose of the analysis is to identify major commonalities and differences in countries’ approaches to implementing and reviewing the 2030 Agenda. In order to facilitate the identification of trends and tendencies over time, it compares observations to VNRs submitted in 2017 and 2017.