Metropolitan Localized Data in Greater Belo Horizonte, Brazil: A Participatory Strategy to Better Governance
The SDG in Action Project–a partnership between Metropolitan SDG Observatory (METRODS), University Newton Paiva, and Nossa BH Movement–developed and tested an indicator framework to monitor the achievement of SDG 11 targets in Brazil’s Metropolitan Area of Belo Horizonte. This project was part of the LDA-SI 2018-2019 microgrant program.
Written by Cid Blanco Jr., Architect and Urban Planner with collaboration from Claudia Pires, Architect and Urban Planner, and Marcelo Amaral, Civil Engineer. Editing by Sandra Ruckstuhl, Jessica Espey, and Jay Neuner. Design by Micha Dugan, Ryan Swaney, and Jay Neuner.
Table of contents
Abstract | Problem | Solution | Building Process | Strengths and Weaknesses | Additional Resources | Annexes | Endnotes
Abstract
In Brazil, like many other Latin American countries, more than 80 percent of the population is concentrated in urban areas characterized not by individual cities, but by metropolitan areas. Metropolitan planning and management1 became an important issue in Brazil after the approval of the Metropolitan Statute (Federal Law 13,089) in 2015. The experience of the Metropolitan Area of Belo Horizonte (RMBH) is considered a national reference for metropolitan planning and governance. Despite this vaulted status, Greater Belo Horizonte’s management structure lacks an official metropolitan-level monitoring system to track its policies and investments and help planning and decision-making procedures. Brazil has turned to the United Nations’ Agenda 2030–also known as the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)–for guidance. For RMBH, SDG 11 (“make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient, and sustainable”) is particularly relevant. This brief describes how the RMBH’s SDG in Action project, a partnership between Metropolitan SDG Observatory (METRODS), University Newton Paiva, and Movimento Nossa BH, developed and tested an indicator framework to monitor the achievement of SDG 11 targets.
Problem
Brazil lacks a significant amount of official data relevant to sustainable development at local and metropolitan levels; for example, the most recent national census data are outdated, as the census was last published in 2010. Brazil also experienced an economic and political crisis in the wake of President Dilma Rousseff’s impeachment in August 2016. This event hindered national government-civil society interaction and Agenda 2030 planning in the country. Further, due to the economic downturn, the development context has grown increasingly challenged. For example, although the UN removed Brazil from its World Food Programme (WFP) Hunger Map2 in 2014, WFP General Director José Graziano3 reports that current conditions of crisis may trigger its reinstatement.
Consequently, the Brazilian Commission on Sustainable Development Goals4 has not yet established an official national SDG indicator framework or a set of national goals to be pursued in the follow-up to Agenda 2030. While Brazil was still able to present voluntary national reviews (VNRs) to the High-Level Political Forum (HLPF) based on existing data, this data did not express the real impact of the concurrent economic crisis on the goals.
In order for policymakers to respond effectively to these evolving circumstances and to ultimately meet development goals, Brazilian authorities need to update public data before the next scheduled census in 2020. The 10-year gap between censuses hinders smart policy and investment that can yield equitable development outcomes in Brazil and across the metropolitan areas, including Greater Belo Horizonte5.
The absence of needed data led civil society organizations to produce their own versions of indicators for the country. In the last two years, the Brazilian Civil Society Working Group for the 2030 Agenda developed “Spotlight Reports” in opposition to the Brazilian VNRs. In addition, in May 2017, a group of institutions and organizations from civil society, the public and private sectors, and academia founded the Metropolitan SDG Observatory (METRODS) to identify, disseminate, and monitor indicators related to SDG 11 in metropolitan areas of Brazil6.
Greater Belo Horizonte is one of the country’s most important metropolitan areas7. The RMBH Development Agency is a technical organization founded in 2009 that is in charge of promoting the joint management of public policies of common interest, such as public inter-municipal transportation, land use, and basic sanitation in the Metropolitan Area of Belo Horizonte. It is responsible for coordinating the implementation of the Integrated Development Plan of the RMBH (2011), encompassing the 34 cities under RMBH jurisdiction8. Originally, the agency planned to establish a monitoring and evaluation observatory to guide and inform planning and decision-making processes in the metropolitan area, but to date it has not done so. Current investment discussions under the Metropolitan Plan are missing critical, real-time data on the situation in the metropolitan area. Additionally, funding for the implementation of the Metropolitan Plan faces barriers because most of the cities within the metropolitan region are not contributing to the Metropolitan Development Fund9 due to the economic crisis, diminishing its investment capacity.
Figure 1. Map of RMBH
Map of Greater Belo Horizonte. Courtesy of Cid Blanco, Jr.
Box 1. About Belo Horizonte
The Metropolitan Area of Belo Horizonte (Figure 1) has 6 million inhabitants with 34 cities within its administrative boundaries and territory covering 9,500,000 km². It is the political, financial, commercial, educational, and cultural center of the state of Minas Gerais, representing around 40 percent of the economy and 25 percent of the population of Minas Gerais. Its GDP in 2018 is estimated at USD 4.5 billion, of which more than 40 percent belongs to the city of Belo Horizonte, which covers 3.5 percent of the territory of the metropolitan area. Its economy is significant and active, and it is based on industry, finance, services, commerce, mining, tourism, and construction.
The benefits of the region’s significant economic activity are not equally distributed in the 34 cities across the metropolitan area, indicating a spatial inequality that has become a primary challenge to achieving equitable development across the region. For instance, the City of Belo Horizonte and two other cities account for 60 percent of the population in 9 percent of the territory, and 77 percent of the GDP of the entire metropolitan area. Meanwhile, 22 cities with a population smaller than 50,000 inhabitants occupy
60 percent of the territory and contribute to only 7.5 percent of the GDP.
Box 2. About the SDG in Action partners
University Newton Paiva has teachers and researchers from different areas of expertise who share their knowledge and collaborate to address the multidimensional realities of sustainable development in metropolitan areas. For SDG in Action, students10 tutored by teachers11 worked as a field team, helping local governments with data collection and participating in data analysis activities that were conducted by their professors.
Movimento Nossa BH coordinates the Mobility Observatory, a partnership between the municipality of Belo Horizonte and civil society. Their data production and analysis expertise were utilized when reviewing data that was collected in the cities from the RMBH during the SDG in Action project.
METRODS network developed a framework of 80 indicators12, most of them based on SDG 11, to establish a long-term, practical tool to help political decision-making and investment in the development of metropolitan areas based on SDG 11’s aims. As a network of institutions and organizations, METRODS mobilized its affiliates–more than 40 national and international institutions–in order to disseminate the results and stimulate debate around the facts and figures that came up from work developed by the SDG in Action project.
The RMBH Development Agency acted as the link between local governments and the university/nongovernmental organization (NGO) team. It was initially slated to be the host for capacity-building activities and workshops and the place where all SDG 11 indicator data would be collated and shared. Due to concurrent elections in Brazil, SDG in Action coordinators reevaluated the situation and decided to conduct all activities inside the University Newton Paiva facilities.
SOLUTION
The SDG in Action project was launched in 2017 by METRODS in partnership with Movimento Nossa BH13, University Newton Paiva, and civil society organizations working on housing and urban development issues in the region14. One of the initial partners was the RMBH Development Agency, which initiated the approach of engaging with local institutions and supporting METRODS in piloting its participatory monitoring and evaluation methodology and SDG 11 indicators framework for metropolitan areas. They aimed to create a “temporary Metropolitan Observatory” that would coordinate, monitor, and evaluate these activities at the metropolitan level for a six-month pilot period.
METRODS and University Newton Paiva15 designed and managed the project. Movimento Nossa BH provided data analysis and administrative activities16, and the Metropolitan Agency17 helped to connect the project team with the 34 local governments. The RMBH Development Agency also provided institutional support to the project. The combination of a well-organized metropolitan governance system and a dedicated group of local and regional stakeholders that were committed to Agenda 2030 made the Metropolitan Area of Belo Horizonte an ideal location for this initiative. This work was conducted during the LDA-SI grant period in 2018.
The project utilized METRODS’ guidelines, which promoted a robust participatory approach both in the process of institutional design as well as in indicator development and data decision-making activities. The guidelines also highlighted the need for interaction among different areas of expertise in order to capture the multidimensional realities of sustainable development in metropolitan areas in Brazil. With the expertise of each of the partners, the project aimed to establish the foundation for a long-term Metropolitan Observatory. By incorporating local government, university counterparts, and civil society, the coalition provided capacity, legitimacy, and community perspective to this end.
Building Process
The SDG in Action project initially pursued three activities: (i) awareness and mobilization; (ii) data collection; and (iii) data analysis. The beginning of the data collection activities revealed a disconnect between the original METRODS SDG 11 indicators framework and the reality of the Metropolitan Area of Belo Horizonte. Consequently, the coordination team added an activity into the work plan: (iv) METRODS SDG 11 indicators review.
Due to time constraints, the team worked concurrently on these activities. The project was also implemented during an election period, which created challenges and prolonged its implementation.
The SDG in Action project team. Courtesy of Cid Blanco, Jr.
The project leaders based the SDG in Action Project on sourcing local data to underpin the SDG 11 indicators. They invited mayors and technicians from the RMBH cities to join the project and nominate focal points who could provide the field team with the necessary data from their governments, allowing the SDG in Action team to calculate the indicators and build the proposed SDG 11 metropolitan profile. Without the appointment of focal points and subsequent access to local data, none of the planned activities of the project would have been possible.
Awareness and Mobilization
In May 2018, the project team initiated activity (i) at a Metropolitan Council meeting, having determined this large convening presented a good opportunity to share the SDG in Action project. However, this attempt to sensitize and mobilize the city representatives failed; as the meeting took place during an intense national and local electoral campaign, the attendees wrongly believed that the project was a partisan effort.
The project team then launched a second attempt to engage with the cities. University Newton Paiva students emailed an official letter–signed by the project’s coordinators and presenting the project proposal, its near-term objectives, its long-term goals, and the roles of each of the partner–to the 34 mayors. After that, the 34 mayors and their teams were invited to attend an informational and training meeting at the University Newton Paiva in Belo Horizonte in June 2018. Though 16 of the 34 cities confirmed attendance, only three attended the meeting.
Not to be deterred, the team personally recruited the remaining mayors by visiting each of their offices to provide further information on the project, address concerns, and request the nomination of a focal point. This technique was a marked success. In fact, in some cases, when the team arrived they found the mayor of a given city was aware of the project and had identified a focal point.
In the end, the team secured the participation of the 34 cities representatives to collaborate on the project.
METRODS SDG 11 Indicator Review
Poster promoting the work of the SDG in Action Project. Source: Cid Blanco, Jr.
While mobilizing the city representatives, the team also initiated a review of the list of SDG 11 indicators compiled by METRODS, as it became evident that some of the original indicators were not compatible with the realities of the RMBH.
The original METRODS SDG 11 Indicator Framework (see Annex A) was developed with input and guidance from technical experts in the monitoring and evaluation procedures of different partners of the initiative. This original framework is composed of 80 indicators that use official national census data, as well as local data from local and state governments. This framework was developed as a tool to create “SDG 11 profiles” for metropolitan areas without depending exclusively on official statistics. It is important to mention that most of the METRODS partners live in capital cities of metropolitan areas, such as São Paulo, Rio de Janeiro, and Belo Horizonte–the urban centers that generally offer the best quality of life and public services in Brazil. The standards proposed for the indicators were closer to these capital cities’ realities, and did not consider the diverse conditions that exist across cities in a single metropolitan area. The standards included features considered “normal standards” for Belo Horizonte (as a large capital city), but not necessarily typical for the region’s smaller peripheral cities (such as Ribeirão das Neves, Raposos, and Baldim).
For example, the framework listed indicators measuring the presence of public transportation but did not count regional public transportation linkages. For the peripheral cities, a linkage indicator would have been a better way understand the quality of the service offered in the RMBH. In another example, it called out the presence of exclusive bus lanes, such as the ones used for Bus Rapid Transportation (BRT) systems, when some of the peripheral cities are too small to have this service.
To refine the original list of 80 indicators, the project coordinators conducted weekly meetings with the field team during July and August 2018. The review focused on the indicators’ relevance to the RMBH, the presence in the peripheral cities of the public service to be measured, and the ability to obtain timely data. In the end, the project team and local authorities approved a revised list of 55 localized indicators customized for the Metropolitan Area of Belo Horizonte. Titled “RMBH SDG 11 Indicators,” the list included housing, transportation, public spaces, climate change, and urban development (see Annex B). The team did not use national census or other official data because it was outdated. Instead, they drew on data provided by the local governments.
Data Collection
Parallel with the indicator review, the project team developed two online questionnaires: a Knowledge Survey (Annex C) with questions about the Millennium Development Goals or MDGs (the precursors to the SDGs) and the SDGs, and an SDG 11 Survey (Annex D) that called for data on the RMBH SDG11 Framework. The purpose of the first survey was to measure how much city officials knew about each of the MDG and SDG initiatives and if they had designated any structure or person to work on the 2030 Agenda18. The purpose of the second survey was to produce baseline metropolitan profiles for each city to be used to track progress. Out of 34 cities in the metropolitan area, 22 cities completed the Knowledge Questionnaire. Nine cities completed the SDG 11 Indicators Questionnaire.
In September 2018, an evaluation workshop was conducted to evaluate the project to assess and document its outcomes. It involved professors, local government representatives, social movements, NGOs and students. They determined that the low response rate on the SDG 11 Indicators Questionnaire was due to the lack of knowledge of Agenda 2030. They also concluded that the presence of seven targets for SDG 11 may have been confusing, causing the cities to fail to answer if the respondent’s knowledge focused on a particular public service sector.
Consequently, the group decided to personally contact representatives in non-responsive cities to collect the missing data. They wrote to each local government and followed up with phone calls. During this new round of field visits, the project team delivered a hard-copy form of the SDG 11 Indicator Questionnaire and succeeded in getting responses from ten cities.
SDG 11 Data Analysis
The last phase of the SDG in Action project consisted of an analysis of the data collected in both questionnaires. Representatives from Movimento Nossa BH and University Newton Paiva, under supervision of the project coordinators, undertook this task. The results of the Knowledge Questionnaire confirmed that governments across the Belo Horizonte Metropolitan Area lacked understanding of the MDGs and the SDGs. They also did a more detailed analysis that cross-tabulated the data with population and proximity to the capital, among other variables. They used this information for the introduction to the metropolitan profiles for the 34 cities. Unfortunately, the low response rate on the SDG 11 Questionnaire prevented completion of the metropolitan profiles. However, the project team used data from city websites that have assembled partial profiles, covering the councils and legislation (e.g. housing and environment councils, historical patrimony, and environment legislation).
The results of the analysis were presented during a public workshop at the end of November 2018 (see Annex E). The audience of students, professors, representatives from social movements, and local and state government representatives had the opportunity to see the project’s primary results and also to listen to the challenges and lessons learned.
The 22 municipalities that answered the Knowledge Questionnaire represent 65 percent of the total 4,571,165 inhabitants (87 percent of the total population), 6,744 km² (71 percent of the total of the RMBH), and 87 percent of the GDP of the RMBH. The 17 municipalities that responded to the SDG 11 Questionnaire represent 50 percent of the total 3,690,596 inhabitants (70 percent of the total population), 4,961 km² (52 percent of the total area), and 70 percent of the GDP of the RMBH.
Regarding the results of the Knowledge Questionnaire, 59 percent of the cities know what the MDGs mean, but only 27 percent of the 22 municipalities have done any follow-up on the MDGs. With regards to the SDGs, 73 percent know what they mean, 45 percent have developed a Plan of Goals (2017-2020) incorporating the Agenda 2030 concepts, and 41 percent have any kind of monitoring of Agenda 2030 through the SDGs. Considering that 87 percent of the population lives in those cities, the numbers are better than expected; almost half are developing actions regarding financial planning and monitoring using SDGs.
Table 1. Results of the SDG 11 Questionnaire
| SDG 11 Goals | Goal (Average) | Effort | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 11.1 | By 2030, ensure access for all to adequate, safe and affordable housing and basic services and upgrade slums | 38.7% | Low |
| 11.2 | By 2030, provide access to safe, affordable, accessible and sustainable transport systems for all, improving road safety, notably by expanding public transport, with special attention to the needs of those in vulnerable situations, women, children, persons with disabilities and older | 38.7% | Low |
| 11.3 | By 2030, enhance inclusive and sustainable urbanization and capacity for participatory, integrated and sustainable human settlement planning and management in all countries | 48.7% | Low |
| 11.4 | Strengthen efforts to protect and safeguard the world’s cultural and natural heritage |
74.3% | High |
| 11.5 | By 2030, significantly reduce the number of deaths and the number of people affected and substantially decrease the direct economic losses relative to global gross domestic product caused by disasters, including water-related disasters, with a focus on protecting the poor and people in vulnerable situations | 57.6% | Medium |
| 11.6 | By 2030, reduce the adverse per capita environmental impact of cities, including by paying special attention to air quality and municipal and other waste management | 48% | Low |
| 11.7 | By 2030, provide universal access to safe, inclusive and accessible, green and public spaces, in particular for women and children, older persons and persons with disabilities | 69.1% | Medium |
| 11.a | Support positive economic, social and environmental links between urban, peri-urban and rural areas by strengthening national and regional development planning | 51% | Medium |
| 11.b | By 2020, substantially increase the number of cities and human settlements adopting and implementing integrated policies and plans towards inclusion, resource efficiency, mitigation and adaptation to climate change, resilience to disasters, and develop and implement, in line with the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030, holistic disaster risk management at all levels | 5.9% | Very Low |
“VERY LOW” effort was considered when the percent of respondents responding positively was below 30 percent, “LOW” when between 30 and 50 percent, “MEDIUM” when between 50 and 70 percent, and “HIGH” when above 70 percent.
The results of the SDG 11 Questionnaire (Table 1) provided a basic profile of RMBH’s status in regard to SDG 11 and its goals, informing the creation of related, local-level indicators. The vast majority represent the existence of structures and instruments identified as adhering to the goals, but their effectiveness and quality cannot be evaluated through these indicators. However, other questions may give clues about these qualities, which was considered in the analysis.
Strengths and Weaknesses
Theory versus practice: general methodologies need to be customized for local reality. When the METRODS team developed its indicator framework, it intended to use the framework in all of Brazil’s metropolitan areas. After testing it in the SDG in Action project, however, they discovered the need to customize the indicators to the local situation. They demonstrated how to localize an indicator framework in the Belo Horizonte Metropolitan Area, producing the RMBH SDG Indicator Framework. Lesson: Local coalitions must adapt indicators to the local context.
Politics are always “on.” Support from metropolitan or regional government agencies is essential to connect the data collection team with local government representatives, particularly in the peripheral cities. The SDG in Action project revealed that without careful planning, local authorities can misperceive the work as a political initiative. For example, the initiation of the SDG in Action project at the same time as the presidential and gubernatorial electoral campaigns led to its association as a partisan effort. Consequently, additional time and resources were required for the project team to explain the work and recruit focal points. Lesson: An evaluation of the political situation in the metropolitan area, even in the absence of an election, can help project implementers establish metropolitan and regional government agency support for and participation in the project in a prudent way, keeping in mind the need to reduce risk to project goals.
The use of secondary local data saves time and resources. The leaders of the SDG in Action project discovered that local governments provide important data online that can be used to construct a “minimum profile” for cities that fail to respond to questionnaires seeking information or that supplements the data submitted by compliant cities. Lesson: The use of open source, localized data from public websites helps save time and resources and fills data gaps across the metropolitan area.
Capacity-building activities are essential when collecting data in small and peripheral cities. Results from the Knowledge Questionnaire revealed that local government employees in the Belo Horizonte Metropolitan Area had little knowledge of the Millennium and Sustainable Development Goals. During the SDG in Action project, only one capacity-building workshop was conducted, aiming to educate local government officials on the project implementation activities. Lesson: The concept of sustainable development and Agenda 2030 is still unknown by public servants from small and peripheral cities of metropolitan areas. When resources and time allow, more extensive education and training on the 2030 Agenda and the SDGs should be added to the work plan.
Universities are helpful to the implementation of Agenda 2030. As demonstrated by the SDG in Action project, the partnership with University Newton Paiva made the project feasible. Professors and students contributed time and expertise to the SDG 11 indicator review, the data collection process, and project evaluation discussions. Achieving the SDGs will require partnerships from different levels of the government, civil society and academia. Lesson: Universities and other partners are essential players in training local governments about sustainable development concepts and monitoring SDG projects.
Additional Resources
The resources below provide further information about the mentioned experiences in this document and other Brazilian experiences regarding SDG implementation in metropolitan areas.
Spotlight Synthesis Report: the 2030 sustainable development agenda in Brazil 2017
Spotlight Synthesis Report: the 2030 sustainable development agenda in Brazil 2018 (em português)
Book of Experiences of Localization, Monitoring and Advocacy for Sustainable Development Goals 19
METRODS methodologies and SDG 11 indicators framework creation process
Belo Horizonte Millennium Observatory (em português)
Mobility Observatory of Belo Horizonte (em português)
Annexes
Annex A. Original METRODS SDG 11 Indicator Framework
Annex B. RMBH SDG 11 Indicators
Annex C. Knowledge Questionnaire
Annex D. SDG 11 Questionnaire
Annex E. Presentation: SDG in Action Project Results
Annex F. SDG in Action Project Datasheet
UNIVERSITY NEWTON PAIVA
University Newton Paiva has teachers and researchers from different areas of expertise who share their knowledge and collaborate to address the multidimensional realities of sustainable development in metropolitan areas. For SDG in Action, students15 tutored by teachers16 worked as a field team, helping local governments with data collection and participating in data analysis activities that were conducted by their professors.
Dean: João Paulo Barros Beldi
Research and Extension Coordinator: Prof. Leonardo F. C.R. Santos
Coordinator of Scientific Initiation: Prof. Cinthia Pacheco
Architecture Course Coordinator: Prof. Rodrigo Figueiredo Reis
Civil Engineering Course Coordinator: Urias Eduardo Bistene Cordeiro
Project Coordinator: Prof. Cláudia Teresa Pereira Pires
Smart Campus Coordinator: Prof. Andrea Abrahão Santanna
Collaboration: Prof. Fernando Pacheco
Students: Alice Medeiros, Ana Eliza Araújo Moura, César Gugkielmi, Francisco Gabriel Macedo Araújo, Guilherme Eduardo C. Matoso, Guilherme Tell, Gustavo Caravelli, Jessica Rick, Maria Luiza Maia Araújo, Scarlat Karem, Vinícius Franklin Custódio and Vinícius Turquete.
Graphic Designers: Ana Eliza Araújo Moura and Francisco Gabriel Macedo Araújo
METRODS
METRODS network developed a framework of 80 indicators,17 most of them based on SDG 11, to establish a long-term, practical tool to help political decision-making and investment in the development of metropolitan areas based on SDG 11’s aims. As a network of institutions and organizations, METRODS mobilized its affiliates–more than 40 national and international institutions–in order to disseminate the results and stimulate debate around the facts and figures that came up from work developed by the SDG in Action project.
Project Coordinator: Cid Blanco Jr.
NOSSA BH MOVEMENT
Movimento Nossa BH coordinates the Mobility Observatory, a partnership between the municipality of Belo Horizonte and civil society. Their data production and analysis expertise were utilized when reviewing data that was collected in the cities from the RMBH during the SDG in Action project.
Administrative Coordinator: Guilherme Tampieri
Data Analysis: Marcelo Amaral
Researchers: Ana Eliza Araújo Moura, Guilherme Tell, Jessica Rick, Kaode Biague and Vinícius Turquete
RMBH DEVELOPMENT AGENCY (Institutional Support)
The RMBH Development Agency acted as the link between local governments and the university/nongovernmental organization (NGO) team. It was initially slated to be the host for capacity-building activities and workshops and the place where all SDG 11 indicator data would be collated and shared. Due to concurrent elections in Brazil, SDG in Action coordinators reevaluated the situation and decided to conduct all activities inside the University Newton Paiva facilities.
General-Director: Flavia Mourão
Assistant: Nísio Miranda
ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN PLANNING COUNCIL (Institutional and Financial Support)
National Council President: Antonio Luciano de Lima Guimarães
Special Commission on Urban Planning and Environment Coordinator: Wilson Fernando Vargas de Andrade
Minas Gerais Council President: Danilo Silva Batista
PROJECT PARTNERS (Representatives from Social Movements)
Alma Livre, Associação Comunitária Habitacional Popular, Associação Comunitária Social Cultural Desportiva, Associação dos Moradores do Bairro Coração Eucarístico e Região, Associação dos Usuários do Transporte Coletivo da RMBH, Associação Milan Galo Social, Associação Morada de Minas Gerais, Associação Nossa Cidade, Associação Pro Moradia Nova Cachoeirinha, Centro de Documentação Eloy Ferreira da Silva, Convenção Batista Mineira, Médicos de Cristo Belo Horizonte, Movimento das Associações de Moradores de Belo Horizonte, Movimento Lagoinha Viva, Movimento Nacional de Luta pela Moradia, Movimento Sou Luziense, Núcleo Habitacional Central do Estado de Minas Gerais, Projeto ComPaixão. Projeto Oficial Criança Bom de Bola Bom na Escola, Sindicato das Empresas de Transportes de Carga do Estado de Minas Gerais, and Um Pé de Biblioteca.
Endnotes
1. There are no metropolitan governments in Brazil. At the metropolitan level in the country, there’s only a governance system (councils) to debate planning and investments. Governors and mayors are still the authority of their own territories.
2. The UN World Food Programme Hunger Map features countries that have more than 5 percent of the population ingesting fewer calories than recommended. The list of countries is updated based on the previous year’s official data provided by the UN countries.
3. https://www.conversaafiada.com.br/brasil/jb-risco-de-o-brasil-voltar-para-o-mapa-da-fome-e-enorme.
4. Established in May 2017, before the UN High Level Political Forum, the National Commission on Sustainable Development Goals (CNODS in Portuguese) is a joint collegial body of advisory nature. Its purpose is to monitor, internalize and disseminate the process of implementing the 2030 Agenda. CNODS is composed by representatives from civil society–specialists in sustainable development dimensions and with a recognized contribution to the cause–local and state governments associations, and national government representatives.
5. Among the 34 cities of RMBH, only Belo Horizonte has a local Observatory in its government structure that monitors and evaluates public policies regarding the City of Belo Horizonte and the SDG targets that it has established.
6. For further information about METRODS, see: “Metropolitan Planning and Governance in Brazil: how the use of SDG data can help to deliver better results in public administration."
7. RMBH has historically been the most organized metropolitan area in Brazil. Therefore, the Statue of the Metropolis, approved in 2015, was based on work developed there. Since then RMBH’s legislation, governance, and plan have also inspired the reformulation of most of the main Brazilian metropolitan areas.
8. The Integrated Development Master Plan (PDDI in Portuguese), also known as the Greater Belo Horizonte Metropolitan Plan, is a long-term plan for promoting sustainable development in the RMBH, reconciling economic growth, social equity, and environmental sustainability with an emphasis on territorial reordering capable of reducing socio-spatial inequalities. The time horizon considered was 2023.
9. The Metropolitan Development Fund (FDM in Portuguese) aims to finance the implementation of structural programs and projects and the realization of investments related to public policies of common interest in the RMBH, according to guidelines established by the Metropolitan Plan.
10. Alice Medeiros, Ana Eliza Araújo Moura, César Gugkielmi, Francisco Gabriel Macedo Araújo, Guilherme Eduardo C. Matoso, Guilherme Tell, Gustavo Caravelli, Jessica Rick, Maria Luiza Maia Araújo, Scarlat Karem, Vinícius Franklin Custódio, and Vinícius Turquete.
11. Professors Claudia Teresa Pereira Pires (project coordinator), Rodrigo Figueiredo Reis (architecture course coordinator), Fernando Pacheco, and Andréa Santanna (Smart Campus coordinator).
12. See METRODS’ SDG 11 Indicators Framework in Annex A.
13. Movimento Nossa BH integrates the international network of civil society initiatives that monitor and evaluate public services to force transparency and better use of public resources.
14. Alma Livre, Associação Comunitária Habitacional Popular, Associação Comunitária Social Cultural Desportiva, Associação dos Moradores do Bairro Coração Eucarístico e Região, Associação dos Usuários do Transporte Coletivo da RMBH, Associação Milan Galo Social, Associação Morada de Minas Gerais, Associação Nossa Cidade, Associação Pro Moradia Nova Cachoeirinha, Centro de Documentação Eloy Ferreira da Silva, Convenção Batista Mineira, Médicos de Cristo Belo Horizonte, Movimento das Associações de Moradores de Belo Horizonte, Movimento Lagoinha Viva, Movimento Nacional de Luta pela Moradia, Movimento Sou Luziense, Núcleo Habitacional Central do Estado de Minas Gerais, Projeto ComPaixão. Projeto Oficial Criança Bom de Bola Bom na Escola, Sindicato das Empresas de Transportes de Carga do Estado de Minas Gerais, and Um Pé de Biblioteca.
15. Cid Blanco, Jr. (METRODS) and Professor Claudia Teresa Pereira Pires (University Newton Paiva) coordinated the SDG in Action project.
16. Movimento Nossa BH team involved in the project: Guilherme Tampieri, Marcelo Amaral, and Kaode Biague.
17. Metropolitan Agency team involved in project: Flavia Mourão (General-
Director) and her assistant Nísio Miranda.
18. Translated versions of the questionnaires can be found in Annexes C and D.