Guidebook Complete V03

GUIDEBOOK
for the preparation of

Science, Technology and Innovation (STI)
for SDGs Roadmaps
EUR 30606 EN
The scientific output expressed does not imply a policy position of the European Commission or of the United Nations Inter-Agen-
cy Task Team on Science, Technology and Innovation for the SDGs (IATT). Neither the European Commission, the IATT nor any
person acting on behalf of the Commission and the IATT is responsible for the use that might be made of this publication.
Contact information
Wei Liu
United Nations Department of Social and Economic Affairs (DESA)
Email: [email protected]
Naoto Kanehira
World Bank Group
Monika Matusiak
European Commission, Joint Research Centre
JRC124108
EUR 30606 EN
PDF ISBN 978-92-76-30613-9 ISSN 1831-9424 doi:10.2760/724479
Print ISBN 978-92-76-30612-2 ISSN 1018-5593 doi:10.2760/61584
Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2021
© European Union and United Nations Inter-Agency Task Team, 2021
The reuse policy of the European Commission is implemented by the Commission Decision 2011/833/EU of 12 December 2011
on the reuse of Commission documents (OJ L 330, 14.12.2011, p. 39). Except otherwise noted, the reuse of this document is
authorised under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) licence (https://creativecommons.org/licens-
es/by/4.0/). This means that reuse is allowed provided appropriate credit is given and any changes are indicated. For any use
or reproduction of photos or other material that is not owned by the EU, permission must be sought directly from the copyright
holders.
Text: © European Union and United Nations Inter-Agency Task Team, 2021
Images page 23, photograph, ©motorolka/Depositphotos.com – All rights reserved
Images page 25, photograph, ©FARUKBUDAK.GMAIL.COM/Depositphotos.com – All rights reserved
Images page 77, photograph, ©ssuaphoto /Depositphotos.com – All rights reserved
Images page 103, photograph, ©panxunbin/Depositphotos.com – All rights reserved
How to cite this report: United Nations Inter-Agency Task Team on Science, Technology and Innovation for the SDGs and Eu-
ropean Commission, Joint Research Centre, Guidebook for the Preparation of Science, Technology and Innovation (STI) for
SDGs Roadmaps, EUR 30606 EN, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2021, ISBN 978-92-76-30613-9,
doi:10.2760/724479, JRC124108.
GUIDEBOOK
for the preparation of
Science, Technology and Innovation (STI)
for SDGs Roadmaps
United Nations Inter-agency Task Team on Science, Technology and Innovation

for the SDGs (IATT) Sub-Working Group on STI Roadmaps co-led by World Bank,
United Nations Department of Social and Economic Affairs (DESA), United Nations
Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) and United Nations Educational,
Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO)
September 2020
Acknowledgments
The United Nations Inter-agency Task Team on Science, Technology and In-
novation for the SDGs (IATT) thanks the Government of Japan for funding for
the development of this Guidebook. The team also wishes to acknowledge the
input by various institutions beyond those represented by the IATT Sub-Work-
ing Group co-leads, including the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and
Development (OECD), European Commission Joint Research Centre (EU JRC),
African Union and its affiliated agencies including Regional Economic Com-
munities, African Development Bank, African Center for Technology Studies
(ACTS), Research and Information System for Developing Countries (RIS), Glob-
al Sustainable Technology and Innovation Community (G-STIC), Pathways for
Prosperity, InterAcademy Partnership, International Network for Government
Science Advice (INGSA), Global Solutions Summit, Technology Bank for the
Least Developed Countries, United Nations Economic Commission for Africa
(ECA), United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pa-
cific (ESCAP), United Nations Economic and Social Commission for West Africa
(ESCWA), United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), United Nations
Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO), United Nations International
Strategy for Disaster Reduction (UNISDR), United Nations Office for South-
South Cooperation (UNOSSC), United Nations University (UNU) and the World
Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), among others, as well as many
individuals who have made comments on earlier drafts of the Guidebook.
Representatives of United Nations Member States, including Australia, Bar-

bados, Botswana, Brazil, Cambodia, Chad, China, Colombia, Ecuador, Egypt,
Ethiopia, Germany, Ghana, Guatemala, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Jamaica,
Japan, Kenya, Macedonia, Mexico, Philippines, Republic of Korea, Rwanda,
Serbia, South Africa, Tanzania, Thailand, Tunisia, United Kingdom and Unit-
ed States of America, provided input through discussions at the four Expert
Group Meetings (in New York, Tokyo, Brussels and Nairobi), and at Science,
Technology and Innovation (STI) Forums and other meetings hosted by the
United Nations. The Group of Twenty (G20) under the Japanese Presidency,
through the Development Working Group’s deliberations on the Guiding Prin-
ciples for the Development of STI for SDGs Roadmaps, provided perspectives
complementary to this Guidebook. Current and former members of the United
Nations Technology Facilitation Mechanism (TFM) 10-Member Group, notably
Dr E. William Colglazier, Dr Michiharu Nakamura, Dr Nebojsa Nakicenovic, Dr
Paulo Gadelha, Dr José Ramón López-Portillo Romano and Dr Heide Hack-
mann, provided valuable input and championship throughout IATT’s work on
STI for SDGs Roadmaps and the Guidebook.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 5
The work on the Guidebook was led by Naoto Kanehira and Carl Dahlman (World
Bank) and Wei Liu (DESA). Management supervision was provided by IATT Co-
Lead agencies – Shantanu Mukherjee (DESA), Klaus Tilmes and Denis Medvedev
(World Bank), Dong Wu (UNCTAD) and Ernesto Fernandez Polcuch (UNESCO), with
participation by Justin Hill (World Bank), Richard Roehrl, Charlie Chen, Ruiying
Zhao (DESA), Clovis Freire and Michael Anthony Lim (UNCTAD), Kornelia Tzinova
and Angela Sarcina (UNESCO), and Fernando Santiago Rodriguez (UNIDO), and
support and contributions from IATT partner EU JRC, represented by Alessandro
Rainoldi, Liliana Pasecinic and Monika Matusiak. Research and synthesis, includ-
ing through background papers, were provided by Rui Kotani, Anupam Khanna,
Michal Miedzinski, Paulo Correa, Shuyang Huang, Philipp Sebastian Ruppert and
Neda Bostani (World Bank), Mario Cervantes, Olivier Cattaneo, Rolf Schwarz, Sam
Mealy and Edoardo Bollati (OECD), Monika Matusiak, Katerina Ciampi Stancova,
Mafini Dosso (EU JRC) and Chux Daniels (EU JRC expert).
Views expressed in this Guidebook are of the authors and do not represent of-
ficial positions of the United Nations, the World Bank Group or their Member
States. Written comments and feedback on this Guidebook will be most welcome
and should be addressed to Naoto Kanehira ([email protected]) and
Wei Liu ([email protected]).
Graphic project prepared by Raffaella Manfredi.

6 GUIDEBOOK for the Preparation of Science, Technology and Innovation (STI) for SDGs Roadmaps
Table of CONTENTS
CHAPTER 1
8
Introduction
10 1.1 Background and Objective
13 1.2 Rationale of STI for SDGs Roadmaps
15 1.3 Need for Strengthened International
Partnerships on STI for SDGs
18 1.4 Key Elements of an STI for SDGs Roadmap
19 1.5 Structure of the Guidebook
CHAPTER 2
20
Towards National STI for
SDGs Roadmaps
22 2.1 Institutional Set-up
26 2.2 The Framework
28 2.3 The Core Inputs
31 2.4 The Six Steps
59 2.5 Overview of methodologies
59 2.6 Ensuring that a Country takes Full
Advantage of the Global STI System
CHAPTER 3
62
International Partnerships for
STI for SDGs Roadmaps
64 3.1 Landscape of International Cooperation on
STI for SDGs
68 3.2 Three-Pillar Framework for International
Partnerships – “Build, Boost, Broker”
70 3.3 Key Priorities and Actors for STI
Collaborations for SDGs
78 3.4 What Donor Country and Pilot Country
Governments Can Do
TABLE OF CONTENTS 7
CHAPTER 4
84
Conclusions and Next Steps
86 4.1 Key Messages
86 4.2 Global Pilot Programme on STI for SDGs Roadmaps
89 4.3 Moving Forward
95 References
ANNEX 1
100 Technology Facilitation Mechanism
in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable
Development
ANNEX 2
105 STI as Explicit in 2030 Agenda
Languages
ANNEX 3
111 Overview of the main methodologies to
support STI for SDGs roadmaps
ANNEX 4
114 Summary of Key Lessons Learned from
the Global Pilot Programme on STI for
SDGs Roadmaps
CHAPTER 1. Introduction
1.1 Background porting the whole process of technological and in-

novative development and dissemination, and the
and Objective readiness of its final recipients to accept, own and

implement change, that we can strive to achieve
sustainable and inclusive growth.
The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, In the context of the SDGs, the TFM work on STI
unanimously adopted at the United Nations Sum- has covered four broad discussion areas:
mit in September 2015, positioned science, tech-
nology and innovation (STI) as key means for ■ STI for or as individual Goals/targets
achievement of the Sustainable Development in SDGs. While innovation is the most visible
Goals (SDGs), and launched the United Nations focus of Goal 9 (build resilient infrastructure,
Technology Facilitation Mechanism (TFM). The An- promote inclusive and sustainable industri-
nual Multi-Stakeholder Forum on Science, Tech- alization, and foster innovation), as reflected
nology and Innovation for the SDGs (STI Forum) in the 2030 Agenda language, STI is formally
has been the main TFM platform for discussing agreed as a means or end for 12 out of the 17
topics of common interest to Member States and Goals, and 26 out of the 169 targets.1 The Ad-
STI stakeholders in the context of the 2030 Agen- dis Ababa Action Agenda (AAAA) includes more
da. (For more background on the TFM and key STI than 20 commitments for STI. More broadly,
mechanisms, see Annex 1.) STI Forum discussions have shown that STI can
contribute to virtually every Goal and target, ei-
In the Addis Ababa Action Agenda, Member States ther directly or indirectly.
committed to “adopt science, technology and in-
novation strategies as integral elements of our ■ STI for SDGs as a system. Beyond dis-
national sustainable development strategies” ciplinary or sectoral STI contributions (such
(paragraph 119). At the 2017 STI Forum, partic- as for food, health or energy), interdiscipli-
ipants highlighted that STI roadmaps and action nary approaches and science-policy interfaces
plans were needed at the subnational, national have deepened understanding of interlinkages
and global levels, and that these should include across multiple SDGs, enabling policymakers to
measures for tracking progress. These roadmaps pursue synergies or manage trade-offs (such as
need to incorporate processes that evaluate what between economic and social or environmental
is and is not working, and produce continual revi- goals). Systemic gender disparity among key
sions that create a real learning environment. STI actors in science, technology, engineering
and mathematics (STEM) fields, beyond the
Science, technology and innovation (both techno- targets under Goal 5, has been recognized as
logical and non-technological) can lead to eco- a key issue to be addressed. Traditional knowl-
nomic growth by increasing productivity, reducing edge held by indigenous communities is also
costs and increasing efficiency. STI also helps to seen as part of important STI contributions to
address and alleviate societal challenges, while inclusive development.
finding effective ways to tackle environmental
challenges. In other words, it feeds into the three ■ International cooperation for STI for
components of sustainability: economic, environ- SDGs, related to (but not limited to) Goal
mental and social. The role of STI in economic and 17. While technology transfer has long been
social progress requires not only appropriate in- debated during United Nations deliberations,
frastructure, resources and capabilities to produce
new inventions, but also the capacity of individ-
1 Not all of these targets are accompanied by corresponding
uals, communities and companies to absorb and metrics under the Global Indicator Framework. For a full list
apply them. It is only by understanding and sup- of explicit references to STI in 2030 Agenda language, see
Annex 2.
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION 11
a broader set of issues needs to be examined across these different professional communities –
to facilitate capacity development and mate- scientists, technologists and innovators rooted in
rialize the full potential of STI contributions public, private, academic and civil society organi-
towards the Global Goals, in the context of di- zations. In response, this Guidebook is designed
verse STI supply and demand conditions across to facilitate the development of STI for SDGs
developed and developing economies, and Roadmaps by providing a framework, common
through market and non-market mechanisms. language and step-by-step advice for practical
policymaking and communication purposes.
■ Emerging risks of STI in achieving the
SDGs and leaving no one behind. New and This Guidebook is intended for interested national
emerging technologies, such as artificial intel- and local governments, agencies and institutions
ligence, have raised global concerns about dis- that wish to use roadmaps as a policy tool to har-
placing jobs, undermining the advantage held ness STI as a means to achieve the SDGs. It may
by most developing countries in unskilled la- also be of interest to stakeholders taking part in
bour, and exacerbating inequalities within and the dialogue – an essential stage in design, im-
between countries.2 plementation, monitoring and adjustment of the
STI for SDGs Roadmaps – and to a wider public
STI Forums have enriched these discussions, while
audience wishing to advance global and national
the breadth and depth of the interrelated issues
SDG agendas. The Guidebook first focuses on the
have presented challenges in identifying practical
design stage of the roadmaps, demonstrating that
courses of actions to maximize opportunities and
the design underpins effective implementation
mitigate risks. Meanwhile, reflection on the status
and monitoring.
of the SDGs has made it clear that “business as
usual” is not an option and has added a sense of
urgency to deliver on the promises of STI in reach-
ing the last mile, addressing the needs of those
being left behind, changing the trajectory and ac-
celerating progress.
In this context, an STI for SDGs Roadmap has

been proposed as a useful approach to strengthen
country ownership and elevate the policy debate
on STI for SDGs, inform on the areas of common
interest among United Nations Member States,
improve the complementarity of United Nations
system initiatives on STI in a demand-driven man-
ner, and effectively facilitate relevant national and
international efforts.
The diversity of stakeholders involved so far in

deliberations on STI for SDGs Roadmaps has en-
tailed a “Tower of Babel” challenge: namely, the
absence of a shared framework and language
2 Other concerns often discussed at the United Nations and

other international forums relate to ethical, security (both
cyber and physical, such as autonomous weaponry) and hu-
man rights aspects, not necessarily within the scope of the
SDGs.
Box 1.1 Concepts and Definitions3

Science, technology and innovation are three different domains, each associated with a
distinct set of actors, although there are strong relationships among them.
■ Science is fundamentally the pursuit of knowledge through systematic studies

of the structure and behaviour of the physical and natural world and societies.
Scientists or researchers across public and private institutes are the key actors, often
organized and represented through academies of sciences, professional societies, uni-
versities or other research institutions. Governments typically have a ministry respon-
sible for science policies, and funding agencies administering research programmes.
■ Technology is the practical application of knowledge for a given end. Publicly

funded scientists conducting applied research, as well as private sector scientists, en-
gineers and product/service developers, are the key actors in developing and applying
new technologies. Meanwhile, broader actors within industries and government line
ministries disseminate, adopt or adapt existing technologies, for use in fields such as
agriculture, health, energy, education, defence, infrastructure and environment.
■ Innovation is a new way of producing, delivering or using goods and services,

based on new technology, or through new business models or forms of economic
or social organization. While also applicable to public administration and service de-
livery, innovation has so far been largely a private sector undertaking by industries and
entrepreneurs, farmers and individuals who develop better ways of producing or us-
ing goods and services. The current waves of social innovation and community-based
innovation (such as indigenous solutions) are calling for a new understanding of this
phenomenon.
In the past, innovation was seen as a linear process to turn scientific discoveries into com-
mercial applications of new technologies. From policymakers’ perspectives, the fields of
science, technology and innovation were typically considered highly specialized domains.
They were left to experts who were often facing challenging political, administrative and
budgetary environments, as well as inherent uncertainties and long timeframes. In some
developing country contexts, STI has also been regarded as an unaffordable “luxury”.
Today, policymakers have a more mature understanding of STI and approaches to STI pol-
icies (as reflected in the rest of this Guidebook). Many governments have interministerial
mechanisms, such as national STI councils or commissions, which provide a favourable
environment for multi-stakeholder dialogue, planning for a coherent STI policy mix, and
coordination and interface with the implementation of sectoral policies. Yet, in many coun-
tries, the focus of STI policy is still transitioning from predominantly scientific and econom-
ic objectives towards achieving a closer integration with broader social and environmental
aspirations in line with the SDGs. (See Table 2.1 for a broader discussion of different types
of innovation.)
3 There are many definitions of innovation. See, for example, the Oslo Manual on innovation (OECD/Eurostat,
2018); UNCTAD, 2017 and 2019; Cirera and Maloney, 2017. For this Guidebook, we have adopted a broad
definition including many types; see Table 2.1 on page 42.
1.2 Rationale of velopment plans. Developed countries tend to

have strategies to guide development cooper-
STI for SDGs ation in line with the SDGs.
These three generic, yet distinct, types of plan may

Roadmaps or may not have areas of overlap. The focus of this
Guidebook is to encourage greater use of STI to
help meet the SDGs in all three types of plan – the
The rationale behind creating realistic and ac- intersection of the three circles. The basic prop-
tion-oriented STI for SDGs Roadmaps is to speed osition is that STI can accelerate the attainment
up the process of developing new, or adapting of SDGs if it is properly integrated into plans to
existing, solutions in time to meet the SDGs and achieve the SDGs.
targets by 2030, and to ensure that the three di-
mensions of sustainability are properly addressed STI for SDGs Roadmaps may be stand-alone doc-
(Box 1.2). uments, or part of other planning and implemen-
tation documents such as National Development
STI for SDGs Roadmaps are not created in a vacu- Plans or STI Plans. For effective implementation,
um. Most countries already have or are developing it is useful to maximize the synergies with other
their infrastructure and capabilities for research, planning documents, to avoid duplication and re-
development and innovation. However, there has duce waste – i.e. to maximize the opportunities for
so far been a shortage of systematic assessment convergence among the three circles.
and discussion of national and international expe-
riences in developing and implementing policies,
action plans and strategies on STI specifically for
SDGs, using systemic and consistent frameworks.
Three related policy frameworks provide a nation-

al context for STI for SDGs Roadmaps: NATIONAL
DEVELOPMENT
1. National Development Plan. Most coun- PLAN
tries have developed some national plans and
industry policies (occasionally framed as a
growth strategy), with varying levels of detail
and usefulness.
STI SDGs
2. National STI Plan. These vary widely in PLAN PLAN
scope, as well as in the degree to which they di-
rectly relate to the national development plans.
Sometimes they are conceived independently
of national development plans, mostly by sci-
ence and technology ministries. In other cases,
Figure 1.1: STI for SDGs Roadmaps as an intersection of
they are more closely aligned with national de-
three types of national plans
velopment plans.
Source: Authors
3. National SDGs Plan. Since the global
agreement on the United Nations Sustainable
Development Goals in 2015, countries have
also begun drawing up plans on how to reach
these Goals and specific targets, and many are
explicitly including them in their national de-
Box 1.2 Why focus on STI for SDGs Roadmaps?

Human progress has been based on advances in science, technology and innovation. This
was clearly seen with the dramatic increases in growth and productivity accompanying
the first industrial revolution, based on water and steam power to mechanize production.
That was followed by the second industrial revolution, based on the internal combustion
engine and electricity to create mass production; and by the third, based on electronics
and information technology to automate production. But industrial revolutions also creat-
ed pressure on the environment and entailed social costs such as disruption of traditional
life and increased inequality within countries, and there was also a great divergence in
uptake between countries that led these revolutions and the developing world.
We now realize the need to also consider social and environmental aspects in develop-
ment strategies, as reflected in the SDGs. We are also entering a new period of rapid
development and convergence of emerging technologies in the physical, digital and bi-
ological spheres, which many are calling a fourth industrial revolution (World Econom-
ic Forum, 2016). These emerging technologies and their convergence offer tremendous
opportunities but also carry enormous risks. Developing countries are far behind in pro-
ductivity because they are not fully using technologies already available in developed
countries. It would seem easy for developing countries just to import technology from
developed countries to catch up rapidly. However, persistent large productivity gaps indi-
cate that it is much more complicated, as this creates issues of dependency and lack of
development of endogenous potential as a basis for long-term growth.
Historically, some countries – such as Japan and the Republic of Korea – have been very
successful at technological catch-up and have become technology leaders themselves
using STI as part of their development strategies. This involved explicit STI strategies,
including the development of their science base, human and institutional capital, and
effective government policies working closely with the private sector to build firms’ capa-
bilities and to foster rapid adoption of foreign technologies and their domestic dissem-
ination. Developing countries such as China and India have been explicitly including STI
in their development strategies for achieving rapid growth, and are now also focusing on
inclusiveness and environmental sustainability.
Developing countries need to establish effective strategies to use STI to further their eco-
nomic and social development to achieve the SDGs. They need to take advantage of tech-
nologies that already exist, make effective use of the potential offered by new emerging
technologies, and also mitigate the risks they present. That is why it is so critical to de-
velop effective STI for SDGs Roadmaps and why the highest levels of government need
to be involved in developing and implementing these strategies.
1.3 Need for opment funds to humanitarian emergencies, the

downsizing of operations by cash-strapped United
strengthened Nations agencies, and increased skepticism to-

wards multilateralism. Sudden crises, such as the
international recent COVID 19 global emergency, clearly show

the need for international cooperation, especially
partnerships in the STI domains, to find evidence-based solu-

tions and to build robust STI systems that can re-
on STI for spond to such crises.
SDGs GLOBAL DISTRIBUTION

OF THE EXTREME POOR
2015
Few countries will be able to achieve the SDGs
through business as usual. Continuation of the cur-
RIA
NIGE
rent pace of poverty reduction (SDG 1, target 1.1) IN
DO
NE
SI
M.
is likely to leave 23 per cent of the African popula-
A
DE
O,
NG REP
CO
EAND P
A
BAN
ST AC
tion below the poverty line by 20304 (Figure 1.2).
GLA
AS IFI
DES
H
IA C
PIA
Many countries are also going to fall far short of ETHIO
other goals.5 Effective use of STI may change the SUB-S

AHAR
TANZANIA
AFRIC IA
IA A N MADAGA
trajectory and accelerate progress towards the fu- SOUTH
AS
KENY
SCAR
A
ture we want, particularly if developing countries IND
IA
MO
ZAM
BIQ
UE
are able to benefit further from international part-

nerships. For example, the M-Pesa mobile money
service in Kenya, which increased financial inclu-
sion from less than 30 per cent in 2006 to 90 per
cent in 2019, was partly made possible by a grant
from the UK Department for International Devel- RECENT AND PROJECTED
opment (DFID) to a private company.6 Given the POVERTY REDUCTION
limited maturity of national innovation systems 2015 TOP 5 COUNTRIES
in developing countries and their low institutional 250
capability, there is much that can be done by the
international community in partnership with de- 200
veloping countries to use STI inputs to make pro-

Millions of poor
gress towards the SDGs. 150
However, the climate for international cooperation 100

is worsening. There are many reasons for this, in-
cluding the global slowdown in growth, the decline 50
in overall development aid and diversion of devel-

0
2012 2015 2018 2021 2024 2027 2030
4 World Bank (2018a), Poverty and Shared Prosperity 2018 India URP India MMRP Nigeria
Congo, Dem. Rep. Ethiopia Bangladesh
5 See the United Nations Secretary-General’s assessment of
four-year progress towards the Sustainable Development
Goals. Available at https://undocs.org/E/2019/68
Figure 1.2: Business as usual will leave Africa further behind
6 M-Pesa, and other case studies, are described in the back-
ground paper on pilot countries. Source: World Bank (2018a)
In addition, looking forwards there are many ■ Broker STI coalitions to meet the Global
trends that will increasingly challenge our abil- Goals, which includes provision of STI global
ity to achieve the SDGs.7 These include climate public goods.
change and extreme weather; rapid environmen-
This Guidebook reviews a landscape of interna-
tal depletion (particularly of water and air quali-
tional STI opportunities and challenges in the
ty) and deforestation; global pandemics; erosion
context of the SDGs and provides a set of guide-
of trust in government and international institu-
lines on how developing and developed countries
tions; increasing inequality within and between the
can participate in and benefit from international
richest and poorest nations;8 further slowdown in
partnerships.
global economic growth; the risk of new global fi-
nancial crises; great competition for power and the
risks of regional frictions escalating into conflicts;
and the increasing rate of technological change
and innovation, bringing many opportunities but
also many challenges (see Box 1.3).
There are many opportunities for the internation-

al community to improve coordination, coherence
and complementarity of development assistance
to effectively harness STI for SDGs. Countries can
join forces in regional or global efforts to exploit
comparative advantages and pursue economies of
scale. International partnerships on STI for SDGs
can be strengthened in the following three ways:
■ Build capacity of countries’ STI ecosys-

tems, which includes designing and imple-
menting STI for SDGs Roadmaps.
■ Boost international flow and supply of

STI, which includes finding synergies and filling
gaps in implementation of STI for SDGs Road-
maps.
7 See: Global Sustainable Development Report (GSDR), 2019;

International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA,
2018) which argues that “humanity is at a crossroads. Un-
bounded growth is endangering planetary support systems
and increasing inequalities, the rich are getting richer and
the poor even poorer.”
8 The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) Hu-
man Development Report 2019 points out that income
measures of inequality are misleading because they do
not consider other critical dimensions of well being or the
underlying causes of inequality. It argues that is necessary
to look beyond income inequality, beyond averages and be-
yond today. While the gap in basic living standards has been
narrowing, a new generation of inequalities is opening up in
education, technology and climate change, that unchecked
could trigger a “new great divergence” in society of a kind
not seen since the industrial revolutions.
Box 1.3 Challenges and opportunities of emerging

technologies for developing countries
A high number of both existing and emerging technologies present not only many oppor-
tunities, but also many challenges, for developing countries in meeting the SDGs. They are
the result of rapid advances in science and technology. They include digital technologies
(such as the Internet, artificial intelligence, robotics, remote sensing, big data analytics,
block chain and 3D printing), nanotechnology, new materials and biotechnology (OECD,
2017). Moreover, there is increasing convergence among these technologies, largely fa-
cilitated by advances in digital technologies (IIASA, 2019). This is speeding up the rate of
technological change, as well as the way research and innovation are done (OECD, 2018).
Many new technologies already available offer opportunities for leapfrogging, as well as
for reducing the cost of providing better goods and services and improving how they are
delivered and used. Rapid advances will continue and will open up even more livelihood
and welfare opportunities for people in developing countries. However, the rapid advanc-
es in these emerging technologies also raise many challenges. The main challenges and
opportunities for developing countries include the following.
1. They may not be able to absorb many of these technologies because they lack
many of the complementary factors necessary for their successful deployment and
use. Thus, there is a considerable risk that they will fall further behind high-income
countries.
2. Some of these technologies, such as Industry 4.0, will erode their export competi-
tiveness based on low cost labour alone, as labour will become a very small share of
total costs.
3. The development of higher productivity agriculture, as well as new synthetic ma-

terials in advanced countries, may reduce demand for developing country exports of
agricultural products and raw materials.
4. Besides the loss of jobs through competition from advanced countries, the new
technologies may reduce net demand for labour, although also creating new job op-
portunities. This means that there may not be enough jobs for the growing labour
forces in most developing countries (especially in sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia),
which may lead to increased social instability.
5. The use of many of these emerging technologies tends to increase income inequal-
ity, because the benefits go to those who have complementary assets (such as higher
education and access to finance) to make use of them, while poorer segments of the
population are left behind.
6. The advance of digital technologies is raising many complex issues, and developing
countries are at a disadvantage by not being at the centre of global discussion about
how to address them. These issues include data ownership (critically important as
data has become a crucial new asset for competitiveness), data privacy, data security,
the advantages that captive data gives to giant global data players (such as Facebook,
Google, Amazon, Baidu, Tencent, credit card and finance companies), cross-border
>
data flows, and the regulatory and governance issues surrounding the new forms of
>
competition enabled by first-mover advantage on Internet-based platforms.
7. There is huge potential for endogenous innovation and technological development

in developing countries. This can be used to build internal capacities to absorb and
adapt the existing technologies and develop new solutions targeted to the specific
needs of each country.
Developing countries need to strengthen their STI capabilities and use their entrepre-
neurial potential to take advantage of these opportunities, while anticipating and building
capacity to respond to the challenges. They should also develop their own technological
capacity to build resilience to the challenges in the long term. For a more detailed discus-
sion of the trends and implications for achieving the SDGs, see Global Sustainable Devel-
opment Report (2019), IIASA (2018; 2019), Pathways for Prosperity Commission (2018a;
2018b; 2019) and OECD (2017). For more general impact on the prospects for develop-
ing countries, see Weber (2017), Hallward-Driemeier and Nayyar (2018), World Economic
Forum (2020), McKinsey Global Institute (2020) and Daniels and Tilmes (2020).
diagnostics or policy reviews, analysis of coun-

1.4 Key elements try-specific challenges or priorities in achieving
the SDGs, and assessment of critical contri-
of an STI butions from STI, practice-based peer learn-
ing and/or modelling and scenario building on
for SDGs technological changes and their socioeconomic
impacts.
Roadmap ■ Financed, localized and action-orient-
ed, taking into account the specific contexts
For the purpose of this Guidebook, an STI for SDGs at different territorial levels, (re-)allocating
Roadmap is defined as a forward-looking policy budgetary or other resources, building policy
framework, action plan and/or strategy, to con- and implementation capacities, improving pre-
tinuously guide effective actions that utilize STI dictability, incentivizing contributions from key
to achieve the SDGs with a country-wide scope, stakeholders, and defining explicit milestones.
including at national and subnational levels, also
■ Coherent and owned by key actors
with implications at the international level. The
through multi-stakeholder engagement in de-
main characteristics of an STI for SDGs Roadmap,
sign and implementation, having adequate
as discussed through STI Forums and related de-
governance structure, reflecting sector-specific
liberations, include the following.
deep dives in line with national development
■ Goal-driven, focused and prioritized, en- priorities, considering synergies and trade-offs,
suring alignment with the 2030 Agenda and and strengthening enabling STI environments
with a strategic focus on the impact of interven- through policy and institutional reforms.
tions to accelerate progress and address gaps.
■ Dynamic, based on learning and course
■ Informed by evidence, experience and correction through the definition of milestones
foresight, through retrospective STI ecosystem and measures of success, monitoring and eval-
uation of progress, and informing necessary the international community in stepping up ef-
adjustments including international efforts. forts on STI for SDGs through the next cycle of
follow-up and review of the SDGs.
This Guidebook aims to provide general and
adaptable guidance, as well as documenting the
early experiences of champion countries to foster
peer learning and help further refine methodolo-
gies and guidance. The specific pathways coun-
tries can take towards harnessing STI to achieve
the SDGs will differ, depending on their level of de-
velopment and existing resources and capabilities.
The guidance included in this publication should

be treated as general advice that must always
be adapted to specific conditions and capacities,
including political, social and administrative cir-
cumstances. It is not the ambition of the authors
to provide a full scientific outlook or theoretical
discourse on STI for SDGs, but rather to focus on
practical recommendations that can facilitate the
concrete process of developing and implementing
the roadmaps.
1.5 Structure of
the Guidebook
Following this introduction, Chapter 2 of the
Guidebook provides step-by-step guidance to
developing and implementing national STI for
SDGs Roadmaps, targeting policymakers in coun-
tries at different levels of development, with spe-
cial attention to developing countries.
Chapter 3 describes international partnerships

to facilitate effective design and implementa-
tion of STI for SDGs Roadmaps, based on a broad
characterization of the global STI system. This
chapter targets policymakers in both developing
and developed countries, while addressing other
international stakeholders who may participate in
partnerships related to STI for SDGs.
Chapter 4 concludes with key messages, sum-

mary assessments of remaining challenges given
the limitations of the proposed approaches to STI
for SDGs Roadmaps, and recommendations for
CHAPTER 2. Towards
National STI
for SDGs
Roadmaps 9
9
This chapter has benefited from extensive oral and written comments received
during expert group meetings in 2018 and 2019, as well as the 2019 STI Forum.
The objective of this chapter is to provide a con- the intersection of these three groups, as well as
ceptual framework and propose step-by-step some of the key actors within them.
guidelines for developing national STI for SDGs
Ideally, the process would be coordinated at the
Roadmaps. These roadmaps differ from STI strat-
highest level by the President’s Office, the Ministries
egies in three ways. Firstly, they focus not just
of Planning or Finance or some other specialized
on STI strategies for economic competitiveness
high-level agency tasked with this responsibility.
and growth, but explicitly include a focus on STI
This, for example, is the process being followed in
for social and environmental objectives as these
Kenya (Box 2.1). However, the initiative may also
are central elements of the SDGs. Secondly, STI is
come from the Ministry of Science and Technolo-
not just science, technology and R&D-based inno-
gy or its equivalent. Alternatively, the initiative in
vation. Instead, it is used in a broader sense that
using STI to accelerate achievement of a specific
goes beyond R&D-based innovation to include
SDG may be taken by a line ministry or local gov-
non-technical, indigenous, grassroots, organiza-
ernment as part of its SDG Plans. The key point is
tional and social innovation (see broad coverage in
that, whatever its starting place, developing effec-
Table 2.1). Thirdly, as a result of this broader con-
tive STI for SDGs Roadmaps requires interaction
cept, unlike traditional STI which has focused on
across a broad range of actors representing dif-
academic excellence measured through scientists
ferent parts of government, academia, industries,
and engineering, R&D spending, patents and pro-
entrepreneurs, civil society, development partners
ductivity, the new focus is on how STI thus broadly
and other stakeholders.
defined can accelerate the attainment of SDGs,
such as eliminating hunger, reducing income and Regardless of the starting point, this chapter pre-
gender inequality, protecting the environment, and sents a framework and outlines a six-step process
promoting inclusive and sustainable development. that should be undertaken in planning the STI in-
puts to achieve the SDGs and targets. It should be
This chapter is structured as follows. It starts with
kept in mind that the attainment of even a single
a brief discussion about institutional set-up be-
SDG may require many different technologies, in-
cause there are different entry points to develop-
novations and agents, and that the STI component
ing STI for SDGs Roadmaps. Then it summarizes
is just one of the many elements (e.g. political will,
the framework and the core inputs. The detailed
finance, institutions and organizations, networks,
step-by-step guidelines follow. The chapter con-
etc.) that are required to achieve that Goal. These
cludes with some guidance on the need for coun-
guidelines are generic enough that, with some
tries to assess the extent to which their national
adaptation to the specific context, they should
innovation systems are set up to take advantage
be useful whether the STI for SDGs Roadmap is
of global STI inputs.
a stand-alone document or part of a national de-
velopment plan, sectoral development plan or STI
2.1 Institutional plan that also targets SDGs. Chapter 3 outlines

the steps that both recipient countries and donor
set-up countries should consider in developing interna-

tional partnerships using STI to help achieve the
SDGs in developing countries.10
STI for SDGs Roadmaps may be developed at the
national level by a central agency or ministry in
charge of national development plans, by the Min-
10 A companion background paper for this chapter summariz-
istry of Science and Technology or other agencies es diagnostic methodologies and tools from different coun-
in charge of STI plans, or by line ministries or a tries for needs and gap assessments, and provides analysis
of initial voluntary national STI for SDGs Roadmaps, as well
specialized agency or task force with the specific
as of the international STI system and its relationship to
mandate to develop SDG plans. Figure 2.1 shows national roadmaps.
CHAPTER 2. TOWARDS NATIONAL STI FOR SDGS ROADMAPS 23
NATIONAL
DEVELOPMENT
PLAN
• President's office
• Ministry of Planning
• Ministry of Finance
• Statistical Office
UNIVERSITIES, CIVIL
ACADEMIA • Lead agency on SDGs SOCIETY
• National STI Council (e.g. foreign, planning)
• Ministry of S&T • Line ministries
• Ministry of Industry (e.g. health, agriculture, energy)
• Ministry of ICT • Local Governments
INDUSTRIES, • Development Cooperation
DEVELOPMENT
ENTREPRENEURS PARTNERS
STI SDGs
PLAN PLAN
Figure 2.1: Intersection of Development, STI and SDG Plans and key actors
Source: Authors
©motorolka/Depositphotos.com, 2021
Box 2.1 An early pilot experience of national STI for

SDGs Roadmaps – Kenya
As part of the United Nations Global Pilot Programme on STI for SDGs Roadmaps, Kenya
has recently launched an inter-agency committee to develop and implement STI for SDGs
Roadmaps. Kenya’s approach includes promising characteristics such as the following.
■ Institutional arrangement integrating supply and demand sides of STI for

SDGs. The pilot is owned by the National Treasury, State Department for Planning,
jointly with the State Department of ICT, State Department of University Education,
Science and Technology, and Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and implemented through
the National Commission for Science, Technology and Innovation (NACOSTI). The in-
ter-agency committee invites contributions by line ministries, such as the Ministry of
Agriculture, Ministry of Health and Ministry of Industry.
■ Policy frameworks. The STI for SDGs Roadmap is building on Kenya’s SDGs Road-
maps (under Treasury) and STI Policy (undergoing finalization at Ministry of Educa-
tion), contributing to the current administration’s Big Four Agenda, and aligned in
scope with the African Digital Transformation Strategy (African Union).
■ Support from international organizations. The pilot design is supported by di-

agnostic inputs and capacity building from United Nations agencies. These include
the World Bank (on the effectiveness and efficiency of the government’s STI policies,
programmes and budget, as well as incoming development cooperation as related to
STI) and UNESCO (on the assessment of STI system functioning in the context of the
Treasury’s and county governments’ SDGs gap analysis at national and subnational
levels, and gender-inclusive STI policy implementation). These diagnostics are expect-
ed to stimulate dialogue among policymakers, academia, private sector and civil soci-
ety towards collective visioning and planning in directing policy actions, to improve STI
contributions to filling the critical gaps in achieving the targeted SDGs.
The first phase of Kenya’s pilot roadmap will focus on technological innovations that
enhance agricultural productivity for food security, manufacturing (in the context of
agro-processing), and delivery of universal health care services, including increased
health coverage, disease diagnosis and treatment. These are three components of the
Big Four Agenda (the fourth being housing) that contribute to attaining targets under
several SDGs. The aim of this first phase is to launch implementable action plans over
the coming months in 2020, supported by the African Center for Technology Studies
(ACTS) as a knowledge carrier to codify and disseminate lessons to other African coun-
tries.
As part of the initial consultations, the World Bank and the Government of Kenya or-
ganized a digital agriculture start-up competition in March 2019, synergizing with the
fourth Expert Group Meeting on STI for SDGs. Key points that emerged from policy dis-
cussion included the need to strengthen links between relevant ministries and countries
after devolution; the need for coherent frameworks for data sharing and protection; the
need to invest in human capital and onboard younger or new generation policy practi-
tioners; and the need to strengthen the voice of the domestic scientific community in
the face of challenging policy choices.
Source: Government of Kenya, Enhancing the Utilization of Science, Technology and Innovation for the
Realization of Sustainable Development Goals in Kenya: Concept Note – the Pilot Programme on STI
for SDGs Roadmaps.
©FARUKBUDAK.GMAIL.COM/Depositphotos.com
The framework
dependent or self-contained. It should actually be
2.2 a key element in a national development plan or
sectoral development plan being implemented by
the government. It may also be part of STI plans,
Figure 2.2 presents a stylized framework for de-
where the focus is on how STI can help acceler-
veloping STI for SDGs Roadmaps as a series of six
ate attainment of the SDGs. The key is that the
sequential steps, plus a set of three core inputs
roadmap is a systematic approach to how STI can
that are depicted in the central hexagon support-
be used to accelerate achievement of the Goals
ing all the steps. The six stylized steps are:
and coordinate implementation. Some methodol-
1. Define objectives and scope ogies available from different international organ-
izations can be used to support different steps in
2. Assess current situation
developing the roadmap.
3. Develop vision, goals and targets
In addition, it is important to be aware that there
4. Assess alternative pathways are three levels to the framework (Figure 2.3). The
first level is the subnational level, since roadmaps
5. Develop detailed STI for SDGs Roadmaps have to be tailored to the specific local context.11
for implementation This is particularly important for large countries,
6. Execute, monitor, evaluate and update plan since the context varies widely among regions
within a country, and it is important to aim at in-
The framework is stylized because the steps do clusiveness. The second level is the national level,
not necessarily have to be in the sequence out- which is the main focus of this chapter. It assumes
lined, since there are strong interactive effects that this already aggregates inputs from the sub-
among the different steps. In addition, the frame- national levels, which would follow a similar step-
work has been presented as a circle because the by-step process. The third level is the international
roadmaps need to be continually updated based level. As indicated in Figure 2.3, key inputs coor-
on evaluation of what is and is not working, and dinated across different levels should constitute a
allow for new developments that may affect what collective policy learning environment, as further
is possible (e.g. the development of new technol- developed in the next chapter.12
ogies). The link between Step 6 and the beginning
of the cycle is typically missing in most plans
although it is critical, particularly in these times
where there are so many changes in the global en-
vironment, from trade to severe weather events,
as well as the rapid development of new disrup-
tive technologies. Three core inputs – stakeholder
consultations, technical and managerial expertise, 11 STI for SDGs Roadmaps can also be created at the institu-
and data and evidence base – are critical to all the tional level for professional societies, such as the National
Science Council, or National Academy of Science or Engi-
steps. neering, to help the institution identify how it may best con-
tribute to achieving some specific SDGs to which it can bring
The objective of this Guidebook is to help policy- its STI expertise. This was emphasized in the InterAcademy
makers to think and work their way systematically Partnership study, Improving Scientific Input to Global Poli-
cymaking with a Focus on the UN Sustainable Development
through the key elements that need to be consid- Goals, https://www.interacademies.org/50429/SDGs Re-
ered in harnessing the potential of STI to achieve port.
the SDGs earlier or more efficiently. The steps out- 12 In addition, there can be multi-country regional roadmaps,
lined are for SDGs or targets that the government such as for the African Union. This will require coordination
among the country governments participating, as well as
decides to address. As previously noted, the STI for
with the bilateral or multilateral agencies, international pri-
SDGs Roadmap does not necessarily have to be in- vate sector and NGOs involved.
Figure 2.2 Flowchart of six key steps

in developing STI for SDGs
roadmaps
2.
Assess current
situation
1.
Define objectives 3.
and scope Develop vision,
goals and targets
Key Inputs:
STAKEHOLDER TECHNICAL AND DATA &
CONSULTATIONS MANAGERIAL EVIDENCE BASE
EXPERTISE
6. 4.
Execute, monitor, Assess alternative
evaluate, and pathways
update plan
5.
Develop detailed
STI for SDGs
roadmap
Source: Developed by authors based on analysis of background material and selected countries
INTERNATIONAL
• Data, evidence, good practises

• Needs and gap assessments,
international expertise
• Financing for STI for SDGs
NATIONAL
• Monitoring progress
• Planning & matching resources
SUBNATIONAL
• Private initiatives
• Local and indigenous
knowledge
Figure 2.3: Three levels of STI For SDGs Roadmaps
Source: Authors
2.3 The core tive way, where stakeholders (from private sector,
academia and civil society) are treated as partners
inputs and co-creators of the roadmaps. In addition, the

consultation process can help to align conflicting
interests and improve buy-in from different stake-
Although the three core inputs are quite obvious, holders for implementation and monitoring.
many STI for SDGs Roadmaps are developed with- A significant risk in developing the roadmap is that
out sufficient attention to them. the process may be captured and heavily influ-
enced by vested interests. These may be particular
groups within governments, or powerful business
STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATIONS or political lobbies. To guard against this, those
managing the development of the roadmap need
Although the way stakeholder consultations are to make sure that relevant stakeholders, includ-
done may vary across countries, depending on ing those that may be affected, can participate in
the type of political system and how top-down or the discussions, to represent the different views
bottom-up their policy decision process is, it is an and to keep the process clear and transparent. The
important input for virtually all the steps because methodologies available to involve stakeholders
of the need to gain stakeholder perspectives and throughout the roadmap process include Smart
to aim for stakeholder alignment. The broader the Specialisation (European Union Joint Research
scope of the plan, the greater the need to involve Centre – EU JRC), Science, Technology and Innova-
all stakeholders to receive input on their needs tion Policy – STIP (UNCTAD) and TIP (Transforma-
and priorities. This should be done in a participa- tive Innovation Policy Consortium – TIPC).
TECHNICAL AND MANAGERIAL EXPERTISE for resourcing specific projects in technological de-
velopment programmes. The best way to manage
Expertise, including on scientific, technical, man- this is to seek expert input from a broad enough
agerial and even political dimensions, is a critical group of experts and stakeholders with hands-on
input to define not only objectives and scope, but experience to weigh in on the value of different
to assess the current situation and in particular approaches and specific projects.
to assess alternative pathways. Expertise, espe-
cially on political aspects, is also very important
in developing the vision, goals and targets. It is DATA AND EVIDENCE BASE
fundamental for developing the specifics of STI in-
put into the SDGs roadmaps, including who does The data and evidence base refers to underlying
what, how much it will cost, what capabilities are data and knowledge on the development situation
required by the agencies or individuals in charge in the country or sector, the current and possible
of different aspects, and what milestones should future development of technology, and its appli-
be set at what points. It is also critical for monitor- cability to the country. It also includes information
ing progress on implementation of the plan, and on how implementation of the plan is going, both
even more so for evaluating what is or is not work- in terms of inputs and outputs, and what specif-
ing, what the main obstacles are, how they can be ic indicators should be monitored. Other useful
overcome, and how the plan should be updated data sources are qualitative information on all of
in light of changes to the context as well as the the above, as well as information on obstacles or
development of new technologies. problems in implementation, etc. This input also
International experts, and assistance from inter- includes information on the changing context and
national institutions with experience in analysing the potential positive or negative impact of new
SDG gaps and the role of STI in helping to close technologies on the plan. Without well-developed
them, can play a very useful role. The overview of data, it is hard to set priorities, monitor progress
approaches and experience available can be found and evaluate results.
in the later part of this chapter. Some examples are While general statistical agencies may collect a lot
illustrated with details in the Background Paper, of data, some careful thought needs to be given to
Overview of the existing STI for SDGs roadmapping what specific types of data and information need
methodologies13, which offers a wealth of experi- to be collected and analysed in order to develop,
ence and competence that could be very useful at implement and monitor the roadmap. In many de-
different stages of the roadmap process and developing countries, data are poor or unavailable.
pending on needs. The experience of other coun- For this reason, one of the first activities that may
tries in developing and implementing STI for SDGs need to be built into development of the roadmap
Roadmaps is also highly valuable, so there should is data collection and the capability to assess that
be systematic efforts to develop communities of data. This needs to be supplemented by expert
practice to foster the exchange of relevant expe- judgment on relevant domestic data, and interna-
rience and expertise among countries and regions. tional data and global trends relevant to the coun-
On the expertise side, there is also the risk that try. Examples of data used in existing approaches
the process may be captured by particular lobbies and methodologies can be found at the end of
who potentially see the roadmaps as a pathway the chapter – most of the methodologies availa-
ble offer excellent tools for assessing the current
situation, together with databases and knowledge
13 Matusiak, M., Ciampi Stancova, K., Dosso, M., Daniels, C. and repositories that can be helpful in the roadmap
Miedziński, M., Background paper: Overview of the existing process. With the advent of increasing digitaliza-
STI for SDGs roadmapping methodologies, Publications Of-
fice of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2020, JRC123628. tion of all kinds of information, as well as better
geospatial mapping tools, in many instances it is

possible to use new digital data to provide some
of the information that may not be readily avail-
able through conventional methods.14 In addition,
there is a need to develop systems to integrate
multiple data streams and to channel the data ag-
gregates to decision makers at different levels.15
14 See, for example, the presentation by Dr Xu Zhengzhong on

27 November 2018 at the third Expert Group Meeting on
roadmaps in Brussels. See also UNCTAD (2017) on digital
tools such as big data and artificial intelligence to support
foresight analysis.
15 The United Nations Technology Facilitation Mechanism has
an extensive reference list for developing roadmaps, which
includes not only United Nations agencies but other interna-
tional and bilateral agencies.
2.4
The six steps
Step
1. ally, the whole process should be endorsed and led
by the highest level of government. Box 1.2 pre-
sented a rationale for why developing STI for SDGs
Roadmaps should be of interest to the President’s
Office and the Ministries of Finance and Planning.
What is the scope?
Define objectives Is this a national STI for SDGs Roadmap, a roadm-

ap for the Ministry of Science and Technology to
and scope16 leverage STI to accelerate attainment of the SDGs,
a deep dive on one sector or issue, or a subnational
roadmap? Is it focusing on a cross-sectoral chal-
lenge or a mission-oriented exercise? Is the scope
What is the objective of the roadmap? a broad set of SDGs, or is it focused on a single
STI for SDGs Roadmaps can have many objectives, SDG or sector? (See Background Paper for useful
regardless of whether they are stand-alone docu- references to sectoral roadmaps such as agricul-
ments or part of other planning and implementa- ture, education, energy, environment, health, ICT,
tion documents. Is the objective of this roadmap oceans, STI and water.)
primarily to help build consensus on a vision, or
Here it is worth noting that there can be important
to develop the details of the roadmap? If it is the
synergies, as well as trade-offs, between different
former, more effort will need to be devoted to cre-
SDGs. The Independent Group of Scientists com-
ating that consensus through greater stakehold-
missioned by the Secretary-General of the United
er involvement and advocacy. But even if it is the
Nations has conducted an exhaustive analysis of
latter, it is still necessary to involve those who are
the SDGs and made an important argument that
expected to be part of implementation, or who will
the Goals are all interrelated and need to be tack-
be affected by the roadmap, in the discussions
led simultaneously in order to take advantage of
in order to align actions and ensure buy-in. The
synergies and offset trade-offs. They have iden-
process of developing the roadmap and building
tified six entry points that take account of these
stakeholder alignment is often one of the most
interrelationships, as well as four levers that can
valuable aspects of the roadmap, as it facilitates
facilitate implementation of the entry points (see
the consideration and integration of perspectives
Box 2.2).17 Thus, it is important to consider these
and the involvement of institutions and agents
in deciding the scope of the roadmap. Various
that are critical for successful implementation.
methodologies are being developed to help coun-
The organization developing the roadmap also tries examine some of those synergies and trade-
needs to consider various practical details. These offs, determine which Goals to focus on, and work
include ensuring leadership commitment, appoint- towards attaining them most effectively (See Box
ing a steering committee whose members have 2.3 for an example).
knowledge and authority to make decisions re-
garding the scope and boundaries of the exercise,
as well as considering how broadly to consult and
the types of organizations and experts who are 17 IIASA’s The World in 2050 report (2018) has also convinc-
ingly pointed out that there are strong synergies as well
expected to participate in developing the plan. Ide- as trade-offs across SDGs. They have grouped the SDGs
into six key transformations that have to be accomplished
to achieve sustainable development: human capacity and
demography; consumption and production; decarbonization
16 For more guidance on initial planning and preparation, see and energy; food, biosphere and water; smart cities; and
Technology Executive Committee (2013). digital revolution (IIASA, 2018).
CHAPTER 2. THE SIX STEPS 33
Box 2.2 Key Insights and recommendations from the

Global Sustainable Development Report
The first four-year Global Sustainable Development Report (Independent Group of Sci-
entists, 2019), produced by a group of 15 eminent scientists appointed by the Sec-
retary-General of the United Nations, is an exhaustive science-based “assessment of
assessments” of the transformations necessary to meet the SDGs. A key insight is that
“although we are not on track to reach many Sustainable Development Goal targets …
there is enough scientific evidence to indicate the ways forward … accelerated results
over the next 10 years are possible, but only through an approach that builds on a truly
systemic understanding of the indivisible and universal 2030 Agenda … [and] only if we
intentionally address the inherent trade-offs among the Goals, and harness the abundant
co-benefits” (p.139). It proposes six entry points that address the underlying systems
behind the Goals, and four levers that can help achieve the necessary transformations
towards sustainable and equitable development, as summarized in the table below.
It argues that “the entry points alone may not be sufficient, especially if actions do not
adequately address global interconnections, or take full account of the non-economic,
ENTRY POINTS FOR TRANSFORMATION
Human Sustainable Sustainable Energy Urban and Global

well-being and just food system decarbonization peri-urban environmental
and economies and healthy with universal development commons
capabilities nutrition access
LEVERS
GOVERNANCE
ECONOMY AND
FINANCE
INDIVIDUAL AND
COLLECTIVE ACTION
SCIENCE AND
TECHNOLOGY
>
but intrinsic value of nature” (p.23). It further argues that while each of the levers can
>
contribute to the entry points, they generally work best together, since these different
dimensions need to be addressed in implementation, and the entry points and levers
must be adapted to the specific situation of each country. This will require strong political
leadership and novel collaboration among governments, business and academia. There-
fore, countries need to start with what is politically possible, but also strive to expand the
range of actions and actors over time. Furthermore, as clearly highlighted from the title
of the report, The Future is Now: Science for Achieving Sustainable Development, action
needs to start now, and science and technology have a critical role to play. Actions are
necessary at both country and global levels. The global STI community needs to do much
more to help apply existing STI, but also to develop new technologies that are needed
to help attain the Goals. This calls for partnerships to develop greater STI capability in
developing countries, as well as global coalitions to develop technologies and innovations
that can help strengthen synergies and bridge some of the trade-offs across Goals and
targets.
Source: Independent Group of Scientists (2019)
This issue of synergies and trade-offs is some- and targets they will prioritize, and which they will
thing that those developing the roadmap need to tackle later as they build up capacity and expe-
consider carefully. Roadmaps with broader scopes rience. Presumably, this will have been done in
are more complex, as they involve many different their national development plan, but it can be sup-
areas which means broader sets of experts and plemented in separate STI for SDGs Roadmaps.
stakeholders, involving many sectors. This will Various international agencies are creating meth-
typically require broader consultation and coordi- odologies to help countries identify where they
nation. But even single SDG roadmaps or sector have the largest SDG gaps, as well as where there
focused plans can involve experts and actors with are possible synergies. For the SDG gap analysis,
different technical skills and capabilities. For ex- benchmarking assessments such as those by Ber-
ample, tackling SDG 2 (Zero hunger) may involve telsmann Stiftung and the Millennium Institute
improved seeds, other inputs such as irrigation may serve as useful references.
and fertilizer, training in the use of new techno-
The International Science Council has developed a
logical inputs, better food storage and distribution
mapping of linkages among SDGs 2, 3, 7 and 14
systems, better marketing systems, improved gov-
and is piloting this with the International Network
ernment targeting of food supply or cash grants to
for Government Science Advice (INGSA) in Jamai-
ensure food reaches the poor, better information
ca.18 In addition, the Millennium Institute’s Integrat-
on health and nutrition, better education and skills,
ed Sustainable Development Goals (iSDG) model
better jobs, etc.
simulates the consequences of a variety of policies
influencing SDGs both individually and concurrent-
Which specific SDGs and targets?
ly. Other useful tools include the Rapid Integrated
Because the 17 SDGs are so broad and cover so
many targets, tackling them all simultaneously
may be very difficult. Therefore, it is important 18 See https://council.science/publica-
for countries to think carefully about which SDGs tions/a-guide-to-sdg-interactions-from-science-to-im-
plementation
Assessment and the SDG Accelerator and Bottle- as part of their development plans, but few have
neck Assessment, both developed by UNDP, which outlined the role that STI will play in reaching
help developing countries to identify key areas that those Goals, or even more importantly how STI
can trigger positive effects across SDGs. The Eu- can help to ensure that the Goals will be met. It
ropean Commission has developed an interactive is also important to consider how STI for SDGs
tool tracking interlinkages between different SDGs, Roadmaps relate to overall STI plans or sectoral
which is available on the KnowSDGs Platform19 development plans (the intersection of the three
accompanied by a dedicated publication.20 Some circles in the Venn diagram in Figure 2.2), as there
other methodologies try to jointly address the eco- is the potential to improve synergies across them.
nomic, societal and environmental challenges faced From the review of country plans undertaken in
by countries or subnational territories, at the same preparation of this Guidebook, as well as the five
time taking into account the synergies and trade- ongoing country pilots,21 it is clear that there is
offs (see Background Paper for more details). room for much more integration across the dif-
ferent plans (see Progress Report on the five pilot
Once the specific Goals and targets have been
countries). This closer integration has the poten-
identified, what sources of knowledge and exper-
tial to leverage resources and actions, as well as
tise will be needed to turn those Goals into action-
to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the
able plans? This will be very important for Steps
actions considered in the various plans.
3 to 5. As noted earlier, it will require data and
a good evidence base on what works, specialized
expertise, and stakeholder consultations.
How does it relate to the overall nation-

al development plan and other strategic
documents?
Since most countries have broader national – as
well as multiple sectoral – development plans, it is
important to consider how this roadmap relates to
those other plans. Ideally, the STI planning process
should be part of wider planning for SDG agen-
das and national or sectoral development plans,
so the alignment can occur more naturally. The
objective of developing STI for SDGs Roadmaps is
to outline concrete milestones that can accelerate
achievement of the SDGs within whatever plan-
ning process countries have for this, by harnessing
innovative potential and taking advantage of tech-
nological opportunities.
Most countries have begun to articulate the SDGs
19 The platform is available here: https://knowsdgs.jrc.ec.eu-

ropa.eu/interlinkages-visualization
20 European Commission (2019), Interlinkages and policy co-
herence for the Sustainable Development Goals implemen-
tation: An operational method to identify trade-offs and 21 The Guidebook is currently being piloted in five countries:
co-benefits in a systemic way, JRC Technical Reports. Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya, India and Serbia.
Box 2.3 An early pilot experience in national STI for

SDGs Roadmaps – Serbia
Serbia, as one of the Global Pilot countries, has decided to use the Smart Specialisation
approach in developing the national STI for SDGs Roadmap. The country is being sup-
ported in this effort by the European Commission Joint Research Centre (EU JRC) and the
United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO). The Serbian government
has approved the Serbian Smart Specialisation Strategy in 2020.
OPPORTUNITIES TO NICHES TO COMPETE

MOVE UP THE ON INTERNATIONAL
VALUE CHAINS ECONOMIC MARKETS
POTENTIAL
SOCIETAL AND
INNOVATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL
POTENTIAL CHALLENGES
SCIENTIFIC
ADDING VALUE TO POTENTIAL CREATE NEW
EXISTING ACTIVITIES SOLUTIONS
Smart Specialisation concept: Localised STI Roadmaps for SDGs
The systemic approach means that the new Roadmap is perceived from the perspective of
a territory, where socioeconomic and environmental systems interact, and the resulting de-
velopment and transformation challenges are jointly addressed by STI inputs. In the case of
Serbia, this approach resulted in the definition of six interrelated priorities, as shown below.
FOOD FOR FUTURE Smart Packaging CREATIVE

INDUSTRIES
Information and Food for Future

communication technologies
Custom Soﬅware Development High Tech Agriculture Eco-packaging, Automation, Soﬅwares UI & UX
waste reduction, robotics, IoT-AI_GIS
IoT Design
Soﬅware Solutions Development Value Added Food products green sensors, traceability
applications,
machines for smart
blockchain,
agriculture and gardens
Future Machines and Sustainable Agrifood food
big data
Manufacturing Systems Production production
General and specific Creative industries
purpose machines MACHINES AND Resource
Industrial PRODUCTION management,
Information in the Smart Creative audio-visual biotechnology, PROCESS embeded
Management Service - Industry 4.0 production nano OF THE FUTURE solutions, IoT
technologies i AI product
Video Games and Interactive Energy Facilities and solutions
Smart Components and Tools
content
Smart Packaging BD, IoT, AI environmental INFORMATION AND
Ecology COMMUNICATION
protection and waste
and Energy TECHNOLOGIES
management solutions,
efficiency
smart cities, smart grid
Key Enabling Technologies (KET)
Energy Efficient and Eco-Smart Solutions

KET - key
enabling AI, BC, IoT solutions
technologies
Serbia’s Smart Specialisation priorities.
Vertical and Horizontal priorities and MADE IN SMART AND CREATIVE SERBIA
cross-innovation
>
Source: Serbian Smart Specialization Strategy

Including possible synergies and trade-offs between different government priorities ena-
>
bles the negative consequences of investing in single SDGs to be foreseen and avoided.
At the same time, it is possible to scale up the efforts and build wide coalitions for the
achievement of Goals and targets.
Source: Fuster Martí E., Matusiak M. (ed), 2019
tant to assess not only what the current gaps are,

but how they are likely to be impacted by emerg-
ing trends, in order to understand the magnitude
of the challenges and help to prioritize the Goals.
There are various methodologies that can help

identify SDG gaps. These include Sachs (2018),
OECD (2017) and Millennium Institute (2018).
However, it is also important to assess the chal-
Assess current lenges in making significant improvements to the
situation Goals. This requires expertise on the specifics of

the country’s economic, social and environmental
situation,23 as well as on what technologies are in
use, how widely diffused they are, and what other
What is the current situation regarding technologies could be used and deployed.
the selected SDG(s) and targets? For the STI component, it is also important to
Establishing a baseline for the country’s current benchmark where a country is with respect to its
situation regarding the selected SDG(s) is critical overall STI system. The Global Innovation Index
to developing a successful roadmap, because it benchmarks 126 countries according to 80 indi-
is important to know where a country is in order cators divided into innovation inputs and innova-
to set realistic goals.22 In addition, it is necessary tion outputs.24 The World Economic Forum’s Global
to assess what will impact that situation moving Competitiveness Report benchmarks countries on
forward. For example, how are trends (e.g. popula- 12 pillars, several of which are highly relevant to
tion growth, climate change and extreme weather, innovation.25 The UNESCO Institute for Statistics is
water and food availability, conflict and security) working on thematic STI indicators in six areas: STI
likely to impact the targeted SDGs, and how may framework conditions and governance, infrastruc-
STI address or exacerbate them. This involves ture for STI, human capital for STI, R&D and other
assessing not only SDG gaps, but how they may S&T activities, innovation processes and outputs,
evolve under different scenarios. Methodologies
for exploring future scenarios will be discussed in
the next step. However, under this step, it is impor- 23 Such a connection is made in the updated Smart Speciali-
sation methodology currently piloted in Serbia as part of the
Global Pilot Programme.
24 Cornell University, INSEAD and WIPO (2018).
22 DESA has an online database of the United Nations family’s
repository of actions, initiatives and plans on the implemen- 25 The World Economic Forum’s Global Competitiveness Report
tation of the 2030 Agenda and the SDGs. It is available at provides indicators relevant to international competitive-
https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/unsur- ness, in the context of what they call the Fourth Industrial
vey/index.html. Revolution (http://gcr.weforum.org/)
and knowledge exchange and transfer. illiterate adults are women. In addition, women
are underrepresented in STEM education, and in
There are also various methodologies to analyse
R&D personnel, technical publications, patenting,
countries’ STI systems. These include the UNCTAD
innovation and management. Meanwhile, wom-
STIP Review Framework, the UNESCO Global Ob-
en spend on average more than three times as
servatory of Science, Technology and Innovation
many hours as men in unpaid care and domestic
Policy Instruments (GO-SPIN)26 and the OECD Re-
work, limiting the time they have for education,
views of Innovation Policy. The European Union
paid work and leisure; when they are paid, their
uses Smart Specialisation Strategies (Research
wages are lower than those for men.30 There is
and Innovation Strategies for Smart Specialisa-
much room for improvement in laws, regulations
tion – RIS3), for which it has developed very useful
and attitudes to address gender equality, as well
diagnostic methodologies to analyse a country’s
as in the use of technology to reduce time spent
or region’s situation and develop concrete strat-
on chores to give women more time for education
egies. These have now been implemented in all
and work, and to improve their access to educa-
European Union Member States and many coun-
tion and jobs through digitally enabled access and
tries outside the European Union.27 In addition,
other technologies and innovations.
given limited fiscal resources, governments should
review the efficiency and effectiveness of spend-
What financial resources are available
ing on STI. One methodology already available for
this is the World Bank public expenditure reviews
or can be made available to meet those
(PERs) in science, technology and innovation, which Goals?
include an STI needs assessment and reviews of It is also important to assess whether there are
policy mix and of the quality of instruments (World enough resources available to match the needs and
Bank 2016).28 There are various others, including level of ambition for achievement of the Goals. Gov-
sectoral approaches where STI is applied in the ernments in all countries, and especially developing
context of a specific policy (industrial, agricultural, countries, are fiscally constrained and have multiple
gender, etc.), and modular approaches best suited demands on those limited resources. What existing
to various steps including assessing current situa- resources can be allocated to an STI for SDG Roadm-
tion (see the Operational Note for this Guidebook ap? What additional resources can be obtained by
and the Background Paper on methodologies). the government for this task? How can resources
In assessing a country’s current situation, an im- from the private sector, NGOs and civil society be
portant dimension is its progress towards gender leveraged for this? How can they be secured?
equality as per SDG 5, which has implications for
the STI for SDGs Roadmaps both as an input and What capabilities are available or need
an output.29 Two thirds of the world’s 750 million to be developed to meet those Goals?
The assessment should also include what capa-
26 GO-SPIN launched a very useful electronic platform to as- bilities need to be developed in government, the
sess countries’ national innovation systems. It is available at private sector, the NGO sector and civil society to
https://gospin.unesco.org
27 For details on the diagnostic tools and their application, see
their online platform at http://s3platform.jrc.ec.europa.eu/
unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0025/002597/259766e.
28 In addition, the World Bank has developed a useful practi-
pdf). On the output side, see Gender Equality and Big Data,
tioner’s guide to innovation policy, which provides helpful
which shows how big data can be used to facilitate and
advice on instruments to build firm capabilities and accel-
assess progress on gender equality (available at https://
erate catch-up in developing countries (Cirera and others,
unsdg.un.org/resources/gender-equality-and-big-da-
2020).
ta-making-gender-data-visible).
29 On the input side, see UNESCO Measuring Gender Equality in
30 See United Nations Secretary-General’s Report (UNESCO,
Science and Engineering: The SAGA Toolkit (available at http://
2019) for more details on gender inequality.
implement the plan. What support can be obtained rent situation and can set goals that are realistic
from abroad? What twinning and training arrange- in terms of resources, capabilities, technologies/
ments may be possible? What skills development innovations and timeline.31
plans need to be included in the roadmap? This is
a complex task. To accomplish it, countries should How ambitious is the vision?
take advantage of technical expertise that can be
Countries also need to decide how ambitious to
supplied by various international agencies, includ-
make the vision and the goals. This is a political
ing many from the United Nations system (such as
as well as an economic decision, and it depends
DESA, UNCTAD, UNESCO, UNDP and WIPO), interna-
on how progress on the selected SDGs fits into the
tional organizations (such as the European Union
overall strategy, resources and capabilities of the
and OECD), multilateral financial institutions (such
country, and the extent to which greater STI input
as the World Bank, Asian Development Bank, Af-
could accelerate attainment of that SDG. In ad-
rican Development Bank, Inter-American Develop-
dition, it will be dependent on social acceptance
ment Bank and European Bank for Reconstruction
of the vision and of its key elements. For some
and Development), bilateral country programmes
developing countries, it also depends on the type
and NGOs, and private companies (see Chapter 3).
and magnitude of foreign technical and financial
assistance they may receive or can try to obtain.
How will the vision be developed and

how will ownership be sought?
A practical consideration is how the vision will
be developed and how ownership will be shared.
Based on the experience of many countries, this
will depend on the level of leadership and commit-
ment by high-level stakeholders, and the extent
Develop vision, to which they are involved in governance of the

implementation of the roadmap. Success in ob-
goals and targets taining stakeholder ownership will also depend on
the process through which the vision is developed.
Visions generated through broad consultation pro-
There are various tools and methodologies for de- cesses are likely to achieve greater ownership and
veloping visions, goals and targets. Which to use credibility, which can facilitate implementation.
will depend on the level of detail and depth that However, the broader the scope of the vision, the
is desired, and on pragmatic considerations about larger the number of stakeholders that may need
availability of time and willingness of stakehold- to be involved, and the more difficult it may be to
ers to participate. reach a consensus. This is an important trade-off
that needs to be considered.
Nevertheless, regardless of what (if any) formal
methodology is chosen, some of the key questions Approaches to developing visions include models
to be considered include the following. exploring forward-looking scenarios on issues such
What is the vision?

31 While developing vision has been presented as the third
Developing a credible vision for advancing the at- step, it could just as easily have been presented as a fourth
tainment of SDGs also requires that the political step after more work has been done on the alternative tech-
leadership for the initiative understands the cur- nology/innovation pathways. This illustrates the iterative
nature of developing roadmaps.
as climate change, trade or income distribution, as consideration needs to be given to how that vision
well as foresight workshops, alternative futures, will be communicated. Beyond the preparation of
horizon scanning, scenarios and others.32 The main a document, when and how will it be launched?
purpose of these tools is to consider more ambi- Should the vision be part of other major govern-
tious alternatives to simple projections of current ment announcements or should it be launched in-
dependently? Should the vision be announced early
trends. Their main value is that they can help pol-
to create momentum and support, or should it be
icymakers and relevant stakeholders to develop
launched only when the full STI for SDG Roadm-
plausible narratives for alternative futures, and to ap has been developed? This will depend on coun-
think systematically about likely implications for try-specific circumstances and traditions. However,
the country’s future. This helps to set out the goals it should be articulated at the highest level possi-
and to open up an outside-the-box discussion about ble and launched through mass media, including
a future state that might not otherwise be consid- the press, television and social media, in order to
ered. Once a consensus emerges about what poli- help create momentum and alignment.
cymakers want that state to be, they can begin to
develop pathways for how to reach that state with
an STI for SDGs Roadmap. The methodologies that
offer support in vision building include Smart Spe-
cialisation (EU JRC), STIP (UNCTAD) and TIP (TIPC).
Some countries also set up specialized agencies or
institutions to help assess future trends and how
they may affect what a country needs to do. In
addition, some United Nations agencies – such as
UNESCO, UNCTAD and UNDP – apply these meth-
odologies in workshop settings to assist developing
countries with this step. Assess alternative
What are the specific Goals and targets pathways
over the short term (three to four years),
medium term (five to eight years) and This is the most critical step in creating an STI for
long term (eight to ten years, to 2030)? SDGs Roadmap, because it is the phase of explicit
The timeline for meeting different Goals and targets consideration of STI inputs towards accelerating
also needs to be developed as part of the vision. the achievement of SDGs. This is also where cur-
They need to be spelled out in further detail, if not rent STI for SDGs Roadmaps are weakest, particu-
here then under Step 5 of the roadmap. In addition, larly in developing countries.33 Part of the reason is
that most STI for SDGs Roadmaps available have
been developed for advanced countries, which can
32 Foresight methods and techniques can be used to support draw on greater capabilities for mission-oriented
many steps in the process. See: Commission on Science
and Technology for Development, Strategic foresight for
research to create new technologies. That said, for
the post-2015 development agenda (23 February 2015), developing countries, innovation covers a broader
http://unctad.org/meetings/en/SessionalDocuments/ space than pure research for scientific or techno-
ecn162015d3_en.pdf; UNCTAD, Digital tools for foresight
(October 2017), http://unctad.org/en/PublicationsLi- logical purposes, as it includes new ways of pro-
brary/ser-rp-2017d10_en.pdf; UNESCO, Transforming
the Future: Anticipation in the 21st Century (2018), http://
unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0026/002646/264644E.
pdf; UNDP Foresight Manual, https://www.undp.org/ 33 This conclusion is also reached by a review of STI roadmaps.
content/undp/en/home/librarypage/capacity-building/ See Carayannis, Grebeniuk and Meissner (2016), Interna-
global-centre-for-public-service-excellence/Foresight- tional Energy Agency (2014), and Miedzinski, McDowall and
Manual2018.html Fahnestock (2018).
ducing, delivering and using goods and services is made in the text to clarify how the term is be-
that may already exist elsewhere, and which can ing used, but the reader will often have to infer
accelerate the achievement of SDGs if they can it from the context. In addition, different types of
be effectively harnessed in the local context. There innovation are needed in different local contexts.
are also a few methodologies that offer support For example, if the focus is on diffusing an existing
in assessing alternative pathways – for sectoral well-tested technology, for example solar energy,
STI policies, UNIDO uses the Strategic Industrial there may still be a need for a great deal of inno-
Intelligence and Governance (SIIG) approach which vative activity to apply it. Organizational innova-
includes this step, while UNCTAD proposes STIP tion may be needed to work out suitable business
to jointly examine various dimensions: econom- models to make it economically feasible, consider-
ic, societal and environmental challenges. Other ing the socioeconomic profile of future customers.
methodologies recommend foresight and other Product innovation may be needed to adapt ex-
techniques but do not use them systematically. isting technology to the local context (e.g. design
of rooftops, climate and other natural conditions,
Table 2.1 presents a comprehensive overview of
regulatory requirements including standards). In
innovations, ranging from incremental process im-
addition, as noted in the Introduction, there needs
provements to system innovation (OECD, 2015)34
to be an equal, if not greater, focus on non-tech-
and including grassroots,35 pro-poor, inclusive and
nological aspects of innovation such as alternative
frugal innovation.36 The use of the term “inno-
business models, organizations, delivery systems
vation” in this report will vary depending on the
and social aspects, including barriers to using new
context. Sometimes it will refer to globally new
technologies.
technology, or it might be a product or service that
exists elsewhere in the world but is new to the Figure 2.4 presents three archetypes of technolo-
local context and may need to be adapted to the gy/innovations in terms of their relative importance
conditions in that context, or it could be in refer- for STI for SDGs Roadmaps in developing countries:
ence to an indigenous innovation that needs to be existing technology/innovations, emerging technol-
scaled up and diffused to other users. An effort ogy/innovations, and new technology/innovations
which have yet to be developed. In this discussion,
innovation is used in the traditional sense to mean
technology to produce and deliver a product or ser-
34 One perspective on transformative innovation is the notion
of system innovation (Geels, 2005; OECD, 2015).
vice that is new to the developing country context.
It is critically important for a country to assess al-
35 Examples of grassroots innovations include those developed
by rural innovators in the course of carrying out their farm ternative pathways for how technology/innovations
and non-farm activities as they seek better and more effi- can be effectively harnessed in the local context.
cient ways of doing things. However, they tend to be known
only locally, so there is a big challenge in highlighting them For the planning horizon to 2030, the reality is
and scaling up their dissemination. In India, the Honey Bee
Network has developed an extensive database and sup-
that most developing countries will be best served
port network for identifying, highlighting and disseminating by taking maximum advantage of broad dissemi-
grassroots innovations. nation and use of existing technology/innovations,
36 Pro-poor, inclusive and frugal innovation refers to inno- as well as emerging technology/innovations. This
vations that have been designed to address the needs of
is why they are in the broader bottom parts of
poorer, marginalized populations. They may include both
high-tech and low-tech innovations. These include use of the pyramid in Figure 2.4. The potential of new
satellite technology to identify sources of clean water for technology/innovations yet to be developed is
poor rural communities, advanced but low-cost eye surgery
to remove cataracts for as low as $30 per person, low-cost
represented in the narrower top part of the pyr-
water purification pumps, and low-cost solar stoves for rural amid. However, drawing on historical precedents
communities. For more examples, see some of the inno- with developing, testing and applying new tech-
vations presented at the Global Solutions Summit in June
2018 prior to the third STI Forum in New York (www.glo- nologies, the time frame to 2030 is too short to
balsolutionssummit.com).
Table 2.1 Innovation is diverse: the main faces of innovation

for the SDGs
Product and service innovation

■ Innovative technologies serving particular economic or social needs, including en-
abling technologies (e.g. ICTs) and technologies underpinning specific socio-technical
systems (e.g. renewable energy technologies)
■ Innovative products
• New products that provide value to users because of their features
• Inexpensive, durable, repairable, re-usable, recyclable, biodegradable mate-
rials and products with enhanced accessibility and reduced environmental
impact
■ Innovative services
• Business to Business (B2B): new services that reduce the cost or time, or im-
prove the quality of production, management or distribution processes
• Business to Consumer (B2C): provision of new services that meet the needs of
consumers at lower costs or provide them faster or more efficiently
Organizational (institutional) innovation

■ New ways of organizing the production or delivery of goods or services (including
government services) that reduce the cost or time of producing and delivering them
■ Better ways of managing the production of goods or services or their delivery,

which can increase efficiency, quality or accountability under new objectives such as
pollution control, waste reduction, corporate social responsibility (CSR) or inclusiveness
Marketing innovation
■ Faster delivery or lower cost of marketing products and services, including through
social media and other internet-based platforms, as well as product differentiation
through eco-labels, fair-trade labels or labels confirming that production has respect-
ed human rights
■ Science-based campaigns and awareness raising (e.g. water and sanitation or

sustainable consumption)
Business model innovation

■ New ways of organizing businesses and their products and services. For example,
using internet-based platforms to match supply and demand for goods (e.g. Amazon)
or services such as personal transport (Uber and Lyft) or short-term apartment rentals
(such as Airbnb) without owning assets
■ Changes to value proposition and product-service systems of companies (e.g.

circular economy business models, including product sharing and functional sales)
Pro-poor, inclusive innovation and frugal innovation

■ Various types of innovation designed to address the needs of poorer, marginal-
ized groups
■ Affordable products from the informal sector that have potential to reduce life
cycle environmental impact, due to reduced use of resources and energy and re-use of
materials and components. Region-specific terms include jugaad (India), jua kali (East
Africa) or gambiarra (Brazil). Products or services designed or redesigned to reduce
their cost and complexity (may be modular but may still be high-tech), while retaining
their core functions.
Grassroots innovation
■ Innovation that involves grassroots actors (NGOs, communities) in the process of
applying knowledge to sustainable development challenges, which are often defined
at a local level
Social innovation
■ New collaborative arrangements with social and environmental benefits (e.g. sup-
ply chain innovations rewarding primary producers, energy cooperatives, repair cafes,
eco-villages)
System innovation
■ System changes underpinning a number of mutually reinforcing innovations, of-
ten implemented by many organizations, which together have potential to transform
functional systems delivering key goods and services to societies, such as health,
water, food, shelter or mobility. For example:
• Circular economy approaches changing waste management systems (inte-
grated approaches to collection, sorting, processing and disposal)
• Integrated solutions to urban systems (e.g. multimodal mobility systems)
Source: Authors, based on Oslo Manual (OECD/Eurostat, 2018); UNCTAD (2017, 2019); Miedzinski and oth-
ers (2017); Radjou and Prabhu (2015); Dutrénit and Sutz (2014) and Cirera and Maloney (2017).
expect that even if they are developed, they could vation offer ways of narrowing this innovation gap.
be broadly disseminated.37 Currently, only a few
And for these types of innovation, one of the ma-
developing countries (such as China, India, Russia
jor challenges is how to adapt, scale up and deploy
and Brazil) have the R&D capability to develop
available technologies.
new transformative technologies, with the bulk of
these new technologies likely being developed in There are multiple channels for accessing existing
advanced countries. There is, however, an impor- technology. These include obtaining technology
tant role for international collaboration to develop through foreign direct investment (FDI), importing
new technologies that may be relevant for devel- capital goods and components that embody the
oping countries, as will be covered in Chapter 3. more efficient technology, licensing technology, ob-
taining technical assistance through arms-length
What existing technologies and chan- market transactions or as part of bilateral govern-
nels can help attain those goals?
Benchmark assessments confirm that developing
countries are far behind the global technological
frontier in most technologies, ranging from agri-
culture to manufacturing and services. Although
there is wide variance among developing coun- NEW TECHNOLOGY/
tries, comparative studies of productivity across INNOVATIONS
sectors show that, on average, developing coun-

tries are operating at less than 2 per cent of the EMERGING TECHNOLOGY/
productivity achieved by developed countries in INNOVATIONS
agriculture, 5-20 per cent of average productivity

in manufacturing, and 5-25 per cent of produc-
tivity in services.38 This means that developing EXISTING TECHNOLOGY/
INNOVATIONS
countries could go a long way towards attaining
some of the SDGs by using technology that al-
ready exists.
A key issue is how developing countries can ac- Figure 2.4: Pyramid of relative relevance of different
technology/innovations in achieving SDGs
cess those technologies, given that 68 per cent
Source: Authors
of the population in low-income countries, and 61
per cent in lower middle-income countries, live in
rural areas (World Development Indicators, 2018). ment technical assistance packages or dissemina-
Moreover, more than two thirds of the labour force tion by NGOs or professional societies, accessing
in low-income countries, and roughly 40 per cent foreign education and training, and copying and re-
of that in lower middle-income countries, is still verse engineering. However, just because the tech-
engaged in agriculture, mostly in subsistence nology or innovation already exists somewhere in
farming. For smallholder farmers and low-income the world, and there are many ways to obtain it,
populations, grassroots, frugal and pro-poor inno- does not mean that it can easily be acquired and
used. For example, to attract FDI that may bring
in the desired technology, the country must be of
37 For a very revealing analysis of the time it has taken differ-
interest to the foreign investor and this involves
ent technologies to diffuse globally, see Comin and Mestieri not just attractive market opportunities, but a good
(2014). business environment and other broader enabling
38 See for example OECD (2014) and Cirera and Maloney conditions. In addition, there is the issue of how
(2017).
that technology is to be disseminated within a ture. This includes energy infrastructure, such as
country and across different regions and actors. fossil fuels or alternative energy systems (e.g.
wind farms or solar energy) for electricity gener-
What does the STI system have to offer to ation. Increasingly, a good ICT infrastructure of fi-
enable dissemination of the innovation? bre-optic cable and wireless networks is critical for
digital technologies such as cell phones and other
It must be kept in mind that technology is just one connected electronic devices which are becoming
of many inputs required to actually have an im- ubiquitous in our new context.
pact on use. What are also required are financial
resources, entrepreneurial incentives, and firms Development and deployment of a technology or
with the appropriate organizational and manage- innovation also requires finance. Given the risks
rial capabilities that can deploy the technology/ involved in developing and testing new technol-
innovation to get goods and services to firms or ogies, this often requires some source of finance
consumers who can benefit from them. For exam- which may be the developers’ own capital, seed
ple, the dissemination of medical technologies/ funding, or some sort of grants by governments
innovations, such as vaccines, requires a system or NGOs. Only once a new technology is beyond
of health providers. Something as simple as oral the conceptual stage is it likely to attract venture
rehydration therapy, essential to reduce mortality capital or social investment funds. And even when
due to dehydration from diarrhoea, requires not a technology has been widely demonstrated to be
just a few cheap chemicals but also trust in the effective, it is often not easy to attract capital to
providers by the target population, as well as clean finance expansion. Banks are risk-averse, so they
water – which is usually not easily available in the
communities where the problem is most endemic.
Figure 2.5 is a schematic representation of some
of the key components of the technology/innova-
tion deployment system.
Technology deployment may involve existing tech- Complementary

inputs
nology that is already ready for dissemination.
New technology, however, often has to be applied Supporting
Technology/ infrastructure
in prototypes and tested before it is fully deployed. innovation
In addition, once tested and debugged, it often has
to be scaled up to reduce production costs, which
also helps to foster its uptake. More steps would Ultimate
therefore be required within the technology box, beneficiary
but they are not represented here to avoid clutter-
Delivery Finance
ing the schematic representation. mechanism
No technology works in isolation; it typically re-

quires complementary inputs. For industrial prod-
ucts, these may involve different types of raw Entrepreneurship
and skills
materials or components and some source of en-
ergy. For services, it includes hardware as well as
software and other forms of non-technical innova-
tion, including business models and new forms of
organization and delivery of services. Figure 2.5: Technology/innovation is just one element of
the deployment system required to reach beneficiaries
Technologies also require supportive infrastruc- Source: Authors
typically require some sort of tangible collateral generally already in place for the delivery of new
before they are willing to make loans. New start- technologies. Therefore, they have to be devel-
ups almost by definition do not have many physical oped as part of the delivery ecosystem. In addi-
assets beyond the potential intellectual capital as- tion, for some technology/innovations (such as
sociated with the new technology. Therefore, spe- in the health or agricultural sectors), the delivery
cialized sources of finance need to be developed system needs to gain the trust of the users before
as part of the deployment ecosystem. In addition, it will be accepted.
consumers may need access to financing to buy
the product or service, so it will also be necessary What emerging technologies may help
to address how that financing can be extended to attain those Goals?
consumers. For poor target populations, this may
require innovative financing schemes that bypass There are also several emerging technologies
the formal financial system. These can include in- that may allow cheaper or more efficient ways of
novative FinTech financing, using digital systems meeting some of those Goals. For example, rather
to deliver small amounts of finance and to track than building central power stations and an exten-
repayment history.39 sive grid system to provide electricity to commu-
nities, new off-grid solar power technologies make
Deployment of the technology/innovation also re- it possible to reach rural communities at a frac-
quires entrepreneurship. Someone – be it a com- tion of the cost. Also, the advent of cheap cellular
pany, NGO or government agency – needs to take telephone and wireless service technologies are
the initiative to roll out the technology to the ul- making it possible to provide phone and even tele-
timate beneficiaries. For technology/innovations phone-based Internet services to rural communi-
that are new to the target environment, there is ties at a fraction of the cost and time needed to
often some risk that they will not work without expand traditional wire-based telephone or cable
modifications or that there may not be uptake be- services. Similarly, new water purification technol-
cause of high cost or cultural or other social rea- ogies, for example using advanced nano-technol-
sons. Therefore, someone has to take the risk. In ogy membranes, may make it possible to provide
addition, the effective use of technology requires water to rural communities more cheaply than
skills, including not only basic literacy, but also of- by extending more expensive conventional water
ten specialized technical skills, such as how to use supply systems. Artificial intelligence also has the
the Internet or new applications. potential to bring in a wave of complementary in-
novations with wide impact and may help to plug
Another requirement for deployment is a delivery
some of the skill and knowledge gaps in develop-
system (see Box 2.4). For commercial technology/
ing countries.
innovations, this is typically through private firms
with an incentive to deploy the products or ser- However, it must also be kept in mind that some
vices because they make profits from such sales. disruptive technologies, such as artificial intelli-
For social technology/innovations in sectors such gence, automation and robotics, 3D printing and
as basic education, preventive health, security new materials, may also have negative impacts
and social protection, it is typically some sort of on the growth and development prospects of de-
government organization or NGO. These are not veloping countries. Automation and robotics may
wipe out the low labour cost advantage of devel-
oping countries, which has allowed them to pro-
39 See, for example, some innovative financing systems duce labour-intensive manufactured products. 3D
such as those offered by Aamra e-banking in Bangladesh printing may also lead to displacements and re-
(https://www.aamratechnologies.com/), Credit Ease in
China (http://english.creditease.cn/), Ignite Power in East
shoring of global supply chains, which have pro-
Africa (https://www.ignite.solar/), and Shared Interest in vided an entry point for developing countries into
South Africa (https://www.sharedinterest.org/approach).
manufacturing.40 New materials and synthetical- ogy parks, etc.) may be necessary for the country
ly produced foods may reduce exports of metal to be able to acquire/develop/use these new tech-
and commodity crops which have been critical for nologies?
developing countries’ exports and growth. In addi-
tion, some of the emerging technologies such as What alternative innovation pathways
nano and biotechnologies may have negative side are there to reach those Goals?
effects, including environmental and biohazards.
Because there can be different ways of using STI
Thus, it will be important to constantly scan the to meet some of the SDGs, it is critical to explore
horizon for the potential positive or negative im- different pathways. This analysis should consider
pacts of emerging and new technologies. This what would be required for each pathway in terms
means that the assessment of alternative road- of alternative existing technology/innovation
maps must also consider what special regulations routes and deployment ecosystems, as well as
or compensation programmes need to be put in the potential offered by emerging and new tech-
place to protect the populations who are negative- nologies and other forms of innovation. For each
ly affected by the rapid dissemination of emerging technological/innovation route, the costs need to
technologies. Regulations may include increased be considered, as well as the organizational ca-
security and privacy protection measures, while pabilities required to effectively diffuse it at the
programmes may include both skills retraining country or regional level. This will allow an overall
and better systems of social protection. comparison of these different routes.
What new technology development pos- It is also important to appraise the distributional
impacts of these pathways, considering their im-
sibilities may be available through new
pact on gender and on different age groups and
global development efforts? ethnic groups, as well as territorial aspects. These
There is also the possibility that global innova- impacts can be positive or negative and need to
tion initiatives in agriculture (more drought- and be considered in making the decision on which
pest-resistant crops, more nutritious food), energy pathway to take. This also highlights the need to
and environment (advances in alternative energy have specific policies in place to offset some of
technologies, carbon capture and sequestration), the negative impacts for some groups. It is like-
health (new vaccines or better diagnostic and pre- ly that some technology/innovation routes will be
ventive medicine, affordable organ replacement), more effective for reaching certain specific popu-
water (more affordable desalination and wa- lations. For example, for electricity, a conventional
ter treatment technologies) and other areas can centralized power grid may be more cost-effective
open up new, more cost-effective ways of meet- for dense urban populations, while other options
ing some of the SDGs. Therefore, it is important to such as off-grid solar or wind-powered electrici-
consider the potential of these new technologies ty may be more cost-effective for dispersed, ru-
and how countries should position themselves to ral populations. This requires significant scientific,
take advantage of them. For example, what kinds technological and managerial input to examine
of scientific/engineering/technical skills, physical the feasibility and cost-effectiveness of different
and virtual infrastructure, institutions (technology routes. This would probably need not just local, but
and training centres, business incubators/technol- international expertise.
It is generally expected that successful new tech-

40 There are cautious opinions on the impact of 3D printing
nologies and innovations will have falling costs
and other digital technologies on trade prospects for devel- and become more competitive as they are further
oping countries, as recent empirical analysis shows other- developed and scaled up. Also, old technologies
wise. See Freund, Mulabdic, and Ruta (2019), Rodrik (2018),
and UNIDO (2019). typically reach a saturation point and are even-
Box 2.4 Some relevant insights from the Global

Solutions Summit
Five key points emerged from the Global Solutions Summits held in New York just before
the third and fourth United Nations STI Forums in 2018 and 2019. The 2018 Summit
brought together social entrepreneurs, foundation executives, high net worth individuals,
NGOs, scientists and government officials around the topic “From the Lab to the Last Mile:
Technology Deployment Business Models for the SDGs.”
1. Useful concept of the global last mile challenge. This was broader than the con-
ventional geographic concept related to proximity to the grid and included the chal-
lenge of getting existing technologies relevant to the attainment of critical SDGs to
poor, marginalized populations. The point was that merely deploying technologies,
such as water purification filters, drought-tolerant seeds, health clinics, off-grid solar
or wind electricity, off-grid refrigeration and food processing, and other small-scale
distributed solutions, was not going to reduce fragility or ensure long-term resilience.
The latter would require strengthening of local social capital – to share assets and
information, promote self-help approaches, and link communities and local networks
with government and formal institutions.
2. Scaling up the challenge. Many entrepreneurs have developed relevant technol-

ogies and innovative new business models and forms of financing for the delivery of
these goods and services to poor communities. However, after reaching thousands – or
even hundreds of thousands – of poor people, it is clear that this is still not sufficient
to reach the hundreds of millions of people who must be reached if we are to achieve
the SDGs. What is required is a way to radically scale up and massively deploy these
successful innovative solutions.
3. Building an efficient and effective deployment ecosystem. Scaling up and rep-

licating successful business models to deliver SDG solutions requires an ecosystem
offering the necessary technical and financial resources, human capital, supply chains,
infrastructure, political support, entrepreneurship, innovative business models and de-
livery systems, and financing. This entails a two-pronged strategy. First, developing a
platform “so that all the disparate elements of the ecosystem … can find each other
and join forces more easily,” such as through online platforms. Second, “building the
capacity of local organizations, institutions and individuals to participate more active-
ly and fully in the deployment process”.
4. Bringing finance to the last mile. This implies going beyond the Addis Ababa
Action Agenda, of increasing development finance from billions to trillions of dol-
lars, and developing innovative financial conduits so that these funds can be invested
in increments of thousands or millions of dollars. Private businesses, NGOs and so-
cial enterprises are developing some of these innovative conduits via traditional and
non-traditional banking systems, as well as new FinTech solutions, to reach the last
mile customers.
>
5. Generating income to deliver the SDGs. The problem of reaching last mile cus-
>
tomers is that they cannot afford the services. Therefore, effective STI for SDGs Road-
maps must address the income constraint. There is a feedback loop from extending
basic SDG services to communities to the income that is generated for them to be
able to buy these services. Some NGOs have realized this and have expanded their
role from technology suppliers to income-generating market access programmes. This
also requires building of social capital, which is a time-consuming process. It needs to
be factored into programmes to help achieve the SDGs.
The key implication of these findings is that discussions of STI for SDGs Roadmaps need
to also focus on the non-science dimensions of the technology deployment ecosystem.
Source: Watkins (2018) and Watkins (2019)
tually replaced by newer technologies. Attention of both generic STI capabilities (e.g. STEM skills,
must be given to the ecosystem required for the entrepreneurial potential, absorptive capacity) and
deployment of different technologies. In addition, specific capabilities needed to adopt and diffuse
for alternative pathways, the social aspects of the renewable energy technologies and upgrade ener-
adoption of new technologies need to be taken gy infrastructure in the country. The focus on STI
into account, such as trust and acceptance of the capabilities needed to address specific challeng-
technologies by the users. Ideally, in evaluating es is important, as they may differ considerably
each technology/innovation pathway, the following between various topics, actors, technology areas,
should be considered: capability of the different economic sectors and regions. This appraisal will
agents needed in getting the service to the users – allow planners to better tailor policy intervention
including firms, government, NGOs and communi- in STI to address the SDGs, while making sure that
ty organizations, depending on which are the main policy portfolios cater for the specific policy and
delivery agents; physical and digital infrastructure country context.
requirements; complementary inputs; financing;
government policymaking and delivery capability;
and the relative costs and benefits of using the
different technological routes.
The choice of innovation pathways in STI for SDGs

Roadmaps needs to consider existing STI capa-
bilities and the extent to which they are aligned
with the SDGs. Put simply, different types of in-
novation are needed to accomplish the SDGs in
different contexts, and they require different ca-
pabilities from firms and other actors to be suc-
cessfully implemented, scaled up and diffused. For
example, if one of the priority goals is to provide
universal access to clean low-carbon electricity,
governments need to assess knowledge and inno-
vation needs in relation to existing STI capabili-
ties, and system conditions relevant for achieving
this goal. This requires a systemic understanding
roadmap supports their deployment at scale
■ Policy instruments and other actions (e.g.

public-private partnerships) included in the
roadmap, with an explanation of how they con-
tribute to the roadmap objectives as a portfolio,
and taking into consideration the capabilities of
Develop detailed government agencies for implementation
STI for SDGs ■ Expected timeline for implementation, tak-
Roadmap ing into account contingencies, key dependen-

cies and sequencing of actions
■ Roles and responsibilities of government

Step 5 is focused on developing the STI for SDGs and other stakeholders in implementing and
Roadmap, along with key instruments and prior- coordinating the roadmap
ity actions to be taken to accomplish the vision
■ Allocation of resources over time
and contribute to the SDGs. As a decision-mak-
ing phase, the process needs to be embedded in ■ Partnership and communication strategy
and aligned with established policy processes, and to sustain stakeholder involvement and ensure
fully engage key actors with powers and compe- inclusive governance of the roadmap
tences to make formal commitments. It is key that
■ Monitoring and evaluation system to track
the process is transparent and takes full account
progress on implementation of the roadmap
of the evidence and deliberations in the preceding
steps. ■ Feedback loops using monitoring and eval-
uation to adjust the roadmap
The process should result in a roadmap document
– an action plan. The document needs to build on Some of the key issues are discussed below.
the preceding steps. It should introduce key find-
ings from the baseline analysis and provide an What will be the role of government vs
account of the roadmap deliberation process, es- the private sector or civil society?
pecially how different voices and interests were
considered in elaborating and comparing alter- Generally, roadmaps for attaining the SDGs will
native STI pathways. The methodologies such as be developed by government. However, given the
Smart Specialisation (EC JRC), STIP (UNCTAD) and nature of the SDGs, government is not always the
TIP (TIPC) offer support and guidance during this key actor or even the most important actor. For
step of roadmap development. some (such as quality education; clean water and
sanitation; peace, justice and strong institutions),
The action plan should present: the government may have a strong role to play, be
■ Key challenges and vision of the STI for it through the direct provision of services, financial
SDGs Roadmap support, or the regulatory environment. For many
others (such as decent work and economic growth;
■ Objectives, concrete targets and mile- industry, innovation and infrastructure; affordable
stones for the roadmap, explaining how they and clean energy), it will be both public and private
link with key strategic documents for the coun- sectors that will roll out the services or undertake
try the activities that will help attain the Goals. For
still others (such as no poverty; zero hunger; good
■ Description of selected innovation path-
health and well-being), it will be a wide variety
ways and technology areas, explaining how the
of actors, including non-governmental actors and come countries, production and services are
civil society. Therefore, policymakers need to think provided by very small, informal firms operat-
about what it will take to incentivize and mobilize ing in manufacturing, services and subsistence
the other actors, drawing on government policy, agriculture. They have limited knowledge of
regulation, direct government provision, govern- existing technologies that could improve the
ment expenditures, subsidies, grants, etc. production, delivery and quality of goods and
services and help to meet the SDGs. Innovation
What will be an adequate policy mix? is largely indigenous or grassroots, although
there may be a small modern sector. Thus, the
Policymakers need to develop an appropriate pol-
key focus is not so much on encouraging re-
icy mix and instrument portfolio. The choice of in-
search, but on encouraging the use of existing
struments for these portfolios depends on the type,
technology/innovation and scaling up grass-
maturity and level of disruptiveness of supported
roots innovation. The aim of the instruments
innovations, the institutional and implementation
is therefore to provide technological informa-
capacity of the government and its agencies, and
tion and disseminate innovation, strengthen
the innovation capacity of the actors targeted by
management capability, upgrade skills and
direct or indirect policy support.
improve the basic national quality infrastruc-
Design of policy instrument portfolios should con- ture. Promotion of non-technological inno-
sider how various policy instruments can incentiv- vation. In many cases, the need for innovation
ize actors with different needs and capacities, and is not technological but social, organizational
leverage and funnel investments into innovations or managerial (concerning business processes,
needed to accomplish the SDGs. These include marketing, etc.). This type of innovation is par-
changes to the country’s regulatory regime, as ticularly important in developing or transition
well as specific instruments designed to encour- economies, as it enables businesses and soci-
age or support desired activities. eties to adapt to change and accept it. It can
also help to achieve many SDGs, as it promotes
Table 2.2 outlines some general regulatory levers social change and localized (non-technological)
and policy instruments relevant for STI for SDGs solutions. In this case, it is important to include
Roadmaps. Changes to the regulatory regime are instruments that support the development and
primarily used to open the economy to global promotion of new solutions to societal prob-
knowledge inflows and provide the right signals lems and challenges. The innovative projects
for the use of technologies that are relevant to may be proposed by the private sector, but also
meet the SDG needs. In particular, they include by NGOs and other civil society organizations.
regulations to encourage greater social inclusion
and environmental sustainability, which may not ■ Adaptation of existing and emerging
be reflected in current market signals. This also technologies and innovations. This is typically
includes dealing with the challenges of emerging more relevant for countries at the middle level
technologies, such as new forms of unfair com- of technological development and with more
petition facilitated by proprietary digital platforms diversified productive sectors, as their innova-
and issues such as data ownership, privacy and tion and entrepreneurial systems allow them
security, which are relevant to developing as well to exploit more sophisticated technology and
as developed countries business models and proactively adapt them to
specific local conditions and needs. Here, the
The objectives of policy instruments providing sup- focus also includes supporting greater interac-
port can be grouped into three broad categories: tion between R&D and the needs of firms and
■ Adoption and use of existing and emerg- society, and the commercialization of adapted
ing technology/innovations. In most low-in- technology.
■ More ambitious creation of new tech- of the effectiveness of a policy mix and how to im-
nologies and system-wide innovations. This prove it, PERs in STI (World Bank) can be applied.
typically has greater relevance for countries
Adapting the STI policy mix to existing STI capa-
with more advanced technological capabilities
bilities does not need to limit the ambition of STI
and productive sectors, and includes support
for SDGs Roadmaps. Governments have a great
for more ambitious and transformative system
deal of flexibility in selecting the combination of
innovation. The focus here is on encouraging
instruments and adjusting their design features to
more collaborative approaches to big challeng-
promote innovation that responds to the specific
es and on helping to mitigate the risks.
needs of different target groups and communi-
Regardless of the level of development and tech- ties. STI for SDGs Roadmaps can become useful
nological capability, countries may opt to use in- frameworks for the design and implementation of
struments supporting a combination of all three policy portfolios that gradually build up the capac-
types. Challenge-driven approaches to STI policy, ity of STI systems to respond to key societal chal-
such as mission-oriented or transformative inno- lenges. Roadmaps can create learning-by-doing
vation policy, are likely to use instruments from all environments in which governments, in close col-
three categories. Even countries at low levels of laboration with stakeholders, appraise, co-design
technological development may find they need to and gradually improve the STI policy mix, so that it
use policy instruments in the second or even the better responds to knowledge and innovation chal-
third category for specific SDG needs. For example, lenges posed by the SDGs.
to encourage research to adapt agricultural tech-
nologies to specific soil, climate and water condi- Who will do what over what time period?
tions, agricultural practices and domestic tastes;
There is also the issue of which actors are to do
or to bring in advanced emerging technologies,
what and over what time period. This involves
including digital technology systems, and adapt
spelling out the role of different government minis-
them to the local context. Likewise, even advanced
tries and agencies that may be involved, as well as
countries may need to use policies in the first cat-
the relationship between the central government
egory to help small and medium enterprises use
and subnational governments. It includes deter-
existing new technology.
mining how the activities of the different govern-
The choice and design of STI policy instruments ment agencies will be coordinated. A decision also
to support the selected pathways must consider needs to be made on which agency is responsible
existing policy and institutional capacity to deploy for coordinating government activities, taking into
and implement specific instruments and portfolios, account what power or leverage that agency will
but also the needs of stakeholders, including civil have to effectively carry out the coordination. To
society and the private sector. Often, classic poli- make this work and to achieve real traction, all
cy instruments are not sufficient to address these the relevant stakeholders from government, the
needs, so it is also necessary to stimulate and en- private sector and civil society need to be brought
courage innovation in the public sector. There needs on board to commit to their respective responsi-
to be a critical and pragmatic appraisal. It may lead bilities (see Box 2.4 on engaging the private sec-
to a decision to include or exclude certain instru- tor). This is why stakeholder involvement is such a
ments from the portfolio, or to adapt instrument critical input for developing a successful roadmap.
delivery mechanisms or design features to make
them feasible and avoid potential problems in im- What capacities will be necessary in
plementation. GO-SPIN methodology (UNESCO) of- government and other agencies?
fers valuable support in relation to STI policy mix in
connection with the SDGs. For detailed assessment Another important consideration is whether the
different agencies or other actors, including the
private sector and civil society, have the capacity sufficiently dealt with in most plans, is how the
and skills necessary to successfully fulfil their role. costs of the different initiatives are to be financed.
If they do not, then training or capacity building How much will be the government’s responsibil-
needs to be built into the roadmap. This may add ity and where will it obtain the funding? Will it
to the cost, but it is essential in order to create a be from current tax revenues, or will there be a
roadmap that can be implemented. To build up do- need for additional financing through domestic or
mestic capabilities, developing countries can try to foreign borrowing or bond issues, or through new
obtain technical support from international institu- specially earmarked taxes (as has been done in
tions, develop twinning arrangements for capacity Chile and Colombia, for example, to finance special
building with bilateral agencies and foreign compa- innovation funds), or special grants from NGOs or
nies, and build technical training components into other donors? Some countries may prefer to leave
loans from the multilateral development banks. the budget details to other documents, but the is-
sue of costs needs to be addressed. If the plan
What financing will be necessary and is to have sufficient financial resources for imple-
how will it be obtained and delivered? mentation, it will probably have to be vetted by
the Ministry of Finance to allow budget trade-offs
Another critical issue, which unfortunately is not to be considered and decided upon.
Table 2.2 Illustrative regulatory levers and policy instruments

for STI for SDGs Roadmaps41
Regulatory framework levers

■ Trade and foreign direct investment policy that encourage the entry and use of
technologies to help achieve the SDGs, including a good business environment that
encourages investment and innovation
■ Intellectual property protection, which provides an incentive to develop new tech-

nology and also facilitates the transfer of technology by allaying the fear of foreign
investors and technology suppliers that their technology will be pirated. In addition,
the information contained in patent documents can provide insights into how to de-
velop other technologies.
■ Prices that reflect economic costs (e.g. carbon pricing; removing subsidies on car-
bon-based fuels)
■ Regulations to address the challenges of the digital economy, including unfair

competition, privacy, security, data access and ownership
■ Reskilling and social protection legislation and institutions, to help people nega-
41 For other useful classifications of instruments, see Cirera and others (2020) and UNCTAD (2019).
tively affected by disruptive technology
■ Regulations and institutional arrangements underpinning gender equality in STEM,

research and entrepreneurship
■ Standards and certification for products and processes, to meet safety, health,
social and environmental goals
■ Intellectual property regulation and incentives (such as purchases of licences), to

encourage use and diffusion of technologies helpful for attainment of the SDGs
■ Rules and regulations for the development of venture capital and other financing
relevant for new technologies that can help achieve the SDGs
Instruments to absorb, disseminate and use relevant technology and innova-

tions
■ Public awareness campaigns and outreach activities to support the use of tech-
nology/innovations for the SDGs
■ Creation and support of online innovation platforms that facilitate access to and
transfer of technologies, such as the United Nations Online Technology Platform and
WIPO GREEN technology platform
■ Business advisory services to build up management capability and help increase

productivity and attain safety, health and environmental standards and gender equal-
ity
■ Establishment of a national network of WIPO Technology and Innovation Support

Centres (TISCs) to provide value-added intellectual property services for the support
of innovation and use of relevant technologies
■ Technology extension services to demonstrate and diffuse new technology/inno-

vations relevant for the SDGs, including scale-up and dissemination of indigenous and
grassroots innovations
■ Technology/innovation centres to help solve firms’ problems related to the SDGs

by using relevant new technology/innovations
■ National quality infrastructure including metrology, standards, testing and quality

control, and awareness programmes on the importance of using these services to
meet quality, health and environmental goals
■ Supplier development programmes to help firms integrate into domestic and in-
ternational value chains
■ Vouchers for firms to contract specialized technical assistance to use relevant

new technology/innovations
■ Tax incentives or grants for first (pioneer) firms for using relevant new technology/
innovations
■ Development of company clusters to generate economies of scale and agglom-

eration in learning about and effectively using (and developing) relevant new technol-
ogy/innovation
■ Skills upgrading and training programmes in using new technologies, including

digital technologies
■ Tax incentives or low interest loans to firms or individuals for using products with
technologies that help address the SDGs (such as installation of high efficiency fur-
naces or purchase of electric vehicles)
Instruments to adapt and disseminate new emerging technology and innova-

tions
■ Development grants and subsidized loans for emerging technology/innovations
that help achieve the SDGs
■ R&D vouchers for firms to contract research to help deliver better goods and
services for the SDGs
■ R&D tax incentives or grants for firms to adapt technology relevant for the SDGs
■ Technology transfer offices in universities and research centres to commercialize

technology
■ Business incubators to support technology start-ups in areas relevant for the

SDGs
■ Grants for science and engineering training abroad, as well as development of

strong domestic universities
Instruments to develop new technologies and system-wide innovations

■ Grants to universities and research centres to develop new technology/innova-
tions relevant for the SDGs
■ R&D tax incentives or grants for firms to develop new technology/innovations

relevant for the SDGs
■ Support for clusters and science and technology parks to stimulate the develop-
ment and commercialization of relevant technology/innovations to help achieve the
SDGs
■ Procurement specifications for new technological or innovative solutions, accom-

panied by research grants and promises of large purchases if products or services
demanded meet the specifications
■ Challenge grants to develop new technologies and innovations to address specific

needs in environment, health, education and agriculture to help achieve the SDGs
■ Grants and tax incentives for researchers and innovation consortia to develop
new technology/innovations in specific targeted areas deemed relevant to help meet
the SDGs
■ Major government-coordinated initiatives, with significant government funding, to

create consortiums of business, the academic community and public research insti-
tutes to develop radical new technologies
Source: Authors
Box 2.4 Engaging the private sector to use STI more

effectively to attain the SDGs
The private sector is driven primarily by the search for profits, and responds to market
signals and the policy environment. It may also be held back by limited information on
market opportunities relevant for achieving some SDGs, as well as by incomplete knowl-
edge of technologies and innovations that could provide profitable ways to provide goods
and services towards that end. Policymakers, on the other hand, tend to focus their atten-
tion on providing goods and services to achieve the SDGs which may not be economically
attractive to the private sector. They need to understand this disconnect and seek ways of
engaging the private sector’s contribution towards leveraging STI to accelerate achieve-
ment of the SDGs. They also need to understand that the private sector is highly diverse
in terms of the size and capabilities of firms, ranging from small, informal enterprises
with limited technological and entrepreneurial capability to large, domestic and foreign
multinationals with extensive capabilities and global reach. They must target their strat-
egies and policies to address this complex reality. In addition, many firms, regardless of
size, are also sometimes willing to act beyond the profit motive because of corporate
social responsibility interests and this goodwill also needs to be harnessed.
Public policy can provide positive and negative incentives for engaging and investing in
STI for SDGs, using various instruments. Positive incentives can be provided by instru-
ments ranging from market-based mechanisms (e.g. direct financial support for tech-
nology adoption or development of new technologies) to measures supporting industrial
clusters and innovation networks in areas relevant for the SDGs (see Table 2.2 for over-
view of policy instruments). Incentives can be introduced through new instruments or by
changing the design features of existing instruments (e.g. changing award criteria for
grants and procurement contracts, changing the level of public match funding depend-
ing on the risk profile of investments). In addition, public policies can improve informa-
tion about market opportunities and technologies to help achieve the SDGs (e.g. through
market fairs; agricultural, industrial and service industry extension services and demon-
stration projects; business incubators; science or industrial parks), as well as training for
entrepreneurs and workers in using relevant technologies and innovations.
>
Negative incentives or restrictions discourage investments in STI projects that are not
>
aligned with the SDGs. These include reducing or banning products and materials with
proven negative impacts on human health (e.g. toxic chemicals) and the environment (e.g.
single-use plastics) and introducing pricing for inputs such as water and carbon that re-
flect true economic costs. They also include removing existing instruments that introduce
perverse incentives (e.g. subsidies for socially and environmentally harmful economic
activities, such as fossil fuel use). To make a significant contribution to social and environ-
mental sustainability and to delivering public goods, the right balance needs to be found
between positive and negative incentives in the STI policy mix.
As strategic policy frameworks for action, STI for SDGs Roadmaps can play an important
role in creating alignments between public and private sector innovation strategies, and
build policy environments providing incentives for multiple actors to invest in and col-
laborate on STI activities with the highest potential to achieve the SDGs. By developing
a shared vision and innovation pathways, the roadmapping process can help to identify
concrete barriers and to determine incentives needed to prioritize and scale up STI invest-
ments conducive to economic, social and environmental sustainability.
ordination mechanisms will need to have been de-

veloped. Which part of the government will be the
lead agency? How will it effectively coordinate with
other parts of the government and other actors?
How will capacity constraints be addressed? How
will other bottlenecks and problems in implemen-
tation be handled? How will adjustments be made
to the roadmap? To implement roadmaps effec-
Execute, monitor, tively, proper mechanisms will need to be set up
evaluate and for monitoring, evaluation and updating.
update plan What monitoring and evaluation mecha-

nisms will there be?
For the plan to be credible and effective, there
Needless to say, the key step after the develop-
should be provisions for monitoring progress to
ment of the STI for SDGs Roadmap is its execu-
determine whether it is on target or whether there
tion and implementation. This is where the value
are problems in implementation that need to be
of this exercise is to be realized. Some of the key
addressed. Who will do the monitoring, how will
elements to be considered are the following.
it be done, using what parameters and with what
frequency? The indicators to monitor are not just
How will the roadmap be executed?
the traditional STI inputs such as scientists, en-
Since the roadmap will involve many different gineers, technical publications and patents, but
parts of government, as well as other actors also technology licensing, technical assistance,
including the private sector, foundations, civ- twinning arrangements, etc. More importantly,
il society organizations and other domestic and output indicators relevant to the targeted SDGs
international partners, good governance and co- need to be monitored, such as reduction in hun-
ger, reduction in income and gender inequality, monitoring the impact of some of these trends,
reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, increases particularly the impact of new technologies. Mex-
in use of non-fossil fuel energy, reductions in in- ico, for example, has undertaken a major effort to
fant and maternal mortality, reduction in the in- assess the impact of disruptive technologies on
cidence of communicable diseases, increases in the country (López-Portillo y Rojas, 2018). This has
life expectancy and preservation of biodiversity. included consultations with foreign and domestic
There is also a need to choose appropriate eval- technology experts, as well as extensive consulta-
uation mechanisms and timing (ex-ante, interim, tions with leaders in various industries and with
ex-post), such as through programme theory and civil society. This will provide an important input
formative evaluation methods, open assessments into Mexico’s STI for SDGs Roadmap.
through multi-stakeholder engagements, and
rigorous impact evaluations. The methodologies How will lessons from the evaluation of
available to support monitoring of the roadmap progress on meeting targets and chang-
include GO-SPIN (UNESCO), PERs in STI (World ing conditions be fed back to adjust the
Bank) and SIIG (UNIDO).
plan?
Who will do the evaluation? This is perhaps the weakest part of most plans,
including those of developed countries. There is
This step involves not just deciding who will do
rarely an explicit mechanism to learn from the
the evaluation, but also selecting an institution
evaluations of what is or is not working, in order to
or group that is both appropriately qualified and
adjust the roadmap. In some countries, progress
sufficiently independent from the actors to be
on plans is reviewed on an annual basis. In others,
credible. This may require building proper provi-
reviews are undertaken every three to four years.
sions into the roadmap to create this capacity in
The roadmap needs to be treated as a dynamic
the country.
process that must be adjusted in light of its per-
What mechanisms will there be for con- formance, as well as changes in a domestic and
foreign context and technology.
tinuous horizon scanning for evolving
subnational, national and global condi- The framework for continuous learning and mon-
itoring needs to be built into existing policy pro-
tions?
cesses and practices. It needs to include credible
Since technology, together with science and inno- and effective feedback mechanisms that ensure
vation, is such an important factor in the STI for lessons from implementation are analysed and
SDGs Roadmaps, there needs to be a mechanism acted upon. The framework can benefit from ongo-
to track the potential impact of new technologies ing collaboration with local, national and interna-
that may open up new opportunities or pose new tional stakeholders who can support the collection
challenges. In addition, there needs to be contin- of data, as well as share relevant evidence and
uous scanning for evolving subnational, national methodological approaches.
and global conditions that may affect the plan,
A useful mechanism to establish here is a “learning
such as trade tensions, fragility and conflicts, the
platform” (or “community of practice”) developed
impact of more frequent extreme weather, or oth-
for the roadmap, which can build on the current
er disruptions. Who will be responsible for this and
Voluntary National Review process for country re-
how will it be done? Continuous horizon scanning
porting on plans and progress on the SDGs under
is often done by specialized departments within
the 2030 Agenda. This would make the roadmap
government or think tanks.
more than just an action plan; it would turn it into
Some developing countries are already carefully a learning mechanism bringing together various
ministries and stakeholders and international ex- planning policies and policy instruments, interest-
perience. ed countries might look to the expertise of UNE-
SCO in GO-SPIN or the World Bank in PERs in STI.
It should also be kept in mind, as noted in Step 1
The latter will also be useful for monitoring and
and Box 2.2, that the SDGs are interdependent.
evaluation exercises. Most of the methodologies
Therefore, as experience is acquired in implement-
analysed can support the countries in valuable an-
ing the roadmap and progress is evaluated, it is
alytical exercises, but few of them offer support
also important to consider how to broaden the
for implementation. Those that do are S3, STIP
scope of the roadmap to take account of the syn-
and TIP. Because of these “specializations”, the
ergies and address the trade-offs in adjusting the
interested countries or subnational territories can
plan and moving forward. This is an area in which
choose one or more approaches that match their
sharing of experience and further assistance from
needs at the different stages of the roadmapping
specialized agencies of the international commu-
process. Through the combination of different ap-
nity working on these synergies and trade-offs will
proaches, the capacity-building effect and new
be very useful.
collaborations between different organizations
can bring additional benefits.
2.5 Overview of
methodologies 2.6 Ensuring a
country takes
full advantage
The choice of methodology will depend on the
country’s needs, contexts and objectives. For in-
of the global
stance, if a country’s need is to explore the effec-
tiveness of STI policy instruments, then GO-SPIN,
STI system
STIP or PERs may be appropriate. However, if the
objective is to develop STI roadmaps that focus on
identifying bottlenecks and eliminate weak linkag-
es in the ecosystem, and to harness STI to address
STI for SDGs Roadmaps also need to explicitly
social, economic and environmental challenges,
consider the international dimension. This includes
then from the list of methodologies reviewed,
how they will draw on and make effective use of
Smart Specialisation Strategies (S3), TIP or STIP
the international supply of STI inputs, methodol-
may be more appropriate. Looking at the steps
ogies and approaches, data and evidence-based
from this Guidebook, it can be seen that different
good practices, technical assistance and financing.
methodologies can also serve best during differ-
The way that most countries tap global STI inputs
ent steps in the roadmapping exercise.
for their SDGs is very fragmented and uncoordi-
The review of existing methodologies shows that nated. The objective of this section is to help coun-
none of the current approaches is fully compre- tries to more systematically assess and develop
hensive. One way forward is to explore synergies effective plans for accessing and effectively using
and complementarities among the methodologies global STI inputs to accelerate the achievement of
and set up collaborations among the internation- their SDGs.
al organizations and agencies. Some of them are
To a large extent, access to and use of global STI
highly experienced in stakeholder involvement
resources and expertise is intermediated by a
during the whole process of roadmap design –
country’s national innovation system (see Chapter
here the methodologies such as S3, STIP or TIP
3). There are various dimensions to assessing the
can be especially useful. In terms of analysing and
capacity of the country’s national innovation sys-
tem to acquire, adapt, deploy and use global STI ilarly, are there regulatory or policy barriers to
to help attain the SDGs. There are several useful accessing foreign science and technology da-
methodologies for reviewing a country’s national tabases? In addition, it is important to assess
innovation system, as explained in the Background the adequacy of the country’s social policies.
Paper by the European Commission JRC (see also Emerging technologies offer many opportuni-
the Operational Note for the Guidebook). What is ties, but they can also disrupt jobs and increase
proposed here is more narrowly focused on the inequality. Therefore, it is important that there
extent to which a country’s national innovation are policies and mechanisms to retrain work-
system is supportive and “fit for purpose” for ef- ers, as well as to provide social protection to
fectively tapping into and domestically deploying people who lose their jobs or cannot find em-
elements from the global STI system that can help ployment as a result of new technologies. It
the country attain specific SDGs. Some of the key is also important to consider whether policies
aspects to cover include the following. promote environmental sustainability, as many
technologies that can assist in this area require
■ Assess to what extent the country’s inno-
a favourable policy environment. For example,
vation system is able to identify and match rel-
proper pricing of water and energy, and good
evant STI inputs from the global system, and to
regulation against and charges for environ-
acquire and make effective use of them. This
mental pollution.
includes the capacity of government and other
agents in the innovation system, in particular ■ Examine constraints in the country’s in-
firms and other critical implementing agents.42 frastructure, particularly its STI infrastructure.
This should include both its capacity to under-
■ Assess how well the national innovation
take relevant research to help track, monitor
system is drawing on relevant global STI inputs.
and acquire global technology and innovation,
What types of inputs is it receiving, or not re-
and its capacity to carry out its own R&D to
ceiving, through market and non-market chan-
adapt and develop technology/innovations rel-
nels? Is the national innovation system making
evant to its own needs. It should also go be-
full use of what can be obtained from abroad?
yond the STI infrastructure to include the ICT
If not, what are the obstacles and what is need-
infrastructure (which is now so critical to taking
ed to resolve them? Likewise, are international
advantage of what digital technologies can of-
advice and technical assistance being obtained
fer), the education and skills necessary to use
through non-market channels having a positive
the technologies, and the depth and flexibility
tangible impact? If not, what are the problems
of financial and labour markets.
or obstacles and how can they be addressed?
The government should also consider priority are-
■ Examine how well the country’s policy
as where STI elements can most usefully be ob-
and regulatory framework encourages, rather
tained from abroad43 and what that requires in
than inhibits, access to global technology and
terms of changes to the national innovation sys-
innovation. For example, since multinational
tem. There may be options that require fewer in-
companies and many small and medium en-
ternational inputs, but this may mean longer lead
terprises are the main players in the creation
and dissemination of technology and innova-
tion, what policy or other barriers may there be 43 The Background Paper on International STI Collaboration
to attracting relevant foreign investment? Sim- includes a brief summary of the broad approach of the five
largest donor countries to STI as part of their official de-
velopment assistance (ODA). Governments of developing
countries also need to actively explore how they may de-
42 In a broader analysis of the STI system, it should also include rive more coordination and synergy from the STI activities
an assessment of STI specialization and the competitive po- of various United Nations agencies and other actors on the
sitioning of the country’s key sectors and areas of research. supply side of STI.
times. There may also be seemingly easy options relevant knowledge to meet the SDGs.
of “quick technology transfer” which may mean
■ Initiatives with a longer-term horizon in-
faster results, but less building of local capabil-
clude investing in domestic R&D capacity to
ity. A critical issue here is also that of policy co-
develop new technologies and effectively de-
herence. This is complex but important, because
ploy them to where they are needed, developing
some STI roadmaps for the attainment of specif-
world-class research centres and universities,
ic SDGs may work at cross-purposes with others.
etc. However, some actions to achieve the me-
Open consultations with stakeholders can identify
dium and long-term outcomes have long lead
some of these trade-offs and help identify prob-
times, so they need to be started in the short
lems, and can be complemented by input from
term.
technical experts on alternative ways to address
some of them. Consideration should be given as to how the coun-
try’s STI for SDGs Roadmap can draw on regional
Explicit consideration should be given as to what is
initiatives, such as the African Union’s plans for
expected in the short term (next one to two years)
science, technology and the SDGs, and Digital
versus the medium term (three to five years), and
Transformation Strategy for Africa. In addition to
long term (six to ten years).
addressing cross-border spillover effects inherent
■ Interventions that may be possible in the to some of the SDGs (e.g. water resource man-
short run include improving access to infor- agement in major river basins), there can be im-
mation about what is available international- portant economies of scale in addressing some
ly, changing policies and regulations that may STI for SDG issues. For example, through sharing
constrain that access, and providing high-im- of data and experiences of good practice, training
pact training and awareness building among programmes, articulation of specific challenges
policymakers and key actors in the non-gov- such as regional health hazards, access to safe
ernmental sectors. They may also include ac- water, weather monitoring, protection of environ-
cessing and deploying innovations that allow ment and biodiversity, etc.
leapfrogging, such as smart cell phones rather
In addition, developing countries should consider
than fixed-line phones and computers, off-grid
how they may best aggregate some of their STI
solar and wind electricity rather than central
needs that require concerted global action, such
electric grids to reach dispersed rural areas, or
as developing new vaccines for stopping global
many preventive medicine practices and vac-
pandemics and tropical diseases, and new tech-
cines rather than more expensive treatment,
nologies to help mitigate and adapt to the impact
etc. This should also include how to strength-
of climate change such as more drought-resist-
en the ability of local researchers and research
ance crops, non-fossil-based alternative energy,
institutions to participate in international pro-
etc. Articulating the demand for technologies that
grammes that are developing technologies rel-
can address these needs, and explaining why they
evant to attaining the SDGs.
are relevant to people in many developing coun-
■ Programmes that can be launched in the tries, can help trigger a concerted response from
medium term (three to four years) should focus the international STI supply system.
on strengthening key infrastructural elements,
as well as the broader innovation ecosystems,
that will be necessary to mobilize and deliv-
er STI elements that can accelerate achieve-
ment of the SDGs targeted by the country. They
should also include strengthening some key STI
infrastructure institutions than can help deploy
CHAPTER 3. International
Partnerships
for STI
for SDGs
Roadmaps
This chapter is about the international dimension

of the framework for STI for SDGs Roadmaps pre- 3.1 Landscape of
sented in Chapter 2.44 The objective of this chap-
ter is to outline how international partnerships can international
do more to support the development and imple-
mentation of STI for SDGs Roadmaps. It draws cooperation on
heavily on the Background Paper, International STI
collaboration and investment for Sustainable De- STI for SDGs
velopment Goals.
The structure of this chapter is as follows: Section Domains and actors

1 depicts the global landscape of international
As in the case of national STI for SDGs Roadmaps,
partnerships for STI for the SDGs. It identifies three
at the international level there are also three policy
main communities involved, provides an overview
domains relevant to developing these roadmaps
of the relationship between the global innovation
(Figure 3.1). Although there is some movement
system and that of individual countries, and plac-
towards greater cooperation, efforts are still quite
es the relative size and STI efforts of developing
fragmented. Therefore, they are not as effective as
vs developed countries in a different context. Sec-
they could be if they were more systematic and in-
tion 2 proposes a three-pillar framework for what
cluded more coordinated actions by their different
the international community can do: build national
constituencies.
STI capacity, boost the development and dissem-
ination of STI across countries, and broker inter- SDGs Cooperation
national coalitions to create global public goods
in STI for the SDGs. Section 3 provides a summa- The SDGs cooperation community is the newest,
ry qualitative assessment of the current state of only in existence since 2015, although it builds
international support for using STI for the SDGs on the Millennium Development Goal community.
in developing countries. It outlines what the main Progress on meeting most SDGs is occurring nat-
actors can do: governments, international institu- urally as part of the development process. Inter-
tions, the private sector, the science and profes- national partnerships for the SDGs are explicit in
sional community, foundations and NGOs. Finally, Goal 17, and innovation is explicit in Goal 9, while
Section 4 highlights three main courses of actions more effective use of STI can help to accelerate
for donor country governments, to help marshal achievement of all the Goals.45 Many actors are
STI to accelerate achievement of the SDGs and
link them back to what receiving countries need to
do to take advantage of international cooperation. 45 Goal 9 explicitly includes innovation in the title. Goal 17 ex-
plicitly mentions international cooperation on S&T as one of
three main areas for international partnerships. The SDGs can
only be achieved if there is more explicit use of STI to help
attain them. A content analysis of the 17 Goals found that STI
is formally agreed as a means or end for 12 (out of the 17)
Goals, and 26 (out of the 169) targets (see Annex 2). However,
STI is indirectly relevant for all the Goals, and virtually all the
targets can benefit from some element of science, technology
or innovation. In terms of the gap analysis for SDGs using the
SDG Index and Dashboard commissioned by the Sustainable
Development Solutions Network, the Goals that were lagging
furthest were Goals 2, 3, 9, 12 and 14. In the mid-ground
were Goals 7, 8, 10, 13, 15 and 16. Relatively advanced Goals
44 This is consistent with the technology-related targets under were 1, 4, 5, 6, 11 and 17 (IATT, 2017). Therefore, if the Goals
SDG 17 (17.6, 17.7, 17.8 and 17.16), which focus on inter- are to be achieved faster than with business as usual, there
national partnerships for STI to help achieve the SDGs (see is an additional urgency in the demand for STI inputs that can
Annex 2). help with the Goals that are lagging furthest.
CHAPTER 3. INTERNATIONAL PARTNERSHIPS FOR STI FOR SDGS ROADMAPS 65
DEVELOPMENT are relatively small as described later in this chap-

COOPERATION ter. Moreover, the STI components are not all fo-
cused on helping to achieve the SDGs. Nor should
they be, as the goals of development cooperation
• Bilateral ODA include advancing national interests. However,
• Development Finance
(IFIs, Foundations) there could be more effective use of development
• Private sector: FDI, CSR cooperation to use STI to accelerate achievement
of the SDGs. The actions by different players will
be outlined in the next section.
• Research institutes,
scientists, engineers
• UN, TFM, Technology
• Academies of science,
Bank for LDCs
STI Cooperation
science diplomacy,
• Thematic mechanism
International Forums
• Cross-border business &
(e.g. IPCC) There is growing awareness that a global innova-
• Governments businesses,
foundations, R&D,
CSO tion system must include more active participation
technology transfer
by developing countries; that the system has many
STI SDGs
COOPERATION COOPERATION key actors – not just governments, academia and
the private sector, but indigenous knowledge and
frugal innovation holders; and that foundations
are playing an important role in funding R&D and
Figure 3.1: International STI for SDGs cooperation:
innovation, which was previously more limited to
domains and actors governments and the private sector. The STI com-
munity is increasingly aware of the need to incor-
Source: Authors
porate SDGs into their work (UNCTAD, 2018, 2019;
OECD, 2018). There is a need for a new innovation
system that pays more attention to inclusiveness
involved in SDGs cooperation communities, rang- and environmental sustainability, which is partial-
ing from governments to foundations, the private ly addressed by some of the ongoing internation-
sector, the academic and professional community, al STI collaborations. To achieve the SDGs, there
NGOs and civil society. International cooperation is a need to direct more STI effort towards those
to help achieve the SDGs is ongoing, and some Goals. There is also a need to increase capability in
of the SDGs could be attained with enough time least developed countries to help them to leverage
and resources. The key point is to accelerate their STI for achievement of the SDGs.
achievement. For this to be accomplished, there
needs to be a stronger emphasis on leveraging STI To a limited extent, the three communities are
more effectively into plans to achieve the SDGs. slowly converging, as development cooperation
is mainstreaming the SDGs, and STI cooperation
Development Cooperation – which historically has focused more on com-
petitiveness and cooperation in R&D among ad-
The development cooperation community includes
vanced countries – is beginning to focus more on
many actors, ranging from governments, the
the SDGs and on helping developing countries to
United Nations system, multilateral development
achieve them. However, as will be developed be-
banks and international foundations to civil soci-
low, there is much more that can be done.
ety organizations, professional societies and indi-
vidual citizens. The objectives are also very broad, The relationship between global and national
including elements of helping developing countries innovation systems
to achieve the SDGs, as well as strategic national
and personal interests. There are elements of STI Figure 3.2 presents a stylized representation of
support in development collaboration, but these the global STI system, linking the global STI sup-
ply to a country’s national innovation system and The middle of Figure 3.2 depicts the national inno-
the STI needed to accelerate achievement of the vation system,47 distinguishing between four main
SDGs. For explanatory purposes, the internation- kinds of actors (universities and research centres,
al STI supply can be conceived as consisting of firms and organizations, national and subnation-
global science supply and global technology and al governments, and consumers and civil society),
innovation supply. and showing the broader context and framework
conditions, and the underlying natural resource
The main forms of science collaboration are train-
endowment.
ing in science and mathematics, joint research
with participants from developing countries, for- The critical elements are the linkages, flows and
mal scientific collaborations and networks (e.g. accumulation of knowledge, people and finance
the Belmont Forum), mobility of researchers and among the actors. The broader context includes
highly skilled labour, and research into the spe- key infrastructures of most relevance to the
cific needs of developing countries. Science is national innovation system, such as the STI in-
also transferred by making available the output frastructure (universities and research parks;
of scientific work through scientific and techni- research centres; business incubators and accel-
cal papers, international science conferences and erators; metrology, standards and quality con-
symposiums, and scientific databases. Many of trol, etc.) and ICT infrastructure (now a critical
these collaborations occur through non-market infrastructure not just for the national innovation
mechanisms.46 system, but for the economy more generally). It
also includes key institutions (finance and ven-
The main actor in technology and innovation
ture capital; labour and capital markets) and the
supply is the private sector. The main way that
policy and regulatory regime (macro policy; busi-
technology and innovation are disseminated to de-
ness environment, including intellectual property
veloping countries is through market mechanisms
protection and the rule of law; STI, competition,
such as the import of manufactured goods (par-
social and environmental policies).
ticularly capital goods and technology-intensive
intermediary goods), technology licensing, foreign National innovation systems have many objectives
direct investment, ICT and commercial services, driven by key actors (such as the pursuit of knowl-
patents and trademarks, and training in engineer- edge by scientists, the pursuit of competitive ad-
ing and management. A lot is also disseminated vantage by firms, the pursuit of better livelihoods
more informally through non-market mechanisms by civil society, and the security, competitiveness
such as international travel, attendance at inter- and welfare goals of governments). The agree-
national technology and commercial fairs, reverse ment by the global community on the SDGs in
engineering and copying, and informal networks. 2015 put another broad, multi-faceted demand on
The international STI system can interact with the the global and national innovation system, with so-
supply as well as the demand side of the national cial inclusion and environmental sustainability as
innovation system. The science element interacts additional key objectives (United Nations, 2015).
particularly with the supply side, while the tech-
nology and innovation elements interact primarily
with the demand side.
46 These are activities that are not provided through a transac- 47 There is a broad literature on national innovation systems.
tion of money paid for goods or services based on a market What is presented here is a brief sketch that highlights the
relationship. They include grants and prizes, and collabora- importance of keeping in mind the different agents, as well
tions where different parties contribute time and effort to- as the broader institutional, policy and social context in
wards a common goal. which they operate.
INTERNATIONAL STI Supply
Global Science Supply Global Technology and

Innovation Supply
• University collaboration
• Joint research • Manufactured goods
• Papers, publications • Foreign direct investment
• Foreign science education • ICT and commercial services
• Electronic platforms • Intellectual property
• Foreign education and training
in engineering and management
Government: oversight, resolution of market and systemic failures, coordination
Domestic Supply Accumulation/Allocation Domestic Demand
University, research institutes Physical capital Firms, farms, public

technology extension services institutions, citizens
NATIONAL INNOVATION System
Human capital
Human capital Incentive to accumulate
Knowledge • Macro context
Support to user capability • Competitive structure
upgrading • Trade regime and intl.
• Productivity/quality Barriers to all accumulation networks
extension services • Credit
• Process/best practice • Entry/exit barriers Firm and farm capabilities
dissemination • Business/regulatory climate • Management competencies
• Consulting services • Rule of law • Production systems
• Technological absorption
R&D systems Barriers to knowledge and production
accumulation
• Rigidities (e.g. labour)
• Seed/venture capital
• Innovation externalities
• Productivity growth • Climate action

FROM SDGs
DEMANDS
• Jobs • Gender equity

• Health • Peace
• Food ...
• Energy, clean water • No poverty
Figure 3.2: Positioning the national innovation system to benefit from international STI supply and address the SDG demands
Source: Authors, based on Cirera and Maloney (2017) for the middle part of the figure.
3.2 Three-pillar addressing the SDGs. One objective of this type

of international collaboration is to shape interna-
framework for tional STI markets and remove bottlenecks im-

peding the flow of knowledge, people and finance
international directed towards the SDGs. This includes adapting

international framework conditions to foster exist-
partnerships ing STI for the SDGs, as well as promoting strong-

er non-market flows such as scientific, academic
– Build, Boost, and professional cooperation. Another objective

is to foster STI collaborations to create new STI
Broker that can help countries address local challenges

in attaining the SDGs. As a result of this interven-
tion, knowledge, people and investments relevant
The low STI capacity of developing countries for the SDGs will reach countries and communi-
is a critical constraint to effective international ties where they are most needed, more effective-
collaboration.48 It applies to a variety of actors, ly. This pillar also includes supplying global public
including firms and entrepreneurs, research and goods (GPGs) needed to facilitate better matching
education systems, government, consumers/us- of STI supply and demand, such as data, expertise
ers, and civil society and citizens. This is there- and scientific knowledge.
fore reflected in the three-pillar framework for The third pillar focuses on engaging in interna-
international STI collaboration proposed below in tional collective STI actions with the ambition of
Figure 3.3.49 tackling global challenges. The level of interven-
The first pillar for collaboration focuses on tion is focused on enhancing the global STI sys-
strengthening national STI capacity, mostly in tem to endow it with collective capabilities and
developing countries, to address challenges un- institutional settings to undertake collective action
derpinning the SDGs. It includes building both at a large enough scale to address critical gaps.
endogenous capacity and capability to absorb These collective STI actions have an explicit focus
external knowledge and technology. This pillar on tackling global challenges and achieving trans-
of international collaboration benefits individual formative impact. This pillar is key to safeguard-
countries directly. The support may be provided by ing the global commons (common-pool resources)
another country (bilateral collaboration), a group as well as collectively developing new knowledge
of countries, international organizations or scien- and solutions to achieve the SDGs. The focus is on
tific and professional societies. planetary STI capabilities.
The second pillar for collaboration focuses on There is a strong science policy community, and a
boosting international flows of relevant knowl- well-developed science advisory ecosystem, that
edge, technology and innovation across countries, can be mobilized to help create these coalitions.
and on supporting cross-border STI collaborations Part of what is missing is a greater willingness by
governments and other actors, including the pri-
vate sector, to commit resources and organization
to supporting these coalitions. Another major chal-
48 Also see Colglazier (2018) for a strong rationale of why it is
important to create more STI capacity in developing countries. lenge is developing appropriate governance to co-
49 Underlying analysis, case studies and a typology of vari-
ordinate and manage the multiple actors needed
ous interventions are elaborated in the Background Paper to advance not only the necessary STI, but also the
on International STI collaboration and investment for SDGs; deployment systems to deliver it at a scale that
World Bank (2018b) applies the three-pillar “build, boost,
broker” framework to creating opportunities and mitigating can make a difference.
risks of emerging technologies.
The pillars, and their respective actions and building local capacity (build), knowledge shar-
collaboration mechanisms, are interdependent ing, e.g. via participation in multi-stakeholder
and therefore need to be “geared” towards fit- platforms (boost), and facilitating integrated in-
ting each other to maximize collective impact ternational collective actions addressing global
through multiplier effects. These interdepend- challenges and global transformations (broker).
ences are not necessarily linear or one-direction- Similarly, Mission Innovation includes information
al. For example, focusing only on strengthening and knowledge-sharing activities (boost) as well
the STI capacities of developing countries cannot as joint technology demonstration (broker). Table
overcome bottlenecks in international STI flows or 3.1 summarizes current practices in internation-
effectively address challenges relating to GPGs. al STI cooperation for each of the three pillars.
Boosting international STI flows alone will not Under boosting STI flows, the table distinguish-
overcome capability gaps at the national level. es typical non-market from market mechanisms,
Taking international collective action will not re- since they have different targets for support and
place building country-level capacities. instruments. The last column of the table gives
some illustrative examples, although many of the
Successful instruments and collaboration mech-
examples address more than one pillar. While it is
anisms tend to address more than one pillar of
quite challenging to broker global coalitions, there
collaboration. For example, CGIAR (formerly the
are numerous historical examples as well as some
Consultative Group for International Agricultural
ongoing efforts (see the Background Paper on in-
Research) includes dedicated activities aimed at
ternational STI collaboration).
• Develop human, institutional and

policy capabilities of key STI actors,
1. BUILD
COUNTRY build STI infrastructures
STI CAPACITY • Help design STI for SDGs Roadmaps
• Support market and non-market flows

2. BOOST of STI across countries
INTERNATIONAL
STI FLOWS • Support cross-border STI collaboration
to address local challenges
• Mobilize ambitious STI collective actions

3. BROKER to address global critical gaps
STI COALITIONS
• Transform global STI system towards
acceleration of SDGs
Figure 3.3: Three pillars for international STI collaborations for the SDGs
Source: Authors
Given the complexity and urgency of the chal- per cent of that of high-income countries.
lenges we face, countries and the international
■ R&D capability (as proxied by R&D ex-
community need to engage in all three pillars of
penditure) is even more skewed, with develop-
international collaboration to mobilize STI for
ing countries accounting for just 23 per cent
the SDGs. The three pillars should not be trans-
of world R&D. Moreover, the bulk of the R&D
lated into a simple step-by-step strategy (e.g. first
in developing countries is performed by China
focusing on improving country STI capacities, then
(not indicated in the table but this is $258 bil-
addressing international knowledge flows and
lion or 60 per cent of all R&D by developing
considering international collective STI action). The
countries). Lower middle-income countries ac-
importance of each pillar of international STI col-
count for only 1.9 per cent of global R&D, and
laboration needs to reflect the specific challenges
low-income countries perform virtually no R&D.
and context. In some cases, collective STI action
for GPGs can be used as a strategic lens to con- ■ The output of scientific and technical jour-
centrate international efforts to build specific STI nal articles is less skewed than R&D expendi-
capacities and infrastructures in (mainly but not tures, with developing countries accounting for
only) developing countries that are either most- 38.9 per cent of the total. The lower middle-in-
ly exposed to specific challenges, or could create come countries’ share (7.5 per cent) is almost
more value benefiting other countries or disadvan- four times as high as their share of R&D ex-
taged communities. penditures.
■ The largest 1,000 companies account for

3.3 Key priorities 42 per cent of global R&D ($782 billion out
of a total of around $1,860 billion in nominal
and actors dollars).50 Moreover, transnational companies
are the main mode of global dissemination of
in STI technology and innovation, through their trade
and foreign direct investment activities and
collaboration technical information transferred through sup-
ply chain links.
for SDGs ■ Cross-border data flow, proxied by interna-
tional network bandwidth used, is the activity
It is helpful to put the key actors and elements most concentrated in high-income countries
of the three pillars in perspective before outlin- (even including China and India, the middle-in-
ing what the government can do. Figure 3.4 pro- come countries have small shares). This indi-
vides some details on the relative representation cates the serious risks to developing countries
of countries at different income levels, in terms of of being left behind in digital transformation.
population, GDP and STI activities.
The key points to note are that most science, tech-
The main points to note are: nology and innovation is performed in high-income
countries, to meet their needs and to strengthen
■ While the developing world (middle- and their international competitive position. Develop-
low-income countries) accounts for 83 per cent ing countries have much greater challenges than
of global population, it only accounts for 36 per high-income countries in meeting the SDGs, be-
cent of world GDP. These differences are less
pronounced for upper middle-income countries,
and most pronounced for low-income countries
whose average per capita incomes are only 1.8 50 See Jaruzelski and others (2018) for R&D by largest com-
panies.
DISTRIBUTION OF STI FLOWS, RELATIVE SIGNIFICANCE

BY COUNTRY INCOME GROUPS OF STI FLOWS
Population 17% 34% 40% 12%
GDP 64% 28% 8%

Manufactured goods import
S&T journal articles 62% 31% 8%
FDI net inflow 72% 20% 7% Foreign

Manufactured goods education
23% 7%
import STI in ODA
R&D expenditure 75% 23%
Outgoing studends 75% 18%

in tertiary education Business service
FDI import
Business service import 80% 13%
Payments for use of IP 84% 14%

IPR
Used International 87% 10% payment
bandwidth
Figure 3.4: Distribution and significance of STI flows to developing countries
Source: Authors
cause their SDG gaps are much larger. In addition, acquire foreign knowledge.52 As can be seen in Fig-
most R&D is performed by the private sector, in ure 3.4 (right panel), these market flows are much
particular large multinational companies. larger than the STI-oriented activities of ODA.
To advance international STI collaboration more Figure 3.5 quantifies ODA disbursement for sci-
fit for the SDGs, it is useful to examine the cur- ence and innovation and for technology, by main
rent situation from the perspectives of developing ODA donor countries. As can be seen, the disburse-
countries. Most of the activities by ODA, STI and ments for science and innovation are much larg-
SDG communities oriented towards STI for SDGs er than those for technology. Combining the data
are non-market.51 This contrasts sharply with mar- from Figures 3.4 and 3.5, the following conclu-
ket-driven flows that transfer technology and inno- sions can be drawn regarding the relative actions
vation that may be relevant for the SDGs, and are of the key actors with respect to the three pillars.
driven mostly by private sector activity. The main
■ ODA for STI is very small compared to
market flows are net inflows of foreign direct in-
market STI flows. In addition, ODA emphasizes
vestment, imports of manufactured products, im-
capacity building for STI (with debatable out-
ports of ICT and business services, payments for
comes and measurement issues) and funding
the use of intellectual property rights, and tertiary
for R&D, but appears less focused on boosting
education abroad, which is an important way to
the flow of existing STI across countries, and
very little on brokering global public goods be-
cause it is largely delivered through bilateral
programmes. However, despite their small size,
51 The activities of NGOs tend to be mostly non-market. The ODA and multilateral STI-related activities can
activities of international institutions fall partly under ODA
but mostly under market activities by the private sector.
be used by governments to leverage those of
This is because, while they finance some STI capacity, they
mostly finance many STI-related activities (even R&D ac-
tivities and STEM education) through commercial loans to
governments and projects co-financed with the private sec- 52 More details in the Background Paper on international STI
tor that deploy existing technology and innovation. collaboration.
Table 3.1 Current practices in international STI

cooperation for SDGs
UNIT OF INTERVENTION
BUILD Individuals
STI CAPABILITY
Human capital base and institutions
Broader STI system
BOOST Non-market Link/strengthen existing STI for SDGs

STI FLOWS
Increase new STI for local challenges
Market Barriers to markets
Trade and investment flows
BROKER Norms, values, standards, statistics

STI COALITIONS
Coalitions addressing critical global gaps
Transformative STI system (global/regional)
Source: Authors, informed by World Bank and

OECD; Background Paper on international STI
collaboration for SDGs Roadmaps.
ABBREVIATIONS: ASEAN, Association of Southeast Asian Nations; ACE, Africa Higher Education Centers of Excellence; TNA,
Technology Needs Assessment; PASET, Partnership for skills in Applied Sciences, Engineering and Technology; AOSP, Africa Open
Science Platform; GCRF, Global Challenges Research Fund; WEF, World Economic Forum; NVA, New Vision for Agriculture; WRG,
Water Resources Group; DE4A, Digital Economy for Africa.
AREAS OF INTERNATIONAL SUPPORT SELECT

(INSTRUMENTS AND RECIPIENTS) EXAMPLES
■ Researchers: scholarships, research grants ASEAN-India S&T Development
■ Absorptive and innovation capacity of farms/firms: training, Fund
Business Development Service (BDS), agricultural/management
extension services
■ STI policymakers: training, peer learning, learning-by-doing
■ STEM education, digital skills, basic and applied research institutes World Bank ACE
■ Entrepreneurship/deployment system, intermediaries, networks UN agencies STI training
■ Public service delivery (e.g. health, education, water, conservation) programmes
■ STI-related infrastructure (quality systems, connectivity, etc.) UNEP TNA

■ STI system diagnostics, policy advice/assistance for reforms STIP/GO-SPIN/PERs
■ Sectoral R&D and innovation systems (e.g. energy)
■ University partnerships, exchange programmes UN Multi-stakeholder Forum on STI

■ Multi-stakeholder platforms, networks, communities of practitioners for SDGs, PASET
■ Facilitate a multi-stakeholder collaborative approach to combine AOSP, EU JRC S3
efforts
■ Supply-push: joint research projects CGIAR, UK GCRF

■ Demand-pull: government procurement, prizes X Prize; Horizon Europe
international research partnerships
■ Support development and use of the online technology platform TFM online platform
for matchmaking STI supply and SDG demands
■ Donor/international financial institution projects to crowd in and Lighting Africa

catalyze R&D, technology transfer and innovation linkages through
US Feed the Future
private capital and blended finance
■ Treaties and other agreements (e.g. intellectual property) WEF: NVA, WRG
conducive to STI flows
■ Global visions, strategies, monitoring reports UN Digital Cooperation Panel

■ Cross-border monitoring and evaluation systems
■ Partnership/funding/governance frameworks US PEPFAR, DE4A, WEF Frontier

■ Mission-innovation programmes, grand challenges 2030
■ Joint or aligned fiscal/procurement/research policies Horizon 2020, TFM

■ Explore synergies and promote system-wide leverage to support
international partnerships and multi-stakeholder initiatives for the
design and implementation of roadmaps
other actors, including the scientific communi- tant role in delivering under the second pillar,
ty, NGOs and the private sector, as will be de- through its role in creating and transferring
veloped in the next section. knowledge and technologies through market
activities, including foreign direct investment,
■ STI cooperation is more focused on push-
R&D, sale of intellectual property and sale of
ing the boundaries of knowledge and perform-
manufactured products and business services.
ing R&D than on building country capacity to
Typically, however, market incentives do not
use STI for the SDGs, which is relatively small
necessarily assure inclusive outcomes for the
compared to international collaboration among
most marginalized groups. The private sector
advanced countries.53 However, the STI com-
has a weaker role in building country capabil-
munity can potentially play a highly significant
ity to use STI for the SDGs, although multina-
role under all pillars. This is very forcefully ar-
tionals often build the absorptive capacities of
gued in the Global Sustainable Development
small and medium enterprises and improve
Report 2019 (Independent Group of Scientists,
management practices through supply chains
2019; see also Box 2.2), which emphasizes in
and contracts, strengthen key elements of the
particular the need for the scientific community
national innovation system such as research
to go much further in developing new science
centres, and develop STI-related training pro-
and technology to take advantage of syner-
grammes at universities. The private sector is
gies among the Goals, and to manage trade-
very weak on the third pillar, because almost
offs and address negative impacts. The role of
by definition there are problems with incen-
the STI community under Pillar 3 is limited by
tive due to lack of appropriability, high risk and
the difficulty in brokering coalitions to take on
complexity. However, more recently, the private
large-scale challenges, due to problems relat-
sector has been realizing that it has a critical
ing to scale, limited finance and workable gov-
and major role to play in achieving the SDGs,
ernance arrangements.
as illustrated by a major initiative launched in
■ SDG cooperation on STI, such as the Unit- January 2020 (see Box 3.1), showing that there
ed Nations TFM, has not been able to achieve is great potential for governments to work to-
much under any of the pillars, despite the gether with the private sector and the scientific
clearly articulated need to harness STI to and NGO community to boost and broker STI
achieve the SDGs. This is largely because of for the SDGs.
its limited funding to boost the flow of existing
The next section will focus on what governments
knowledge, broker concrete collaborations to
can do to make effective use of ODA, as well as to
create new STI, or build country capacity be-
leverage more STI activities by other key actors in
yond some training, methodologies and policy
the international community.
advice. However, it has a potentially highly sig-
nificant role in brokering global STI coalitions
to address grand SDG challenges, through its
advocacy and convening power (see Annex 1).
This is an area that will be addressed in the
next chapter.
■ The private sector plays a very impor-
53 Since most of these activities are non-market, it is harder

to quantify the actual volume of R&D focused on develop-
ing countries and less on STI for SDGs. Details in the Back-
ground Paper.
2016 USD million 2016 USD million

0,0 0,4 0,8 0,0 0,2 0,4 0,6 0,8 1,0
United States Korea
United Kingdom United States
Germany Germany
Canada United Kingdom
Australia Canada
France EU Institutions
Sweden Japan
Netherlands France
Norway Switzerland
DAC
Switzerland Sweden
Australia
DAC
Belgium
Japan Belgium
Korea Norway
Finland Denmark
New Zealand Finland
Italy Netherlands
Denmark Austria
Spain Italy
Ireland Rest of DAC
Austria EBRD
Rest of DAC IDA
EU Institutions IADB
IBRD AsDB Special Funds
IDB Invest
IADB
IBRD
IDA
IFC
WHO
Multilateral
UNICEF
Global Fund
Multilateral
Climate Investment Funds

Global Green
Growth Institute IDB Special Fund
IDB Special Fund World Health Organisation
IFC AsDB Special Funds
Arab Fund (AFESD) UNFPA
UNICEF Concessional: UNDP Concessional
Core research finance:
Other multilateral Other multilateral ICT sector
agencies Concessional: agencies
Other science Concessional
United Arab Emirates United Arab Emirates finance:
and innovation
Non DAC
Non DAC
Other sectors
Russia Other non-DAC
Non-concessional: Non-concessional
Other non-DAC Core research finance:
ICT sector
Non-concessional:
Other science and
innovation
ABBREVIATIONS: DAC, Development Assistance Committee; IBRD, International

Bank for Reconstruction and Development; IADB, Inter-American Development Bank;
IDA, International Development Association; IDB, International Development Bank;
IFC, International Finance Corporation; AFESD, Arab Fund for Social and Economic
Development; EBRD, European Bank for Reconstruction and Development; AsDB,
Asian Development Bank.
Figure 3.5: Sources and content of STI in ODA supporting science and innovation (left
panel) and technology (right panel): disbursements in 2016 prices
Source: Ericsson and Mealy (2019)

Box 3.1 New private sector initiative on unlocking

technology for the SDGs
The World Economic Forum (WEF) is one of the institutions hosting multi-stakeholder
initiatives to systematically onboard private sector efforts to address global challenges.
Its key initiatives to engage industries, international development partners and govern-
ments of developed and developing countries, and to integrate technology development/
deployment with investments, policy reforms and other complementary measures, in-
clude the New Vision for Agriculture and the Water Resources Group (for case studies,
see Background Paper).
At its Annual Meeting in 2020, WEF launched a new initiative called Frontier 2030 - a
New Fourth Industrial Revolution for Global Goods Platform, with an accompanying re-
port. The report analysed over 300 Fourth Industrial Revolution technologies that could
make contributions to meeting the SDGs. However, they found that there were significant
barriers and risks to scaling these applications. The barriers include “poor data access and
quality, a lack of basic infrastructure, an inadequate governance and policy environment,
upskilling and reskilling needs and – in particular for public goods-focused solutions – a
lack of viable business models and commercial incentives for scaling” (p.7). The basic
argument is that business as usual is not an option for achieving the SDGs by 2030 and
that “a gearshift is urgently needed, from the current race to deploy new technologies
for short-term growth and private gain to a more long-sighted and principled approach
that actively manages and harnesses the role technology can play for humanity and the
environment” (p.29). The report argues that the private sector has a critical role to play,
in partnership with government, the scientific community and civil society, in developing
and scaling the technologies to facilitate achievement of the SDGs, and in managing the
downside to that technological revolution – from security and control risks to socioec-
onomic risks such as job displacement, and even unintended environmental risks. They
identified eight “enablers needed to continually accelerate innovation and investment
into new solutions that help tackle our grandest challenges, and to create viable markets
for those solutions in the long term”:
1. Responsible technology governance: from “do no harm” to “principled and positive

impact”
2. Leadership: leadership to mobilize commitments and standards
3. Partnerships: collective action and collaboration
4. Public policy: policies and regulation for the Fourth Industrial Revolution
5. Finance mechanisms: stimulating the Fourth Industrial Revolution for good market
solutions
6. Breakthrough innovation: shaping an innovation agenda to tackle the most press-

ing social and environmental challenges
7. Data and tools: new models for data collaboration scaled for Global Goal impact
8. Skills: upskilling, reskilling, interdisciplinary talent and collaboration
They issued a call to action for tech sector executives and government leaders, advocat-
ing “coordinating, mobilizing and tracking commitments, and action, around a collective
mission to accelerate and realize technology’s potential to tackle the Global Goals” and or-
ganizing vital pathways that also help different stakeholders recognize the respective and
complementary roles that each needs to play to change business as usual (WEF, 2020).
©ssuaphoto /Depositphotos.com, 2021

3.4 What donor tiatives to improve the use of STI in developing

countries to help them achieve the SDGs.55
country and These include three areas:
pilot country ■ Improve the coherence and effectiveness

of the STI components in the ODA assistance
governments they provide to developing countries
Leverage the broader STI supply beyond

can do
■
what they do through direct ODA, by providing
incentives or otherwise facilitating market and
non-market channels
Donor country governments
■ Create international coalitions of STI ac-
It has become clear to the international develop- tors to take on grand challenges
ment community that more effective use of in-
novation is critical to achieve the SDGs, in light Improve the coherence and effectiveness of
of the needs and limited financial resources. An the STI components in ODA assistance
upcoming report by the Development Cooperation
The World Bank took a detailed look at the dis-
Directorate of the OECD (2020) found “at its best,
bursement of STI-ODA intersections in 2017 by
the innovation work DAC donors have led and sup-
the five largest donors: United States, Germa-
ported involves the fusion of new technologies
ny, UK, Japan and France (Kanehira and others,
and technical advances with new business models
forthcoming 2020). Based on this analysis, and
and organizational approaches, and efforts to re-
the one by OECD (Ericsson and Mealy, 2019),
form and transform institutions, norms and politi-
concessional finance for STI is estimated to range
cal context.” It argues that “this kind of innovation
from $10 billion to over $20 billion per year, rep-
… is the best pathway for achieving the SDGs and
resenting six to ten per cent of total concessional
other global commitments.” However, it found that
finance by DAC members, multilateral organiza-
the efforts are fragmented and that not enough
tions and other countries, according to the Back-
is being done to make innovation a major driver
ground Paper on international STI collaboration.
of development assistance. It urges DAC members
Data on these ODA for STI programmes and ac-
and other development organizations to support
tivities are not very well reported, shared or ana-
innovation “as a centrally important and cross-cut-
lysed; there is an urgent need to build up a robust
ting strategic capability,” and to “[harness] … this
and comprehensive evidence-based mechanism
capability courageously and systematically in pur-
for coordinating within and across donor coun-
suit of the most pressing and complex develop-
tries, to capitalize on respective comparative
ment and humanitarian goals.”54
advantages and achieve greater impact and im-
In the language of this Guidebook, this includes proved outcomes.56
more efforts to build, boost and broker STI activities
for attainment of the SDGs. Donor country govern-
ments – not just those from developed countries,
but also developing country governments with 55 Triangular cooperation, where a developed country helps
strong STI capabilities and development assis- finance the transfer of relevant technology and innovation
from one developing country to another, is also an impor-
tance programmes – can undertake various ini- tant element, particularly for grassroots and other inclusive
and frugal innovations that commonly originate in develop-
ing countries.
54 See more details in Background Paper on international STI 56 Further analysis of the coherence of action across countries
collaboration for the SDGs is needed to overcome barriers.
Donor country governments also need to think Leverage the country’s broader STI supply to
strategically about what makes the most sense build and boost STI in developing countries
for them in supporting STI for the SDGs in devel-
oping countries. Currently, STI support from donor Donor country governments can also try to lever-
countries to developing countries is highly frag- age the broader supply of STI from their countries.
mented.57 More systematic efforts are needed to While ODA is just a fraction of the total STI ele-
enable donors to understand what different min- ments a country supplies to developing countries,
istries and agencies are already doing in this area. it can be leveraged if countries are able to use it
The joint European Union programmes, open to in- strategically to influence the broader country sup-
ternational research and innovation collaboration, ply of STI. Unfortunately, most donor country gov-
can provide a good example of such an activity.58 ernments have little systematic knowledge of how
There are different country models of STI-related the private sector, universities, think tanks, NGOs,
ODA assistance. The Background Paper provides a professional associations, diaspora networks or
brief overview of those of the five largest donors individuals are supplying STI inputs to developing
(United States, Germany, UK, Japan and France). countries.
There are advantages and disadvantages to each To develop more effective assistance and lever-
of these variants. age STI inputs to accelerate achievement of the
Donor countries should consider their national SDGs in developing countries, it is important to
strategic foreign policy and competitiveness inter- know who in the country is doing what, and to
ests, as well as their STI strengths and capabili- understand what drives them, what they are ac-
ties, as the basis for defining the objectives and complishing, and how they could be organized to
scope of their contributions to STI for the SDGs in have greater impact. This assessment is funda-
developing countries. In addition, donor countries mental to developing a realistic vision of what can
may find it useful to undertake public expenditure be accomplished, what role the government could
reviews of the efficiency and effectiveness of the play, and how it is to be done. This requires con-
STI components in their ODA.59 sultation within the government as well as with
relevant stakeholders in the country, such as the
It is likely that their interests would be better private sector, academia and civil society, as their
served if they were to develop more strategic and involvement will be important for formulating and
better integrated activities across government de- delivering the initiatives.
partments/agencies and with other agents in their
national innovation systems, as well as with other As previously noted, the private sector is the main
countries, and be more systematic about develop- agent in the generation and global dissemination
ing their country’s contributions. of technology and innovation. While it is primar-
ily motivated by its own profit-making interests,
it does undertake STI activities that can be rele-
vant to achieving the SDGs, where it finds profit-
able opportunities (e.g. more energy-efficient and
57 The efforts of many agencies as well as of multilateral de-
velopment banks are also very fragmented even with-in the alternative energy technologies, lower cost health
agencies, and especially across institutions. This is an en- services, cures for diseases, lower cost sustainable
demic challenge that should be addressed in the context of
shelters). Moreover, it responds to regulations and
developing international STI for SDGs roadmaps.
incentives and other instruments that the govern-
58 The European Union and its Member States are the world’s
major donors of development aid. ment can use to influence its activities. There are
therefore opportunities to try to influence private
59 The World Bank has developed a guidebook for undertaking
public expenditure reviews for STI within a country (World sector contributions to STI for the SDGs, such as
Bank, 2014), which may provide some useful insights into carbon pricing on fossil fuels, and regulations on
how donor countries can review the effectiveness of the STI
components in their ODA.
emissions and other environmental “externalities”.
Innovative public procurement can also have an The government should identify what is required
important role in generating new solutions. to improve leverage through each of these routes.
This is related to how much political support there
Likewise, governments can influence the activi-
is at the highest levels of government, not only to
ties of NGOs, academics, researchers and citizens
make more effective use of the STI assistance that
through a wide range of policy instruments other
is already being provided, but also whether there
than direct finance, as summarized in Table 2.2.
is an appetite for increasing support, and even
Thus, there is room for governments to encour-
taking a global leadership role in developing some
age other agents to deploy STI efforts towards the
relevant technology or innovation. However, even
SDGs, including activities directed at the specific
making effective use of the existing overall budget
challenges of developing countries.
requires some political capital, because there are
On the government side, this will necessarily in- always entrenched vested interests in retaining
volve the ministries of foreign affairs, development, ongoing programmes. It also requires coordination
science and technology, telecommunications, in- across different ministries and programmes, and
dustry and commerce, finance and many others, developing processes to accomplish this, as well
as well as relevant agencies and committees of as some lead agency or point of contact at a high
congress or parliament and the head of govern- level of government such as the Head of State or
ment. It should also involve the mass media to Cabinet Office.
build public support for the plans, and take into
As in the case of receiving country STI for SDGs
account the STI needs of developing countries that
Roadmaps, those for donors should have clear
the government aims to assist. The specific Goals
provisions for monitoring and evaluation of re-
and targets should be set after considering the dif-
sults, as well as periodic readjustments in light
ferent approaches, to reflect what is politically and
of what works and what needs to be improved or
economically feasible.
changed. For this to happen, it would also be use-
Leveraging activities being done by other agents ful to consider formally monitoring these specific
or institutions in the country includes providing in- STI for SDGs Roadmap activities as part of ODA
centives to increase the STI support they give, such peer review mechanisms (such as through the De-
as matching research grants and scholarships, velopment Assistance Committee of the OECD). It
co-funding technical assistance, or underwriting would also be helpful to set up a peer learning
some of the risks in financing such ventures. It mechanism to share approaches and best prac-
also includes non-financial levers, such as provid- tices among donor countries, including non-DAC
ing leadership and coordination for activities in the members active in this area such as China, India,
country supporting greater STI inputs to help de- Brazil and South Africa.
veloping countries achieve the SDGs.
The roadmaps should identify direct government
Stakeholder consultation should be held to create financing, as well as what is expected from other
consensus and ensure buy-in from different actors actors in the country and from other international
in developing a detailed plan of action. This should donors and the recipient countries themselves. It
set out clear goals and priority actions, including should also identify concrete monitorable mile-
the responsibilities of the different agents, financ- stones over specific time periods.
ing, special incentives, etc. Governments have
many policy instruments, including direct action
Broker international coalitions of STI actors to
through their ministries, agencies and special pro-
take on grand challenges
grammes, tax and incentive systems, awareness Beyond what donor governments can do to coordi-
campaigns and moral suasion, and coordinating nate their own country’s STI supply to developing
the actions of others. countries, they should also consider creating inter-
national coalitions of STI actors to address grand financing, monitoring, progress evaluation and
challenges. As has been clearly articulated in the direction/redirection
Global Sustainable Development Report (2019),
■ Designing the ecosystem of other agents
there is an urgent need for more concerted scien-
and institutions (e.g. government agencies, en-
tific effort to address the synergies and particu-
trepreneurs and firms, NGOs, extension agents,
larly the trade-offs among SDGs, as well as some
input suppliers, community organizations, fi-
of the global trends that may negatively impact
nancing agents) that are required to get the
achievement of the goals, such as climate change,
technology to the ultimate beneficiary
increasing inequality and environmental degrada-
tion. Many of these global challenges are beyond ■ Awareness raising, stakeholder engage-
the capability of any one country to address. They ment and strategic communication to influence
require large-scale efforts by many countries and consumer choices with SDG-informed alterna-
multiple stakeholders, working individually and tives
collaboratively towards shared goals. Examples of
areas requiring this type of global effort include The main lessons in brokering successful interna-
the transition to sustainable development, the tional coalitions to undertake collaborative pro-
eradication of some endemic diseases, and solv- grammes for global technological public goods are
ing the challenges of the energy/water/food nexus, the following:
particularly in poor countries. ■ Clear definition of the challenge(s) and of
There have been historical examples of such in- the role of STI
ternational collaborative effort, such as the Green ■ Exploration of alternative pathways and
Revolution and vaccines against HIV/AIDS (see solutions to the challenge(s)
Background Paper). These are impressive achieve-
ments that have had a tremendous global impact ■ Realistic assessment of the costs and po-
in improving sustainable development. What is very tential benefits of different pathways in the
sobering, however, is that it took decades to create short, medium and long term
the coalitions and to develop the science and tech-
■ Clear mechanisms for stakeholder engage-
nology that led to the breakthrough innovations
ment and long-term commitment (this requires
and improved outcomes. It is important to learn
a clear understanding of the incentives and re-
from those experiences in order to speed up this
wards for different stakeholders to engage and
process to tackle global challenges, including new
stay engaged; these may be not just monetary,
ones such as the potentially negative social and en-
but social and reputational)
vironmental impact of disruptive technologies.
■ Adaptive mechanisms for tracking progress
Brokering coalitions of interested stakeholders
and adjusting work programmes, stakeholder
requires:
engagement and collaborative arrangements
■ Convening international workshops to de- in light of what is or is not working
fine the challenge(s) to be addressed and to
■ Thinking beyond the development of tech-
assess the baseline and objectives
nology to the design of the ecosystem that is
■ Designing and building partnerships that necessary to deliver benefits to the ultimate
bring together the different competencies re- beneficiary
quired to map out possible pathways towards
A promising example of this kind of effort is a
a solution
global coalition to bring some of the benefits of
■ Designing appropriate governance struc- the digital revolution to Africa – the Digital Econ-
tures and key instruments for coordination, omy for Africa Initiative (summarized in Box 3.1).
While it only addresses some of what is needed ticularly disruptive technologies that may offer
to help Africa take advantage of the digital rev- strong potential but also carry risks.
olution, it is noteworthy for its ambition: $25 bil-
■ Conducting foresight analysis of the po-
lion investment plus $25 billion mobilized from
tential and risks of new disruptive technologies
the private sector, to provide some of the key ele-
that may impact them, and how to best take
ments including digital infrastructure, digital skills,
advantage of the positive aspects and mitigate
digital platforms, digital financial services and
or adapt to the negative aspects.
digital entrepreneurship. It involves collaboration
between regional organizations, multiple govern- ■ Strengthening their broad innovation sys-
ments, various United Nations agencies and multi- tems to be able to assess and participate in
lateral development banks, private companies and the global innovation system and develop new
philanthropic agencies. technology and innovations relative to their
needs.
There are other incipient attempts to create inter-
national STI coalitions to address other SDG-re- ■ Thinking in terms of the whole innovation
lated goals, such as the elimination of plastic deployment system and including the role of
pollution in the marine environment, low carbon the private sector and civil society (both do-
energy, and climate change adaptation in cities. It mestic and international), in order to translate
will be important to distil some lessons from them technology and innovation into actual practice
in order to move towards developing internation- and at scale to make a difference.
al STI for SDGs Roadmaps to tackle some of the
grand challenges of the SDGs. ■ Thinking also in terms of how they can
benefit from regional STI arrangements that
What receiving country governments need to do can provide some economies of scale and
sharing of relevant experience, as well as how
The discussion in this chapter has shown the great
to raise awareness of some of the major chal-
need – as well as the tremendous potential – for
lenges they face, where more international STI
the international community to do more to lever-
support would be very helpful.
age STI to accelerate achievement of the SDGs,
and especially to help developing countries. As
has been highlighted, one great challenge is weak
STI capacity in developing countries. However, the
challenge is not just in weak human and physi-
cal infrastructure and limited resources. As noted
in the last section of Chapter 2, it also involves
the mindset and the policy and regulatory frame-
works in developing countries. Addressing this will
involve the following.
■ Building endogenous potential and excel-

lence in STI with the aim of having a partner
role in global alliances.
■ Being more open and proactive in acquir-

ing, adapting, deploying and using existing
global technology and innovation.
■ Keeping more up to date with global de-

velopments in technology and innovation, par-
Box 3.2 African Digital Transformation Strategy

Digital innovation is creating unprecedented opportunities for Africa to grow its econo-
my, create jobs and transform people’s lives. With the aim of ensuring that every Afri-
can individual, business and government is digitally enabled by 2030, the African Union,
with support from the World Bank Group and many other partners, has embarked on an
ambitious journey. Digital Economy for Africa (DE4A) will help countries to accelerate
progress, bring high-speed, affordable connectivity to all, and lay the foundations for a
vibrant digital economy.
The African Union is developing a Digital Transformation Strategy, and the World Bank
Group, together with AU Member States and many other partners, is developing an Action
Plan. This takes a multi-tiered approach to five foundational elements of the digital econ-
omy: digital infrastructure, digital skills, digital platforms, digital financial services and
digital entrepreneurship. Partners include the African Union Commission, Regional Eco-
nomic Communities (RECs) and regional institutions (e.g. East African Community, West
African Economic and Monetary Union/Central Bank of West African States, Economic
and Monetary Community of Central Africa, Smart Africa, African Development Bank).
They also include bilateral partners and philanthropic agencies (e.g. Bill & Melinda Gates
Foundation, UK, France, Germany, Norway, Japan), United Nations agencies (e.g. United
Nations Economic Commission for Africa, International Telecommunication Union) and
the private sector (e.g. GSMA, Google, Microsoft, Alibaba).
Achieving the goal of digitally connecting every individual, business and government re-
quires ambitious and easy-to-understand targets under each of the five foundational
pillars of the digital economy to help catalyze and concentrate action, as shown below.
Diagnostics are being undertaken to develop a detailed digital scorecard to set more
granular targets.
DIGITAL DIGITAL DIGITAL DIGITAL DIGITAL

INFRASTRUCTURE SKILLS PLATFORMS FINANCIAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP
SERVICES
• Universal Internet • All 15 year old • Doubling of Online • Universal Access to • Tripling the
network coverage students with basic Services Index rating Digital Financial number of new
‘digital skills’ for all Governments Services digitally-enabled
competencies businesses created
• All individuals are annually
• Affordable Internet for • Africa-wide payments
all at less than 2% of • 100,000 graduates in able to prove their infrastructure/
GNI per capita advanced digital skills identity digitally platform in place
programs annually • Financing for
Venture Capital
• At least 50% of the to reach 25%
• Interim Milestone population regularly of GDP
Doubling broadband uses the Internet
connectivity by 2021 to access Government
or Commercial services
Indicative Targets for Digital Economy for Africa

CHAPTER 4. Conclusions
and Next Steps
4.1 Key messages nent and global in its reach. Hence, it is important
to consider resetting the SDG trajectory and the
means of achieving them, in light of recent pro-
This Guidebook introduced a step-by-step ap- gress and heightened awareness of opportunities
proach for policymakers to develop and implement and risks. Building on historical lessons and cur-
national STI for SDGs Roadmaps, and to participate rent emerging practices, STI for SDGs Roadmaps
in and benefit from international partnerships to can contribute to formulating new solutions to old
harness STI potential to achieve the Global Goals and nascent challenges.
and leave no one behind. The Guidebook is also The United Nations system, through the TFM,
designed to address the “Tower of Babel” problem will stand ready to work with all United Na-
by introducing a set of common languages. Given tions Member States in cultivating communi-
the current state of data, and the constantly evolv- ties of practitioners and partners and fostering
ing understanding about needs and potential sup- a learning environment to test and improve the
ply of STI, the underlying analysis has necessarily approaches as proposed in this Guidebook, ap-
been very preliminary. However, it has attempted ply the methodologies to country-specific STI for
to outline what is possible and the kinds of think- SDGs Roadmaps, learn from experiences to fur-
ing, strategizing and planning that need to be done, ther refine the Guidebook, and potentially initiate
both nationally and internationally. As a result, this or stimulate more fit-for-purpose international
first edition of the Guidebook promotes a common partnerships.
approach and develops coherent frameworks to
examine gaps, evaluates synergies and trade-offs
through a joint effort, and prioritizes actions in or-
der to strengthen national STI systems. The overall
4.2 Global Pilot
message is that governance, institutional arrange-
ments and participatory processes are critical, in
Programme on
aligning on visions, assigning accountabilities, and
shaping ownership by stakeholders.
STI for SDGs
The Guidebook has also demonstrated that there Roadmaps
is tremendous potential, as well as urgency, to
leverage STI to help developing countries attain As an initial step in pursuing the above objec-
the SDGs. However, the focus and the financial re- tives, during the United Nations High-level Polit-
sources to optimize and exploit this potential are ical Forum (HLPF) on Sustainable Development in
not yet there. Therefore, an important next step is July 2019 the United Nations Inter-agency Task
to discuss how developed countries and the donor Team on STI for the SDGs (IATT) launched the
community can do more to make this happen. On Global Pilot Programme on STI for SDGs Road-
the financing side, discussions are already begin- maps with a group of five pilot countries. Under
ning on how to increase financing for STI for the the programme’s first phase, IATT will support the
SDGs (Box 4.1). These discussions should be con- design and implementation of roadmaps in Ethi-
tinued and expanded to include how support from opia, Ghana, India, Kenya and Serbia. In addition,
the international community can be more coher- the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre
ent and effective. and Japan have joined the Global Pilot Programme
to strengthen international partnerships on STI for
When the international community embraced the
SDGs Roadmaps. The final results will be present-
SDGs as a global ambition just five years ago, the
ed at the Multi-stakeholder Forum on Science,
pace of digital technological change at the fron-
Technology and Innovation for the SDGs in 2021.
tier of science and innovation was not as promi-
CHAPTER 4. CONCLUSIONS AND NEXT STEPS 87
The five countries (as all other countries) are differ- STI or the SDGs). This indicates there may be vary-
ent in terms of their SDG gaps and STI capabilities, ing extents to which underlying policy frameworks
as mapped in Figure 4.1. Low SDG index scores are fully established or updated to serve as an an-
for some countries, compared with their peers chor in piloting roadmaps (and so that roadmaps
at a similar level in the Global Innovation Index can be grounded in a robust administrative mo-
(e.g. Mali, Ethiopia, Uganda, India and the United mentum which survives political cycles that may
States), indicates that innovation capability does have shorter timescales). Alternatively, in some
not automatically ensure good SDG performance. countries, STI for SDGs Roadmaps – depending on
The latter requires commitment, good strategy, ef- their scope and ownership – can be useful inputs to
fective policy, financing and good implementation the next cycle of broader policy planning.
capability. Hence the importance of developing ef-
Scope and approaches. Given the diversity of un-
fective roadmaps, in the context of national devel-
derlying SDGs gaps, STI capabilities and national
opment priorities in line with the SDGs.
development priorities, the scope and contents of
Table 4.1 characterizes the state of the STI for STI for SDGs Roadmaps also vary. There is ten-
SDGs Roadmaps in the five pilot countries60 at sion between the depth of “deep dives” and the
their initial stages. While the countries vary signif- breadth of a systemic approach (i.e. addressing
icantly in terms of preparation status, as well as trade-offs, harnessing co-benefits, turning vicious
the analytical, consultative and planning activities into virtuous cycles), as evident in the case of Ken-
already undertaken, early lessons and opportuni- ya. In fact, pilot countries are in the driver’s seat in
ties for peer learning are as follows. identifying national demands for assistance. While
IATT does not intend to provide a “cookie cutter
Institutional arrangement. In some countries, a
solution”, the United Nations and other support-
single ministry is responsible for piloting roadmaps,
ing partners could be in a position to assist pilot
while other countries have instituted interministe-
counterparts who are constrained by availability
rial coordination and consultation structures, sup-
of resources, and often facing capacity and band-
ported by policy think tanks (e.g. ACTS in Kenya, RIS
width constraints, and report back on harmonized
in India, CSIR-STEPRI in Ghana, National Smart Spe-
methodologies with lessons and good practices.
cialisation Team in Serbia). This is not to say that
This pilot programme intends to demonstrate the
the presence of a coordination structure is either
United Nations system-wide approach to advanc-
a precondition for policy coherence or a predictor
ing harmonization and synergies in the area of STI.
of achieving intended outcomes, given the variance
in relevant contexts (e.g. political and administra- STI digital integration or complementarity.
tive cultures, degree of high-level ownership, or Conceptually, there is no doubt that there are
influence and resources at the discretion of the re- large overlaps (in policy issues and relevant
sponsible ministry or ministries/agencies). However, stakeholder groups) between “science, technolo-
countries may want to consider intra-governmental gy and innovation” and “digital economy/digital
institutional arrangements conducive to broader transformation”, and that both require coherent
stakeholder engagement and cross-sectoral align- and effective policy responses to maximize op-
ment, to best harness STI in line with national de- portunities and mitigate risks in achieving the
velopment plans and the SDGs. SDGs. However, in practice, both national and in-
ternational entities are pursuing these agendas
Policy planning cycles. Countries have different
in a silo approach and non-coordinated manner.
planning cycles (whether for national development,
This is in terms of the institutional arrangement
and the scope/approach (either as a result or as
a cause). It would be a missed opportunity if the
60 Country-specific contexts, progress and considerations for
successful outcomes are being documented in pilot country roadmap were to fall into a silo, either in the pilot
case studies (IATT, 2020).
90
Denmark
85
Japan
80
Serbia
75
US
China
70
SDG Index 2019
Ghana
65
60 India
Kenya
55
Uganda
50
Ethiopia
Mali
45
40
10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
Global Innovation Index 2019
NOTE:
Blue dots are the pilot countries; green dots are some outliers as reference points.
Figure 4.1: Five pilot countries in terms of the SDG Index vs. Global Innovation Index
Source: Compiled based on indices in Independent Group of Scientists (2019); Cornell University, INSEAD, and WIPO (2018).
country or supporting partner sides, and not take first phase of the programme will be presented
advantage of synergies between the two. at the 2021 HLPF. To support individual country
pilots, analyse and cross-fertilize emerging experi-
International dimension. Pilot plans also vary in
ences and lessons, and stimulate and galvanize in-
terms of addressing subnational, national and in-
ternational support, IATT will continue to work with
ternational levels of roadmaps, from a solely do-
current and prospective partners to help achieve
mestic/national focus to a willingness to contribute
the intended results through the pilot programme
internationally (e.g. India). International partners
and beyond.
(e.g. Japan, European Union) are already sup-
porting roadmap pilots, and there are promising
emerging initiatives with broader multi-stakehold-
er cooperation (e.g. Japan-India-Africa trilateral
4.3 Moving
cooperation among policy think tanks; scaling up
the European Union-supported Global Pilot Net-
forward
work; private participation spearheaded by the
Toyota Kenya agreement; active discussions about In response to strong interest expressed by coun-
contributions by academies of sciences in pilot tries participating in the deliberations so far,
and partner countries). To produce greater collec- IATT62 together with its partners is committed to
tive impact, IATT and other partners may be in a piloting and scaling the adoption of country-lev-
position to proactively engage pilot counterparts el roadmaps, codifying and disseminating lessons
in raising the level of ambition and identifying op- learned, and strengthening international cooper-
portunities to produce positive international spill- ation accordingly. Based on further consultations
overs. and analysis, the next phase of the intersessional
work programme on STI for SDGs Roadmaps may
Policy learning for acceleration at scale. Only include the following components.
two of the ongoing pilots, India and Serbia,61 have
put monitoring and evaluation systems in place or ■ Intensify joint support for pilots: IATT
considered learning and feedback mechanisms as agencies to strive to secure additional resourc-
an explicit component of their STI for SDGs Road- es, onboard United Nations country teams,
maps. As noted in the Guidebook, this is a critical engage new United Nations and other interest-
step because the implementation of the roadmaps ed partners and stakeholders, and align with
is essentially a learning exercise, where it will be countries’ aspirations and constraints accord-
important to monitor and evaluate what is being ing to the respective pilot plans.
done in order to make adjustments and correc-
■ Foster learning environment: orchestrate
tions during implementation. Furthermore, given
multi-tier engagements for experience sharing,
the scale and urgency of the challenges we face,
such as through tracks led by United Nations
policy learning is critical, not only at the country
regional commissions and/or other regional
level but internationally – requiring a harmonized
bodies (e.g. ASEAN, African Union Commission,
approach to monitoring and evaluation for nation-
European Union) and participated in by cur-
al STI for SDGs Roadmaps, and mechanisms for
rent and prospective pilot countries. Cultivate
collective learning and course correction.
communities of practitioners and networks
IATT presented interim updates from a few pilot of knowledge (e.g. policy think tanks in pilot
countries at the 2020 HLPF and full results of the countries) to codify and disseminate emerg-
ing lessons. Address evidence and data gaps
61 In the case of the Smart Specialisation Strategy approach

followed by Serbia, monitoring and evaluation systems are 62 For more details about IATT, See: https://sustainablede-
necessary elements for the roadmap. velopment.un.org/tfm#un
Table 4.1 Five countries participating in the Global Pilot

Programme for STI for SDGs Roadmaps
KENYA GHANA
LEAD AND OTHER ■ Treasury, Dept of Planning ■ Ministry of Environment

INSTITUTIONS INVOLVED ■ NACOSTI, ACTS and STI
■ Line ministries (Education, ■ CSIR-STEPRI
Science and Technology, Foreign

Affairs, ICT, Agriculture, Industry)
UNDERLYING POLICY ■ Kenya Vision 2030 ■ Agenda for Jobs 2017-

FRAMEWORKS ■ MTP III 2018-2022, Big Four 2021
■ STI Policy, Research Priorities ■ CPESDP 2017-2024
■ Digital Economy Blueprint ■ National STI Policy 2017
SCOPE AND OBJECTIVES ■ Big Four Agenda (agriculture, to be determined

OF ROADMAP health, manufacturing, housing)
■ Agro-processing and ICT as
an initial focus
APPROACH TO PILOT ■ Sectoral deep dive, target- ■ Build on technology

driven (100% food and nutrition incubation centres
security by 2022) ■ Aim for investment
■ R&D and adoption/diffusion proposals and institutional
■ Aiming for an East Africa strengthening
regional model
TIMEFRAME AND KEY to be determined

MILESTONES
PARTNERS IATT ■ World Bank (STI PERs) ■ UNESCO

(DESA: THE FOCAL ■ UNESCO (SAGA, GO-SPIN) ■ World Bank
SECRETARIAT)
UN, ■ Private partnership (Toyota) ■ OECD
OTHERS
Possible EU-ACP, African Union Commission, RECs,
KEY ABBREVIATIONS: [Kenya] NACOSTI, National Commission for Science, Technology and Innovation; ACTS, African Center for
Technology Studies; MTP III, Mid Term Plan III; SAGA, STEM and Gender Advancement. [Ghana] CSIR-STEPRI, Council for Scien-
tific and Industrial Research – Science and Technology Policy Research Institute; CPESDP, Coordinated Programme of Economic
and Social Development Policies. [Ethiopia] GTP III, Growth and Transformation Plan III. [India] NITI Aayog, National Institution
ETHIOPIA INDIA SERBIA
■ Ministry of Innovation ■ Office of the Principal ■ Ministry of Education, S&T;

and Technology Scientific Adviser ■ Coordinating Interministerial Working
■ Ministry of Science and ■ NITI Aayog, Ministry of Group (WG) and cooperation with national
Higher Education External Affairs, RIS Agenda 2030 Group
■ National Coordination ■ WGs for priority domains led by
Committee business and academia, Statistics Office,
Patent Office; National Analytics team
(academia-led)
■ GTP III 2015-2020 ■ Strategy for New ■ EU Accession Process and Smart
■ STI Policy 2012 India@75 Specialisation
■ STI Policy 2013 ■ New STI and industrial policy under
Prime Minister
■ Agenda 2030
SDG 8 (Job creation) ■ Agriculture, energy, ■ defined Smart Specialisation priority

water, health; align with domains and horizontal actions
key initiatives (e.g. Doubling ■ creative industries; food for the future;
of Farmers’ Income, JAM machines and production processes of the
Trinity) future; ICT
■ Strong international
focus – Africa and Far East
■ Sectoral: build on 24 ■ International, national ■ work at national level, with

technology roadmaps and subnational levels subnational and international dimension
(Lighthouse India, ■ mix of deep dives and horizontal
cooperative federalism) activities
■ Data/dashboard to be
substantiated through STI
PER inputs
■ First six months (in India) ■ adoption of S3 (February 2020) and a

■ End first year (AfDB AMs?) detailed roadmap (October 2020)
■ End second year (in New
York)
■ UNCTAD (STIP Review) ■ World Bank (STI PERs) ■ UNIDO

■ World Bank, UNESCO ■ ESCAP
■ UNDP, UNIDO ■ OECD ■ EU JRC (RIS3)

■ UNDP
Japan-India-Africa cooperation
for Transforming India; RIS, Research and Information System for Developing Countries; JAM Trinity, Jan Dhan-
Aadhaar-Mobile trinity; AfDB AMs, African Development Bank Annual Meetings; ESCAP, United Nations Economic
and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific. [Serbia] RIS3, Research and Innovation Strategies for Smart Spe-
cialisation.
to support the development of monitoring and TFM started as voluntary efforts by IATT member
evaluation systems. agencies, without additional resources. Its work
on STI for SDGs Roadmaps has evolved as one of
■ Initiate or stimulate international STI
most tangible deliverables over the last two years.
partnerships: use pilots as tangible entry
This has been made possible through hard work
points to galvanize multi-stakeholder forums,
by pilot and other interested countries, technical
for matching collective actions to address iden-
and intellectual contributions from institutional
tified common challenges and developing pipe-
partners and participants of the series of Expert
lines/portfolios of partnerships with the private
Group Meetings, and seed funding contributions
sector, donor countries and STI stakeholders.
and championship by Japan and the European
■ Mainstream STI in broader SDGs work: Commission. Co-leads of the IATT Sub-Working
apply the six entry points in the Global Sustain- Group on STI roadmaps, namely the World Bank,
able Development Report – 1) human well-be- DESA, UNCTAD and UNESCO, welcome interested
ing and capabilities, 2) sustainable and just partners and countries to join forces to further
economies, 3) food systems and nutrition pat- promote this promising and meaningful work.
terns, 4) energy decarbonization and universal
access, 5) urban and peri-urban development,
and 6) global environmental commons – for
STI for SDGs roadmaps in existing or new pilot
countries, if countries desire.
■ Solidify multi-year programme of work:

define intermediate and final outcomes to be
demonstrated by 2020 and 2021 STI Forums,
and align with pilot counterparts to work back-
wards and use milestone events to pace and
accelerate the roadmap exercise. Plan for the
second phase pilot cohort, with appropriate tim-
ing for useful lessons to be generated from the
first phase, while ensuring current momentum
can be sustained (and over 20 countries remain
interested). Define longer-term objectives, such
as addressing the current fragmentation of in-
ternational support activities, by using critical
mass demands through roadmaps and conven-
ing donors and research funders.
■ Mobilize resources: build the case for

multilateral pooled resources to support both
individual pilots and collective programme de-
livery/expansion, and align with interested and
willing donors.63
63 Donors may contribute to the existing Sustainable Devel-

opment Trust Fund at DESA, to relevant trust funds at oth-
er agencies, or to trust funds relevant to STI; or consider a
more coordinated funding mechanism.
Box 4.1 Global discussions on financing STI for SDGs

World leaders are advancing parallel deliberations on STI for SDGs and Financing for
SDGs, creating a promising space for STI policymakers and stakeholders to work more
closely to demonstrate a case for efficient and effective financing of STI for SDGs.
On the STI front, the G20 under the Japanese presidency, through the Development
Working Group (DWG), acknowledged that multi-stakeholder engagement is essential for
unleashing STI potential, and reached consensus on the Guiding Principles for the Devel-
opment of STI for SDGs Roadmaps. The principles touch on the structure of roadmaps,
the role of government, promotion of knowledge sharing, international cooperation and
other elements to consider. The work of the G20 DWG and TFM on STI for SDGs Road-
maps proceeded in a mutually informing and reinforcing manner, recognizing that the
Guiding Principles represent political consensus on “why” STI for SDGs roadmaps, where-
as the Guidebook prepared by IATT explores “how” to formulate roadmaps. In coordina-
tion with the DWG, the G20 Digital Economy Task Force (DETF) deliberated on a plan for
action towards the SDGs through digitalization, focusing on Africa and least developed
countries, to share the benefits of digitalization and leave no one behind. Following the
G20 Osaka Summit in June, Japan hosted the seventh Tokyo International Conference
on African Development (TICAD7) in August 2019, where STI for SDGs Roadmaps was a
key topic for discussions with African leaders.
On the financing front, TFM and its partners from the scientific community have pur-
sued a multi-stakeholder approach to the funding of STI for SDGs, such as through the
Funders’ Roundtable at the sidelines of the STI Forum 2018. At the Financing for Devel-
opment Forum in 2019, the United Nations announced the creation of a Global Investors
for Sustainable Development Alliance, to be officially launched in September 2019. The
Forum also discussed the “triangle of technology, the SDGs, and financing” as a crucial
new arena requiring attention and the deployment of financing. In addition, the United
Nations Inter-agency Task Force on Financing for Development has been tasked with
supporting countries’ efforts to operationalize integrated national financing frameworks
(INFF). These are a planning and delivery tool to finance sustainable development at the
national level. INFFs are a tool to operationalize the Addis Ababa Action Agenda at the
national level, in conjunction with international cooperation at the global level. The roll
out of the INFFs started in July 2020.
Informing G20 deliberation on development finance, the Eminent Persons Group on

Global Financial Governance, in its report in 2018, recommended implementing the
system-wide reorientation in development finance. The aim was to achieve complemen-
tarity among multilateral, regional and bilateral institutions, and to establish a clear
system of metrics to track impact and value for money. This would involve building ef-
fective country platforms, owned by governments, to enhance contributions from all de-
velopment partners, including the private sector. In response, Finance Ministers, through
the Development Committee communiqué in April 2019, urged the World Bank Group “to
continue to work closely with public and private partners including international financial
institutions and the UN, on the most pressing development challenges”. They noted that
>
“heads of state will gather in September for the UN summit focusing on climate, universal
>
health coverage, SDGs, financing for development, and small island developing states”
and underscored the importance of “the potential of multilateral development banks
working as a system to improve their response to common challenges, including through
a coordinated country platform approach” (paragraph 12).
STI for SDGs Roadmaps, if adequately formulated and implemented, may constitute a
tangible element in approaches to such country platforms, by enhancing complementari-
ty among national and development partner efforts.
Source: Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan, presentation at the Fourth Expert Group Meeting on STI for
SDGs Roadmaps, Nairobi, April 2019; the Boards of Governors of the Bank and the Fund on the Transfer of
Real Resources to Developing Countries, April 2019.
REFERENCES 95
References
Business and Sustainable Development Commission (2017). Better Business Better World.
Analysis of business opportunities in a consolidated background report, Valuing the SDG
Prize: Unlocking business opportunities to accelerate sustainable and inclusive growth. Lon-
don.
Buluswar, Shashi, and others (2014). 50 Breakthroughs: Critical Scientific and Technological
Advances Needed for Sustainable Global Development. Berkeley, California: LIGTT, Institute
for Globally Transformative Technologies, Lawrence Berkeley National Lab.
Carayannis, Elias, Anna Grebeniuk and Dirk Meissner (2016). Smart Roadmapping for STI Poli-
cy. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, vol. 110 (September), pp. 109-115.
Champain, Vincent, and others (2015). Transition Through Innovation: How innovation can con-
tribute to building a low carbon economy at an affordable cost. Paris, France: R20 Regions of
Climate Action, Observatoire du Long Terme and CVA.
Cirera, Xavier, Jaime Frías, Justin Hill, and Yanchao Li. (2020). A Practitioner’s Guide to Innova-
tion Policy. Instruments to Build Firm Capabilities and Accelerate Technological Catch-Up in
Developing Countries. Washington, DC: World Bank.
Cirera, Xavier, and William F. Maloney (2017). The Innovation Paradox: Developing-Coun-
try Capabilities and the Unrealized Promise of Technological Catch-Up. Washington,
DC: World Bank. Available at: https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/bitstream/han-
dle/10986/28341/9781464811609.pdf.
Colglazier, E. William (2018). The Sustainable Development Goals: Pathways to Progress. Edi-
torial in Science & Diplomacy, online publication from the AAAS Center for Science Diplomacy
(March). Available at: http://www.sciencediplomacy.org/editorial/2018/sdg-roadmaps
Comin, Diego, and Marti Mestieri (2014). Technology Diffusion: Measurement, Causes and Con-
sequences. Handbook of Economic Growth, vol. 2, pp. 565-622.
Cornell University, INSEAD, and WIPO (2018). Global Innovation Index 2018: Energizing the
World with Innovation. Ithaca, Fontainebleau and Geneva. Available at: https://www.wipo.int/
edocs/pubdocs/en/wipo_pub_gii_2018.pdf.
Daniels, C. K., and K. Tilmes (2020). Leveraging Innovation Policies and Digital Strategies for
Africa’s Transformation, chapter in African Transformation Report 2020. Accra, Ghana: Afri-
can Center for Economic Transformation.
DESA and World Bank (2018). IATT issues brief on Science, Technology and Innovation for the
SDGs Roadmaps. Available at: https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/tfm#roadmaps.
EPTANETWORK (2013). Finland – The Committee for the Future. Available at: https://eptanet-
work.org/static-html/comparative-table/countryreport/finland.html.
Ericsson, Fredrik and Sam Mealy (2019). Connecting Overseas Development Assistance and
Science, Technology and Innovation for Inclusive Development: Measurement challenges
from a DAC perspective. OECD Development Cooperation Working Papers, No. 58. Paris: OECD
Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/3726edff-en
Freund, Caroline, Alen Mulabdic, and Michele Ruta (2019). Is 3D Printing a Threat to Global
Trade? The Trade Effects You Didn’t Hear About. Policy Research Working Paper 9024, World
Development Report 2020 Background Paper. Washington, D.C.: World Bank Group. Available
at: http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/152701569432061451/Is-3D-Printing-
a-Threat-to-Global-Trade-The-Trade-Effects-You-Didnt-Hear-About
Fuster Martí E., Matusiak M. (ed), 2019, Pilot methodology for mapping Sustainable Develop-
ment Goals in the context of Smart Specialisation Strategies, European Commission, Joint
Research Centre
G20 (2019a). G20 Development Working Group (DWG) Guiding Principles for the Development
of Science, Technology, and Innovation for SDGs Roadmaps. Available at: https://www.mofa.
go.jp/policy/economy/g20_summit/osaka19/pdf/documents/en/annex_12.pdf
---------- (2019b). G20 Ministerial Statement on Trade and Digital Economy. Available at:
https://g20-digital.go.jp/asset/pdf/g20_2019_japan_digital_statement.pdf
---------- (2019c). G20 Osaka Leaders’ Declaration. Available at: https://www.mofa.go.jp/poli-

cy/economy/g20_summit/osaka19/en/documents/final_g20_osaka_leaders_declaration.
html
Hallward-Driemeier, Mary, and Gaurav Nayyar (2018). Trouble in the Making? The Future of
Manufacturing-Led Development. Washington, DC: World Bank. doi: 10.1596/978-1-4648-
1174-6.
Hietanen, Olli (2018). Science and political decision-making – The Parliament of Finland’s Com-
mittee for the Future. Responsible Research. Finland. Available at https://vastuullinentiede.
fi/en/reuse/science-and-political-decision-making-parliament-finlands-committee-fu-
ture
Independent Group of Scientists appointed by the United Nations Secretary-General (2019).

Global Sustainable Development Report: The Future is Now—Science for Achieving Sustain-
able Development. New York: United Nations. Available at https://sustainabledevelopment.
un.org/content/documents/24797GSDR_report_2019.pdf
Inter-agency Task Team on Science, Technology and Innovation for the SDGs (IATT-STI) (2017).
Landscape of Science, Technology and Innovation Initiatives for the SDGs. Background Paper
No. 3. United Nations. Retrieved from https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/doc-
uments/17447IATTLandscape_of_STIInitiatives_for_SDGs.pdf
---------- (2018). STI for SDGs Roadmaps – Expert Group Meeting International Workshop (May
8-9, 2018) in Tokyo (May 29, 2018 draft).
---------- (2020). Progress Report: The Global Pilot Programme on STI for SDGs Roadmaps
International Council for Science (2017). A Guide to SDG Interactions: From Science to Imple-
mentation. Paris: ICSU. Available at https://council.science/cms/2017/05/SDGs-Guide-to-In-
teractions.pdf.
International Energy Agency (2014). Energy Technology Roadmaps: A Guide to Development

and Implementation (2014 edition). Paris: IEA. Available at https://sustainabledevelopment.
un.org/content/documents/21079TechnologyRoadmapAguidetodevelopmentandim-
plementation.pdf.
International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA) (2018). Transformations to Achieve
the Sustainable Development Goals. Report prepared by The World in 2050 initiative. Laxen-
burg, Austria. www.twi2050.org
---------- (2019). The Digital Revolution and Sustainable Development: Opportunities and Chal-
lenges. Report prepared by The World in 2050 initiative. Laxenburg, Austria. www.twi2050.
org
Jaruzelski, Barry, Robert Chwalik, and Brad Goehle (2018). What the Top Innovators Get Right.
Strategy+Business, issue 93 (Winter).
Kanehira, Naoto, Rui Kotani, Shuyang Huang, and Philipp S. Ruppert (2020). Benchmarking Top
Donors’ Science, Technology and Innovation Activities in Development Aid. Washington, DC:
World Bank. (forthcoming)
Liu, Wei, Naoto Kanehira, and Ludovico Alcorta (2015). An Overview of the UN Technology Initiatives.
New York: United Nations Inter-agency Working Group on a Technology Facilitation Mechanism.
Available at https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/2091Mapping%20
UN%20Technology%20Facilitation%20Initiatives%20Sept%202015%20clean.pdf
REFERENCES 97
López-Portillo y Rojas, José (2018). La Novela: Breve Ensayo Presentado a La Academia Mex-
icana (Spanish Edition), published by Forgotten Books.
Matusiak, Monika, and others (2020). Science, Technology and Innovation (STI) for Sustainable
Development Goals Roadmaps – Background Paper: Overview of the existing STI for SDGs
roadmapping methodologies. European Commission, Joint Research Centre.
McDowall, Will (2012). Technology roadmaps for transition management: The case of hydrogen
energy. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, vol. 79, issue 3 (March), pp. 530–542.
McKinsey Global Institute (2020). Connected World: An evolution in connectivity beyond the 5G
revolution. Discussion Paper (February).
Miedzinski, Michal, Mariana Mazzucato, and Paul Ekins (2019). A framework for mission-ori-
ented innovation policy roadmapping for the SDGs. UCL Institute for Innovation and Public
Purpose, Working Paper Series (IIPP WP 2019-03). Available at https://www.ucl.ac.uk/bart-
lett/public-purpose/wp2019-03
Miedzinski, Michal, Will McDowall, and Jesse Fahnestock (2018). Paving the pathways towards
sustainable future? A critical review of STI policy roadmaps as policy instruments enabling
sustainability transitions. Paper presented at International Sustainability Transitions Confer-
ence 2018 (IST 2018) held in Manchester, 12-14 June 2018.
Miedzinski, Michal, and others (2018). How to design and implement science, technology and
innovation (STI) roadmaps to foster eco-innovation for sustainable development? Policy Out-
look 10. Innovation for Sustainable Development Network (inno4sd.net).
Miedzinski, Michal, and others (2019). Science, Technology and Innovation Policy Roadmaps for
the SDGs: A Guide for design and implementation. Inno4sd.net.
Miedzinski, Michal, and others (2020). Science, Technology and Innovation (STI) for SDGs Road-
maps –Background Paper: International STI collaboration and investment for Sustainable
Development Goals.
Milola, Apollonia, and others (2019). Interlinkages and policy coherence for the Sustaina-
ble Development Goals implementation: An operational method to identify trade-offs and
co-benefits in a systemic way, EUR 29646 EN. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the Euro-
pean Union, ISBN 978-92-79-99556-9, doi:10.2760/472928, JRC115163.
Millennium Institute (2018). Integrated Simulation Tool: Policy Coherence and Integration to
Achieve the Sustainable Development Goals. Available at https://www.millennium-institute.
org/isdg.
OECD (2014). Perspectives on Global Development 2014: Boosting Productivity to Meet the
Middle-Income Challenge. Paris: OECD Publishing. Available at https://www.oecd-ilibrary.
org/development/perspectives-on-global-development-2014_persp_glob_dev-2014-en.
---------- (2017). International co-operation in STI for the grand challenges – insights from
a mapping exercise and survey, unpublished paper for official use. Paris: OECD. DSTI/
STP(2017)13.
---------- (2017). Measuring Distance to the SDG Targets: An Assessment of where OECD
Countries Stand. Available at http://www.oecd.org/sdd/OECD-Measuring-Distance-to-SDG-
Targets.pdf.
---------- (2018). OECD Science, Technology and Innovation Outlook 2018: Adapting to Tech-
nological and Societal Disruption. Paris: OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/sti_in_
outlook-2018-en.
---------- (2020). Innovation for Development. OECD Development Cooperation Directorate

Working Paper.
OECD/Eurostat (2018). Oslo Manual 2018: Guidelines for Collecting, Reporting and Using
Data on Innovation, 4th Edition. The Measurement of Scientific, Technological, and Inno-
vation Activities. Paris: OECD Publishing/Luxembourg: Eurostat. Available at https://doi.
org/10.1787/9789264304604-en
Pathways for Prosperity Commission (2018a). Charting Pathways for Inclusive Growth – From
Paralysis to Preparation. Oxford. Available at https://pathwayscommission.bsg.ox.ac.uk/
charting-pathways-report
---------- (2018b). Digital Lives: Creating Meaningful Connections for the Next 3 Billion. Oxford.
Available at https://pathwayscommission.bsg.ox.ac.uk/digital-lives-report
---------- (2019). The Digital Roadmap: how developing countries can get ahead. Final Report
of the Pathways for Prosperity Commission. Oxford. Available at https://pathwayscommis-
sion.bsg.ox.ac.uk/digital-roadmap
Rodrik, Dani (2018). New Technologies, Global Value Chains, and the Developing Economies.
Pathways for Prosperity Commission Background Paper Series, No. 1. Oxford.
Sachs, Jeffrey, and others (2016). SDG Index and Dashboards – Global Report. New York: Ber-
telsmann Stiftung and Sustainable Development Solutions Network (SDSN).
---------- (2018). SDG Index and Dashboards Report 2018. New York: Bertelsmann Stiftung and
Sustainable Development Solutions Network (SDSN). Available at http://www.sdgindex.org/
Technology Executive Committee of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate

Change (2013). Background paper on Technology Roadmaps. Available at https://www.ctc-n.
org/resources/tec-background-paper-technology-roadmaps
United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (2017). New Innovation Approaches
to Support the Implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals. New York and Gene-
va: United Nations. Available at https://unctad.org/en/PublicationsLibrary/dtlstict2017d4_
en.pdf
---------- (2018). Technology and Innovation Report 2018: Harnessing Frontier Technologies
for Sustainable Development. United Nations publication. Sales No. E.18.II.D.3.
---------- (2019). A Framework for Science, Technology and Innovation Policy Reviews – Har-
nessing innovation for sustainable development. United Nations publication. UNCTAD/DTL/
STICT/2019/4.
United Nations Development Programme (2016). Rapid Integrated Assessment (RIA): To

facilitate mainstreaming of SDGs into national and local plans. New York: UNDP. Availa-
ble at http://www.undp.org/content/dam/undp/library/Sustainable%20Development/
SDG%2Tools/Rapid_Integrated_Assessment_10May2017.pdf.
-------- (2017). SDG Accelerator and Bottleneck Assessment tool. New York: UNDP. Availa-
ble at https://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/librarypage/sustainable-develop-
ment-goals/sdg-accelerator-and-bottleneck-assessment.html
-------- (2019). Human Development Report 2019 – Beyond income, beyond averages, beyond
today: Inequalities in human development in the 21st Century. New York: UNDP. Available at
http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/human-development-report-2019.
United Nations Economic and Social Council (2018). Co-Chairs’ Summary of the Multi-stake-
holder forum on science, technology and innovation for the Sustainable Development Goals
(5-6 June, New York). United Nations publication.
---------- (2019). Special edition: progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals – Re-
port of the Secretary-General (May). Available at https://undocs.org/E/2019/68.
United Nations Industrial Development Organization (2019). Absorbing Advanced Digital Pro-
duction Technologies to Foster Industrialization: Evidence from Case Studies in Developing
Countries. Background document prepared for the Industrial Development Report 2020. Vi-
enna: United Nations Industrial Development Organization. Available at https://www.unido.
org/sites/default/files/files/2019-11/IDR_2020_Booklet.pdf
United Nations (2019), Technology Facilitation Mechanism. Sustainable Development Goals

Knowledge Platform, https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/tfm.
---------- (2015). Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development,
Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 25 September 2015.
REFERENCES 99
Watkins, Alfred (2018). Takeaways and Policy Recommendations: Global Solutions Summit
2018. Available at http://www.globalsolutionssummit.com/uploads/3/1/5/5/31554571/
takeaways_and_policy_recommendations_--_final.pdf
---------- (2019). Global Solutions Summit 2019: Synthesis and Policy Recommendations.
Available at http://www.globalsolutionssummit.com/uploads/3/1/5/5/31554571/synthe-
sis_and_policy_conclusions_--_gss_2019_--_final.pdf
Weber, Steven (2017). Data, Development, and Growth. In Business and Politics, vol. 19, Issue
3 (September), pp. 397-423.
World Economic Forum (2019). The Global Competitiveness Report 2018. Geneva: WEF. Avail-
able at http://www3.weforum.org/docs/GCR2018/05FullReport/TheGlobalCompetitive-
nessReport2018.pdf.
---------- (2020). Unlocking Technology for the Global Goals. Geneva: WEF. Available at https://
www.weforum.org/reports/unlocking-technology-for-the-global-goals.
World Bank (2014). Public Expenditure Reviews in Science, Technology, and Innovation. Guid-
ance note by Paulo Correa. Available at https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/bitstream/
handle/10986/21064/930760WP0Box380iture0Reviews0in0STI.pdf?sequence=1&isAl-
lowed=y
---------- (2018a). Poverty and Shared Prosperity 2018: Piecing Together the Poverty Puzzle.
Washington, DC: World Bank. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/30418
License: Creative Commons Attribution CC BY 3.0 IGO.
---------- (2018b). Disruptive Technologies and the World Bank Group – Creating Opportu-
nities – Mitigating Risks. Development Committee Paper (DC2018-0010), Washington, DC:
World Bank. Available at: https://www.devcommittee.org/sites/dc/files/download/Docu-
ments/2018-09/DC2018-0010%20Disruptive%20Technologies.pdf
---------- (2019). World Development Indicators. Washington, D.C: World Bank. Retrieved from
https://data.worldbank.org/
ANNEX 1 Technology Facilitation
Mechanism in the 2030
Agenda for Sustainable
Development
The United Nations Technology Facilitation Mech- ty, United Nations entities and other stakeholders
anism (TFM) was established by the Addis Ababa and will be composed of:
Action Agenda to support the implementation of
■ United Nations Inter-agency Task Team on
the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and
Science, Technology and Innovation for the SDGs
launched through the 2030 Agenda for Sustain-
(IATT). IATT will draw on existing resources and
able Development in September 2015. From the
work with the ten representatives (10-Member
outset, the Division for Sustainable Development
Group) appointed by the Secretary-General to
Goals (DSDG) at DESA continued to serve as Sec-
support the TFM. This group, appointed for two
retariat for the Inter-agency Task Team on Sci-
years at a time, is drawn from civil society, the
ence, Technology and Innovation for the SDGs
private sector and the science and technology
(IATT) and for the group of high-level represent-
community.
atives of the scientific community, the private
sector and civil society (10-Member Group) ap- ■ Collaborative Multi-stakeholder Forum on
pointed by the Secretary-General to support the Science, Technology and Innovation for the
TFM. The two groups mobilize experts from with- SDGs (STI Forum)
in and outside the United Nations system to ad-
vance the SDGs through science, technology and ■ Online platform
innovation (STI) in various contexts. Since 2015, The diagram below summarizes the key mech-
both groups have been coordinated and support- anisms on STI and maps the main channels for
ed by DESA/DSDG (2015 to present), the United engaging multi-stakeholders in the United Nations
Nations Environment Programme (2016-2017) process.
and UNCTAD (2018 to present).
The creation of the TFM was of historic significance,
Throughout both the intergovernmental negotia- as it brought substantive STI discussions back to
tions on the post-2015 development agenda, and the United Nations Headquarters in New York, af-
the preparatory process in 2014 and 2015 for the ter decades of political gridlock over intellectual
Third International Conference on Financing for property rights and technology transfer issues.
Development, Member States clearly indicated Over the past three years, the TFM has explored
that the development, transfer and dissemination a new multi-stakeholder model of work for the
of technology, along with strengthening the scien- United Nations system, which has so far engaged
tific and technological capabilities of all countries, 42 United Nations entities, more than 100 expert
represent key elements of the Means of Imple- staff of the United Nations system, and thousands
mentation (MoI) for the 2030 Agenda for Sustain- of scientists and stakeholders to facilitate STI for
able Development. the SDGs. The TFM’s STI Forum also holds a special
Paragraph 70 of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable role, as it reports formally to the High-level Polit-
Development launched a Technology Facilitation ical Forum on Sustainable Development (HLPF) in
Mechanism (TFM) in order to support the imple- support of its formal review of SDG progress and
mentation of the SDGs. The TFM was first estab- its explicit function to “strengthen the science-pol-
lished by the Addis Ababa Action Agenda, which icy interface”.
was agreed at the Third International Conference In its meetings, the IATT has regularly reflected on
on Financing for Development held in Addis Ababa, its work direction, and on the relationship to partic-
Ethiopia, in July 2015. ipating United Nations system entities and to the
It was decided that the Technology Facilitation TFM 10-Member Group. At the same time, UNC-
Mechanism (TFM) will be based on a multi-stake- TAD (as the Secretariat for the Commission on Sci-
holder collaboration between Member States, civil ence and Technology for Development), the United
society, the private sector, the scientific communi- Nations Regional Commissions, Inter-agency Task
ANNEX 1 - TECHNOLOGY FACILITATION MECHANISM IN THE 2030 AGENDA FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT 103
UN GENERAL
ASSEMBLY UN
SECRETARY
MEMBER STATES ECONOMIC AND GENERAL
SOCIAL COUNCIL
Multi-stakeholders:
UN academia, private sector,
Specialized civil society, NGO etc. High-level
Agencies Panel or Task
Force
UN Economic Major Group S&T

CSTD Functional Community
Commissions (ISC/WFEO)
SDGs Progress
SUSTENAIBLE Report
DEVELOPMENT [annual]
KNOWLEDGE
PLATFORM HIGH LEVEL POLITICAL
FORUM (HLPF)
Global Sustainable
Development
Report (GSDR)
[quadrennial]
Products/Outputs
Inter-Agency Task Team Ad hoc
UN-IATT (all UN sustem 10 - MEMBER GROUP
high-level group
with STI mandates)
UN permanent mechanisms
ONLINE PLATFORM STI MULTISTAKEHOLDER

UN BODIES OR FORUM (Annual)
STRUCTURES
Bespoken to SDGs TECHNOLOGY FACILITATION MECHANISM (TFM)
Diagram: Mapping key mechanisms on STI under the 2030 Agenda
Source: DESA/DSDG adopted from InterAcademy Partnership (IAP) Report on

Improving Scientific Input to Global Policymaking with a Focus on the UN Sus-
tainable Development Goals, 2019: https://www.interacademies.org/50429/
SDGs_Report
©panxunbin/Depositphotos.com, 2021
Force (IATF), UNEP, World Bank, UNESCO, WIPO,

ITU, FAO and many other participating United Na-
tions system entities have issued documents on
trends and policy options and proposed findings on
STI in their areas of expertise. In addition, several
organizations beyond the United Nations system
have started cooperating and contributing to work
on the TFM.
One significant achievement of the IATT is this joint

Guidebook on STI for SDGs Roadmaps and its Op-
erational Note, currently being piloted in five coun-
tries: Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya, India and Serbia.
ANNEX 2 STI as explicit in 2030
Agenda language
GOAL TARGET LANGUAGE RELEVANCE

1 1.4 By 2030, ensure that all men and women, in particular the poor and Outcome: Tech
the vulnerable, have equal rights to economic resources, as well as
access to basic services, ownership and control over land and other
forms of property, inheritance, natural resources, appropriate new
technology and financial services, including microfinance
2 2.a Increase investment, including through enhanced international MoI: Sci / Tech
cooperation, in rural infrastructure, agricultural research and
extension services, technology development and plant and
livestock gene banks in order to enhance agricultural productive
capacity in developing countries, in particular least developed countries
3 3.b Support the research and development of vaccines and medicines MoI: Sci / Tech
for the communicable and non-communicable diseases that
primarily affect developing countries, provide access to affordable
essential medicines and vaccines, in accordance with the Doha
Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health, which affirms
the right of developing countries to use to the full the provisions in the
Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights
regarding flexibilities to protect public health, and, in particular, provide
access to medicines for all
4 4.3 By 2030, ensure equal access for all women and men to affordable Outcome: Sci (edu)
and quality technical, vocational and tertiary education, including
university
4.4 By 2030, substantially increase the number of youth and adults who Outcome: Sci (edu)
have relevant skills, including technical and vocational skills, for
employment, decent jobs and entrepreneurship
4.b By 2020, substantially expand globally the number of scholarships MoI: Sci (edu)
available to developing countries, in particular least developed
countries, small island developing States and African countries, for
enrolment in higher education, including vocational training and
information and communications technology, technical, engineering
and scientific programmes, in developed countries and other
developing countries
5 5.b Enhance the use of enabling technology, in particular information MoI: Tech
and communications technology, to promote the empowerment of
women
6 6.a By 2030, expand international cooperation and capacity-building MoI: Tech
support to developing countries in water- and sanitation-
related activities and programmes, including water harvesting,
desalination, water efficiency, wastewater treatment, recycling and
reuse technologies
7 7.a By 2030, enhance international cooperation to facilitate access to MoI: Tech
clean energy research and technology, including renewable energy,
energy efficiency and advanced and cleaner fossil-fuel technology,
and promote investment in energy infrastructure and clean energy
technology
7.b By 2030, expand infrastructure and upgrade technology for MoI: Tech
supplying modern and sustainable energy services for all in
developing countries, in particular least developed countries, small
island developing States and landlocked developing countries, in
accordance with their respective programmes of support
8 8.2 Achieve higher levels of economic productivity through diversification, Outcome: Inno
technological upgrading and innovation, including through a focus on
high-value added and labour-intensive sectors
8.3 Promote development-oriented policies that support productive Outcome: Inno
activities, decent job creation, entrepreneurship, creativity and
innovation, and encourage the formalization and growth of micro-,
small- and medium-sized enterprises, including through access to
financial services
ANNEX 2 - STI AS EXPLICIT IN 2030 AGENDA LANGUAGE 107

9 9.4 By 2030, upgrade infrastructure and retrofit industries to make Outcome: Tech
them sustainable, with increased resource-use efficiency and greater
adoption of clean and environmentally sound technologies and
industrial processes, with all countries taking action in accordance
with their respective capabilities
9.5 Enhance scientific research, upgrade the technological capabilities Outcome: Inno
of industrial sectors in all countries, in particular developing countries,
including, by 2030, encouraging innovation and substantially
increasing the number of research and development workers per
1 million people and public and private research and development
spending
9.a Facilitate sustainable and resilient infrastructure development in MoI: Tech
developing countries through enhanced financial, technological and
technical support to African countries, least developed countries,
landlocked developing countries and small island developing States
9.b Support domestic technology development, research and innovation MoI: Inno
in developing countries, including by ensuring a conducive policy
environment for, inter alia, industrial diversification and value addition
to commodities
9.c Significantly increase access to information and communications MoI: Tech
technology and strive to provide universal and affordable access to
the Internet in least developed countries by 2020
12 12.a Support developing countries to strengthen their scientific and MoI: Sci/Tech
technological capacity to move towards more sustainable patterns of
consumption and production
14 14.3 Minimize and address the impacts of ocean acidification, including Outcome: Sci
through enhanced scientific cooperation at all levels
14.4 By 2020, effectively regulate harvesting and end overfishing, illegal, Outcome: Sci
unreported and unregulated fishing and destructive fishing practices
and implement science-based management plans, in order to restore
fish stocks in the shortest time feasible, at least to levels that can
produce maximum sustainable yield as determined by their biological
characteristics
14.5 By 2020, conserve at least 10 per cent of coastal and marine Outcome: Sci
areas, consistent with national and international law and based on the
best available scientific information
14.a Increase scientific knowledge, develop research capacity MoI: Sci/tech
and transfer marine technology, taking into account the
Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission Criteria and Guidelines
on the Transfer of Marine Technology, in order to improve ocean
health and to enhance the contribution of marine biodiversity to
the development of developing countries, in particular small island
developing States and least developed countries

17 17.6 Enhance North-South, South-South and triangular regional MoI
and international cooperation on and access to science,
technology and innovation and enhance knowledge sharing
on mutually agreed terms, including through improved
coordination among existing mechanisms, in particular at
the United Nations level, and through a global technology
facilitation mechanism
17.7 Promote the development, transfer, dissemination and MoI
diffusion of environmentally sound technologies to
developing countries on favourable terms, including on
concessional and preferential terms, as mutually agreed
17.8 Fully operationalize the technology bank and science, MoI
technology and innovation capacity-building mechanism
for least developed countries by 2017 and enhance the
use of enabling technology, in particular information and
communications technology
17.16 Enhance the Global Partnership for Sustainable MoI
Development, complemented by multi-stakeholder partnerships
that mobilize and share knowledge, expertise, technology
and financial resources, to support the achievement of the
Sustainable Development Goals in all countries, in particular
developing countries
ANNEX 2 - STI AS EXPLICIT IN 2030 AGENDA LANGUAGE 109
STI commitments in Addis Ababa Action Agen- ty, including linkages between multinational
da (AAAA)* companies and the domestic private sec-
tor to facilitate technology development and
National STI Policy Framework transfer, on mutually agreed terms, of knowl-
■ adopt science, technology and innovation edge and skills (§117)
strategies as integral elements of our national ■ promote entrepreneurship, including sup-
sustainable development strategies (§119) porting business incubators (§117)
■ craft policies that incentivize the creation
■ promote social innovation to support social
of new technologies, that incentivize research well-being and sustainable livelihoods (§116)
and that support innovation in developing
countries (§116) ■ recognize that traditional knowledge,
innovations and practices of indigenous peo-
Scientific Research and Education ples and local communities can support social
■ scale up investment in science, technol- well-being and sustainable livelihoods, and re-
ogy, engineering and mathematics education affirm that indigenous peoples have the right
(§119) to maintain, control, protect and develop their
cultural heritage, traditional knowledge and
■ consider using public funding to enable traditional cultural expressions (§117)
critical projects to remain in the public domain
and strive for open access to research for Technologies Supporting Specific Development
publicly funded projects, as appropriate (§118) Outcomes
■ enhance technical, vocational and ter- ■ promote the development and use of in-
tiary education and training, ensuring equal formation and communications technology
access for women and girls and encouraging infrastructure, as well as capacity-building,
their participation therein, including through in- particularly in least developed countries, land-
ternational cooperation (§119) locked developing countries and small island
developing States, including rapid universal
■ enhance cooperation to strengthen ter- and affordable access to the Internet (§114)
tiary education systems and aim to increase
access to online education in areas related to ■ encourage the development, dissemina-
sustainable development (§119) tion and diffusion and transfer of environmen-

tally sound technologies (§120)
■ increase the number of scholarships
available to students in developing countries to ■ support developing countries to strengthen
enrol in higher education (§119) their scientific, technological and innovative ca-
pacity to move towards more sustainable pat-
Industry and Innovation Systems terns of consumption and production through
■ consider setting up innovation funds science and technology (§120)
where appropriate, on an open, competitive ■ increase scientific knowledge, develop re-
basis to support innovative enterprises, par- search capacity and transfer marine technol-
ticularly during research, development and ogy … in order to improve ocean health and to
demonstration phases (§118) enhance the contribution of marine biodiver-
■ encourage knowledge-sharing and the sity (§121)
promotion of cooperation and partnerships ■ step up international cooperation and col-
between stakeholders, including between Gov- laboration in science, research, technology and
ernments, firms, academia and civil socie- innovation, including through public-private
and multi-stakeholder partnerships, and on the

basis of common interest and mutual benefit,
focusing on the needs of developing countries
and the achievement of the sustainable devel-
opment goals (§120) [for example, research
and development in vaccines and medicines,
including relevant initiatives such as Gavi
(§121); preventive measures and treatments
for the communicable and non-communi-
cable diseases (§121); earth observation
(§121); rural infrastructure (§121); agricul-
tural research and extension services and
technology development (§121); increase sci-
entific knowledge, develop research capacity
and transfer marine technology (§121)]
■ further facilitate accessible technology for

persons with disabilities [and] promote access
to technology and science for women, youth
and children (§114)
Supportive international arrangements
■ enhance international cooperation, includ-

ing ODA, in these areas, in particular to least
developed countries, landlocked developing
countries, small island developing States,
and countries in Africa [and] encourage oth-
er forms of international cooperation, including
South-South cooperation (§120)
■ recognize the importance of adequate, bal-

anced and effective protection of intellectual
property rights in both developed and develop-
ing countries in line with nationally defined pri-
orities and in full respect of WTO rules (§116)
■ commit to strengthening coherence and

synergies among science and technology initi-
atives within the United Nations system (§122)
■ established a Technology Facilitation

Mechanism to support the sustainable devel-
opment goals (§123)
■ operationalize the Technology Bank for

Least Developed Countries by 2017 (§124)
*Grouping of the commitments and bold texts are by the

Author for the analytical purposes of this paper
ANNEX 3 Overview of the main
methodologies to
support STI for SDGs
roadmaps
METHODOLOGICAL STEP/ SMART SPECIALISATION STI POLICY REVIEWS STIP REVIEWS

ORGANIZATION (EU JRC) (OECD) (UNCTAD)
Systemic approach: STI in the Modular approach: focus on Systemic approach: STI in the
DEFINE context of economic, societal collection, analysis, reporting context of economic, societal
and environmental challenges and dissemination of STI policy and environmental challenges
OBJECTIVES AND data
SCOPE
Based on existing policy Detailed analysis of STI policies instrumental

ASSESS CURRENT frameworks; requires inter- STI performance in the for economic growth and
institutional cooperation. macroeconomic context and development. Wide collection
SITUATION Quantitative and qualitative societal needs. Quantitative STI of qualitative data supported
analysis of economic, STI and indicators plus in-depth analysis by overviews of literature and
SDG indicators of specific sectors quantitative analyses
Vision for sustainable Vision developed individually Synergic vision for

DEVELOP VISION, socioeconomic development by each country based on the transformative change
of territories developed jointly analysis and recommendations developed jointly by internal and
GOALS AND by external and internal external stakeholders
TARGETS stakeholders
Entrepreneurial Discovery Stakeholders are interviewed Multiple stakeholders involved in

DIALOGUE AND Process requires permanent during the fact-finding missions. the STIP review process
involvement of public and International community
CONSULTATION private sector, academia and involved in reviews
WITH civil society in development,
STAKEHOLDERS implementation and monitoring
of the strategy and associated
activities
Foresight and similar exercises Countries can develop Technology foresights are
ASSESS recommended, although not scenarios for enhancement of strongly recommended
obligatory the national STI ecosystem
ALTERNATIVE
PATHWAYS
Clear intervention logic required, Not explicit, recommendations Specific guidance is provided
DEVELOP with implementation action plan, provided on implementation, policy
policy mix and instruments, and instruments and financial
DETAILED STI FOR financing instruments instruments
SDGs ROADMAP
DOCUMENT
Monitoring and evaluation Monitoring and evaluation Monitoring and evaluation

MONITOR frameworks are essential in S3 considered very important frameworks are strongly
approach, with clearly defined but not included. Post-review recommended, and additional
EVALUATE AND metrics and indicators analyses are possible on request support is possible on request
UPDATE PLAN
Source: Matusiak (2020)

ANNEX 3 - OVERVIEW OF THE MAIN METHODOLOGIES TO SUPPORT STI FOR SDGS ROADMAPS 113
GO-SPIN SIIG TIP PERS IN STI

(UNESCO) (UNIDO) (TIPC) (WORLD BANK)
Modular approach: focus on STI Sectoral approach: focus on Systemic approach using Modular approach: main focus
governance, explicit and implicit STI component in industrial innovation to address societal, is on STI policy expenditure and
STI policies, legal frameworks, policy; includes social inclusion, economic and environmental its impact
policy instruments and indicators economic competitiveness and challenges
environmental protection
Description of the political, Based on existing development Based on wide qualitative Quality of public spending on
economic, social, cultural plans and strategies. Includes process and review of existing STI and R&D is assessed, based
and educational contextual in-depth quantitative and policies. Uses case study on a mix of qualitative and
factors; analysis of explicit STI qualitative analyses of the approach and learning histories quantitative indicators, with the
policies, policy cycle and STI industrial landscape in the objective of understanding how
organizational chart; study of context of the country’s governments can spend better
R&D and innovation indicators development goals on STI or how they can improve
the impact of STI expenditures
on economic development
Looks at impact of existing Vision developed individually Wide vision for transformative The PERs can result in the
STI policies, based on a survey by each country with wide change achieved through STI development of vision for
enabling creation of country participation by stakeholders policies and other elements of change DIALOGUE AND
profiles with comprehensive systemic change CONSULTATION WITH
assessments of STI policies STAKEHOLDERS
Internal and external Stakeholders are involved in Wide stakeholder participation, Stakeholder involvement is part
stakeholders involved in a participatory policy-making including local and grassroots of data collection, in the form of
providing the survey responses process throughout the policy innovators interviews, access to data, etc.
and discussing the results cycle
This step can be included but is Possibility of developing Foresight and future studies Based on the analysis, the team
optional scenarios for industrial policy activities are considered discuss different options
valuable but optional
Methodology provides Developed individually by Strong focus on experimentation. Assessment results in a set
an overview of STI policy governments but based The policy mix is a part of TIP of recommendations that
instruments but does not on recommended policy development and guidance can support stronger alignment of
prescribe specific solutions instruments be provided on financing innovation policy instruments
– they can be developed at with national development
country’s request objectives, improved quality and
higher efficiency of instruments
used, and an evidence-based
framework to track results and
map expenditure to outputs and
outcomes
The regularly updated country Monitoring and evaluations are a Monitoring and formative M&E is a core part of the
profile can be a useful part of the methodology evaluation are required with methodology. A unique feature
monitoring tool the focus on learning and of PER in STI is the inclusion
improvement of impact evaluations in the
effectiveness stage.
ANNEX 4 Summary of key lessons
learned from the Global
Pilot Programme on STI
for SDGs Roadmaps
ANNEX 4 - SUMMARY OF KEY LESSONS LEARNED FROM THE GLOBAL PILOT PROGRAMME ON STI FOR SDGS ROADMAPS 115
The United Nations Inter-agency Task Team (IATT)

launched the first phase of the Global Pilot Pro-
gramme on Science, Technology and Innovation
for SDGs Roadmaps with an initial group of five
pilot countries. Under this first phase, roadmaps
have been piloted in Ethiopia, Ghana, India, Kenya
and Serbia (see table below). In addition, the Eu-
ropean Union and Japan have joined the Global
Pilot Programme to strengthen international part-
nerships on STI for SDGs roadmaps. These pilots
have been implemented using the guidance in
the draft Guidebook for the Preparation of STI for
SDGs Roadmaps.
To date, more than 20 countries have expressed

interest in joining the programme. They will be
accepted onto the programme as resources be-
come available to support their participation. The
most common challenge, experienced by all coun-
tries, has been achieving stakeholder involvement
and active participation. The pilot countries that
are doing relatively well have succeeded in in-
volving several ministries and agencies, and in
creating platforms for effective coordination and
collaboration among governments and between
governments and other stakeholders. A related
challenge has been ensuring a focus on SDGs in
the development of national plans and the STI for
SDGs Roadmap. The second major challenge has
been the availability of current data and relevant
expertise to perform the assessment to develop
priorities. In addition to COVID-19, another com-
mon problem that has slowed preparation of the
roadmaps is the lack of a specific budget to de-
velop – and more importantly to implement – the
STI for SDGs Roadmap.
FIVE COUNTRIES PARTICIPATING IN THE GLOBAL PILOT PROGRAMME ON STI FOR SDGs ROADMAPS
ETHIOPIA GHANA
Leading Ministry / Ministries Ministry of Innovation and Technology Ministry of Environment, Science,
(MINT) is lead agency; Technology and Innovation (MESTI) and
CSIR-STEPRI (policy research institute).
Ministry of Science and Higher Education
(MOSHE) later joined the roadmap initiative. Technical oversight committee co-
chaired by President’s SDG Advisory Unit
Working on modalities of collaboration.
and National Development Planning
Commission.
Involves Ministry of Finance, Ministry of
Planning, etc.
Objectives and Scope Effort so far has been based on Science Stakeholder consultation meeting in
Technology and Innovation Policy (STIP) December 2019 and first meeting of
Review concluded in 2019. Technical Task Team prioritized SDGs 1, 2,
4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 and 13. SDGs 3 and 5 will
Key SDGs that appear as planned targets
also be considered.
are 1, 2, 3, 8 and 10.
Assessment of Current Situation Has been done as part of the STIP Review; Largely based on STI Eco survey;
Included collection of data and knowledge SDG baseline report 2018; Additional STI
on development situation of country, status situational analysis ongoing, including
of national innovation system including 22 desktop research by University College
sectoral technology roadmaps. of London MSC student team as part of
partnership with UNESCO.
Alternative Technology Pathways Discussion so far has focused on preparing Focusing on university-based technology
an implementation plan covering several of incubators working on emerging
22 sectoral technology maps prepared for technologies.
Ethiopia.
Timeframe and Key Milestones COVID-19 delayed process of preparation. Assessment studies of current situation
of policies, strategies, implementation
plans: March-August 2020
■ Sensitization of key stakeholders:

January-December 2020
■ Preparation of the STI Roadmap for
the SDGs by the Technical Task Team, with
support from a consultant and research
assistance team: July-December 2020
■ Mobilization of resources,
implementation of programmes/projects/
activities, monitoring and evaluation:
January 2020 - December 2030
Execute, Monitor, Evaluate and Update Not yet applicable Not yet applicable.
Plan
Ministry of Monitoring and Evaluation is
part of the Technical Task Team and is
involved in process.
IATT Focal point UNCTAD UNESCO

INDIA KENYA SERBIA

Office of the Principal Scientific Advisor to State Department of Planning (within STI for SDGs Roadmap being developed
the Prime Minister and NITI Aayog (main National Treasury) and National by two WGs: Interministerial WG on
government policy think tank) Commission for Science, Technology, and Smart Specialisation and Industrial Policy,
Innovation (NACOSTI) within Ministry of led by Prime Minister’s Cabinet, and
Education; in partnership with Ministries Interministerial Group for Agenda 2030 (26
of ICT, Foreign Affairs, Agriculture, and Ministries) under the lead of Minister for
Industry, and supported by African Center SDGs.
for Technology Studies (ACT)
The Roadmap is operationalized by the
Ministry of Education, S&T;
Participation by multiple ministries, private
sector and academic community.
Focusing on SDGs 2, 3, 6, 7 and 17 (due to Main objective is plan for implementation Serbian STI for SDGs Roadmap is to be
India’s strong STI capability and interest in of STI policy and support for delivery of detailed action plan for the Serbian Smart
partnering with developing countries) President’s Big Four Agenda, which focuses Specialisation Strategy (4S), with the
on agriculture, manufacturing, health and main goal of fostering socioeconomic
housing, and therefore includes SDGs 1, 2, development and transformation based
8 and 9. on six knowledge-intensive priority sectors
(food, creative industries, manufacturing,
ICT, key enabling technologies, energy).
SDGs include 2, 7, 8 and 9.
Detailed R&D assessment at subnational Used indicators from various international 4S plan involved detailed assessment
and national level (2019); and national databases on SDG gaps and of economic, innovation, and research
country situation; potential of Serbia;
NITI Aayog constructed SDG India Index
for 13 of 17 SDGs on set of 62 priority Is undertaking STI Public Expenditure EC JC supported mapping of 17 SDGs,
indicators in 2018; In 2019, it was updated Review aiming to promote R&D and statistical baseline analysis and
with 100 indicators covering 54 targets technology adoption and diffusion with identification of STI inputs focused on
across 16 Goals except SGD17; increased efficiency and effectiveness. specific SDG goals;
Mapping of some key sectors completed. After this analysis SDGs 3, 4 and 12 are
under discussion as an additional priority.
Analysis of alternative technologies being Within SDG 2, focused on increasing Entrepreneurial Discovery Process framed
done as part of development of roadmap. productivity and income for smallholders the discussion of alternative targets and
and technologies for maize, rice and solutions; this is documented in separate
potatoes; workshop reports.
methodology being tested for maize.
Deep dives into specific programmes are Team will expand scope and hold Detailed STI for SDGs Roadmap will have
next step; consultations to identify what technologies detailed indicators and timeframes.
can be delivered, mobilize resources and
monitoring and evaluation platforms Expected to be completed by end 2020.
incentivize private-sector participation.
planned. Progress has been slowed due to the
COVID-19 crisis.
IATT Workshop with Japan held June 2020.
Not yet applicable, but planning includes Not yet applicable as plan is still under Not yet applicable, but 4S includes the
monitoring and evaluation and strategic preparation. outline of the monitoring and evaluation
decision system system, which will be further developed in
the STI for SDGs Roadmap based on input,
output and outcome indicators.
World Bank World Bank EU JRC, UNIDO
ETHIOPIA GHANA
Challenges/Problems/Lessons Challenges: Challenges:
1. lack of specific budget for the imple- 1. involving broad range of stakeholders for
mentation of the STI for SDGs Roadmap definition of priorities
(UNCTAD has been able to mobilize some 2. better alignment of STI policies with sec-
support for the preparation), toral priorities
2. establishing a smooth mechanism for 3. interministerial cooperation key to avoid-
collaboration across stakeholders that ing duplication
would ideally be involved in preparation of 4. capacity building in STI governance
the roadmap
3. COVID-19 crisis has slowed the whole
process
Detailed Roadmap Under preparation; Under preparation

so far implementation plans have only
been prepared for 3 of the 22 technology
roadmaps
Source: IATT, 2020.

INDIA KENYA SERBIA

Challenges: Challenges: Inadequate data for baseline Challenges: lack of sufficiently
of SDG targets or to link government disaggregated data; building trust and
1. obtaining updated data programmes to SDG targets. involving stakeholders; overcoming
2. coordination among agencies government silos; getting focus on SDGs;
Lessons:
balance between setting strategy and
3. COVID-19 crisis has slowed progress actual implementation.
1. importance of Technical Committee to
provide guidance Lessons (keys for success):
2. need for external support to develop STI 1. mobilizing own funding for implementa-
for SDGs Roadmaps due to limited skills tion of 4S, with additional EU funding
and funding 2. formation of permanent public-pri-
3. need for increased stakeholder consul- vate dialogue platform for involvement of
tation high-level stakeholders
4. most difficult and expensive step is as- 3. winning approval of PM
sessing alternative technology pathways
Under preparation but various interventions Under preparation, but team has identified Under preparation.
ongoing in agriculture, digital connectivity, needs and gaps along six agricultural value
Detailed STI for SDGs Roadmap will be the
health, energy, e-governance, tinkering chains, and current gaps in STI system.
action plan for 4S;
labs, digital ID, digital banking and health
insurance. Also, PM has announced eight will focus on specific actions to achieve the
major innovation missions. prioritized SDGs, and include monitoring,
financing and implementation system.
121
September 2020
123
Contact information
Wei Liu
United Nations Department of Social and
Economic Affairs (DESA)
Naoto Kanehira
World Bank Group
Monika Matusiak
European Commission, Joint Research Centre
KJ-NA-30606-EN-N
ISBN 978-92-76-30613-9
doi:10.2760/724479

Guidebook Complete V03

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Guidebook Complete V03

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Guidebook Complete V03

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

GUIDEBOOK

for the preparation of

PDF ISBN 978-92-76-30613-9 ISSN 1831-9424 doi:10.2760/724479

Print ISBN 978-92-76-30612-2 ISSN 1018-5593 doi:10.2760/61584

Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2021

© European Union and United Nations Inter-Agency Task Team, 2021

Images page 23, photograph, ©motorolka/Depositphotos.com – All rights reserved

Images page 25, photograph, ©FARUKBUDAK.GMAIL.COM/Depositphotos.com – All rights reserved

Images page 77, photograph, ©ssuaphoto /Depositphotos.com – All rights reserved

Images page 103, photograph, ©panxunbin/Depositphotos.com – All rights reserved

United Nations Inter-agency Task Team on Science, Technology and Innovation

Representatives of United Nations Member States, including Australia, Bar-

Graphic project prepared by Raffaella Manfredi.

1.1 Background porting the whole process of technological and in-

and Objective readiness of its final recipients to accept, own and

In this context, an STI for SDGs Roadmap has

The diversity of stakeholders involved so far in

2 Other concerns often discussed at the United Nations and

Box 1.1 Concepts and Definitions3

■ Science is fundamentally the pursuit of knowledge through systematic studies

■ Technology is the practical application of knowledge for a given end. Publicly

■ Innovation is a new way of producing, delivering or using goods and services,

1.2 Rationale of velopment plans. Developed countries tend to

STI for SDGs ation in line with the SDGs.

These three generic, yet distinct, types of plan may

Three related policy frameworks provide a nation-

Box 1.2 Why focus on STI for SDGs Roadmaps?

1.3 Need for opment funds to humanitarian emergencies, the

strengthened Nations agencies, and increased skepticism to-

international recent COVID 19 global emergency, clearly show

partnerships in the STI domains, to find evidence-based solu-

on STI for spond to such crises.

SDGs GLOBAL DISTRIBUTION

other goals.5 Effective use of STI may change the SUB-S

are able to benefit further from international part-

veloping countries to use STI inputs to make pro-

gress towards the SDGs. 150

However, the climate for international cooperation 100

in overall development aid and diversion of devel-

There are many opportunities for the internation-

■ Build capacity of countries’ STI ecosys-

■ Boost international flow and supply of

7 See: Global Sustainable Development Report (GSDR), 2019;

Box 1.3 Challenges and opportunities of emerging

3. The development of higher productivity agriculture, as well as new synthetic ma-

competition enabled by first-mover advantage on Internet-based platforms.

7. There is huge potential for endogenous innovation and technological development

diagnostics or policy reviews, analysis of coun-

The guidance included in this publication should

Chapter 3 describes international partnerships

Chapter 4 concludes with key messages, sum-

2.1 Institutional plan that also targets SDGs. Chapter 3 outlines

set-up countries should consider in developing interna-

Box 2.1 An early pilot experience of national STI for

■ Institutional arrangement integrating supply and demand sides of STI for

■ Support from international organizations. The pilot design is supported by di-

Figure 2.2 Flowchart of six key steps

• Data, evidence, good practises

Figure 2.3: Three levels of STI For SDGs Roadmaps