Strasbourg

Local governments are territorial entities whose political leaders are accountable to their citizens and must ensure the provision of public services such as education, health, and housing... Their essential role in the protection of human rights is indisputable. In our societies marked by inequality, discrimination, difficulty in accessing affordable housing, and lack of access to adequate health or education services, human rights have local effects. Because local governments are closely connected to their constituents, they clearly play a vital role in the realization of human rights. This is why local governments and their representatives must be on the front lines to defend and promote human rights. 

Due to the proximity between elected officials and their citizens, the local and regional level is best positioned to analyze the human rights situation, identify issues, and implement effective solutions to resolve them. It is on the ground, in regions, cities, and neighborhoods, as close as possible to daily life, that human rights must be brought to life. 

The competencies of local governments are increasingly varied and complex. Local and regional governments make individual or general decisions, particularly in education, housing, health, environment, or law enforcement, which directly or indirectly affect human rights and may impact individuals' enjoyment of those rights. 

The responsibilities of political leaders and public officials in local governments are to:

• Respect (refrain from violating individual human rights),

• Protect (safeguard human rights against violations by others),

• Fulfil (establish and/or maintain systems to enforce human rights),

• Promote (encourage understanding and respect for human rights) 

In Strasbourg, we chose to use the SDG budget to transform with legitimacy. 

As early as 2020, it became essential to make the budget the primary lever for a transformation geared toward sustainability, and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) adopted by the UN in 2015 provided the framework. The budget of a French public authority relies on a relatively rigid accounting structure. It is constantly affected by fiscal uncertainties, changes in funding, socio-economic crises, and, by nature, it is always insufficient. However, in the face of the (climate, social, and democratic) challenges we face, it is necessary not only to make public action more understandable for everyone (staff and citizens) but also to increase its impact and ability to act. The SDGs emerged as a highly powerful framework for transformation for three reasons: 

• They promote a change in values, are based on human rights, express the will to meet human needs (hunger, poverty, health, education, water, employment…), emphasize the need to focus on the most vulnerable, and introduced the concept of commons governance. 

• They are both “universal” and “territorialized,” allowing for free appropriation while also revealing the necessary alignment of actions across different scales. 

• They are built systemically, allowing the complexity of interactions (contradictions, synergies, or leverage effects) to be understood. Although they define a direction, the path depends on individual decisions, with necessary compromises or even sacrifices. 

Our “SDG Budget” approach has evolved over several editions, and we can distinguish three components: a mapping of public policies specific to the territory, a methodology for applying it to the annual budget (investment and operations), and a steering support process for departments, which is currently being tested. This initiative clearly aims to provide the local executive with a governance tool for transformation. 

Thus, the SDG Budget mapping is presented during the vote on the draft budget, alongside the Sustainable Development Report. It allows for the presentation of annual financial priorities in relation to global objectives, clearly and analytically to all citizens, which is progress. But due to the interest sparked by this work—especially from administrative and financial managers who saw in it a way to “give meaning to their actions”—and due to the new budget constraints arising from the energy crisis, it was decided to further explore its operational transformative potential. 

This is why the third component, currently being tested, involves supporting the departments, which form the core of the budgetary process, in steering their actions more effectively. 

Initially, the mapping must enable a better understanding of synergies and contradictions at play, to provide responses. Recommendations may be sent to the departments, to be taken into account the following year. In a second stage, two more “filters” are applied to the initial SDG matrix: one climatic—the “carbon” evaluation—and the other social—the “gender-sensitive” evaluation. Both will help identify unfavourable expenditures and thus fuel subsequent political discussions and arbitrations. 

At a time when global challenges mobilize us all, local governments are called to implement transformations with finite financial resources. This financial constraint and urgency often force them to optimize budgets or forgo spending, sometimes at the risk of social discontent. It is therefore increasingly necessary to base decisions on real legitimacy, whether derived from a scientifically established (quantified) situation or a socially accepted (discussed) one. The constraint also necessitates a real effort to align actions across levels and invites us to open essential spaces for political dialogue so that, in this interdependent world, we can work collectively in the same direction.