Decentralising UN SDG Consultancy: Why Local Universities Must Lead

For decades, United Nations agencies have relied heavily on expert advice and consultancy from the “world’s top universities.” This pattern extends to the design, planning, and evaluation of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs, 2000-2015) and their successor, the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs, 2015-2030).

But the reality is that measuring progress on the current SDGs—especially at the country level—is not the same as running experiments in a high-tech lab. It requires layers of sustained, face-to-face human interactions, and deep familiarity with local contexts -- something us, lesser mortals, call field engagement. You cannot helicopter in a methodology, run a quick survey, and expect to truly grasp a region’s social and economic dynamics.

Take, for instance, the much-referenced J-PAL (Abdul Latif Jameel Poverty Action Lab) at MIT. Its randomised control trials (RCTs) have brought rigour to development economics, no doubt. But critics have pointed out that such methods, while statistically beautiful, often struggle to capture the complex, evolving realities of communities—especially in regions where relationships, trust, and context matter as much as data points. Yet, economists from institutions like J-PAL have indeed served as advisors to UN agencies, shaping policy far beyond the environments their trials were conducted in.

Hiring or contracting Western university research centres for SDG-related fieldwork is expensive, often unsustainable, and, more importantly, non-contextual. What works in one country—or even one province—may be irrelevant in another.

A new approach is overdue

I propose different approach — something more grounded, legitimate, and cost-effective: UN agencies should partner with credible local universities in each country (and with multiple universities in larger nations).

Why this will work better:

1. Trust and legitimacy – Local universities already have the trust of their governments, economies, and societies.
2. Amplified outreach – UN agencies’ messages can be shared with thousands of students from the same country or region, embedding development discourse in the next generation of leaders.
3. Lower costs, equal competence – Local institutions can carry out surveys, outreach, and even consultancy with the same professionalism as international agencies, but at a fraction of the cost.
4. Social legitimacy – Academic dialogues, conferences, and seminars hosted by these institutions can give UN initiatives far greater cultural and political acceptance.

Global Knowledge, Local Production 

Let Western universities focus on providing consultancy for their own countries. The UN’s global mandate requires global participation in knowledge production, not just global distribution of a few institutions’ perspectives.

The SDGs were never meant to be an abstract global checklist. They are, in their essence, deeply local. And so must be the expertise that shapes them. 

Recognise and Decentralise

This isn’t about downgrading technical excellence. It’s about recognising that development policy is a social process first, and a technical process second. And that process must take root where the change is intended to happen.

Decentralising SDG advisory and consultancy work would not just make the UN’s initiatives more accepted — it would embed them in the fabric of national discourse, increasing the likelihood of sustained participation and local ownership.

Final Word

At a time when the very legitimacy of multilateral organisations is being questioned, UN agencies could strengthen their standing by rooting their work in local institutions — bringing together the vision & mission of global goals and participatory partnership of local institutions.