This issue of the GSoD In Focus explores the contribution that the Global State of Democracy (GSoD) Indices can make to the review of progress on the United Nations’ 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The GSoD Indices can be used to complement the official indicators of the SDGs, to acquire in-depth knowledge on trends in achieving the specific targets of individual SDGs. In this regard, the GSoD Indices can be used to provide data on the SDGs for poverty (SDG 1), hunger (2), health and wellbeing (3), education (4), gender equality (5), inequalities (10), sustainable cities and communities (11), peace, justice and institutions (16), and partnerships for the goals (17), as well as across the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.

Decentralization is an effective conflict resolution mechanism widely used in the countries where ethnic conflicts are experienced. However, the success chance of decentralization is highly dependent on country-specific conditions. In the light of existing theoretical considerations, this study explores the use of decentralization as a conflict resolution mechanism on Kurdish Conflict in Turkey. The research question of "To what extent can decentralization be utilized as a conflict resolution mechanism on Kurdish Conflict in Turkey?" is designed to explore the capacity of decentralization to bring peace in Kurdish Conflict through qualitative content analysis and case study approach. The analysis is constructed in the framework of two theoretical concepts, which are decentralization and conflict resolution, in order to obtain a better insight to the role of decentralization on the solution of Kurdish Conflict. Accordingly, the first part of the analysis focuses the benefits of decentralization, which provide legitimacy and effectiveness in the local governance, with an emphasis on the differences between the national and Council of Europe legislation while the second part examines on the capacity of decentralization to answer the triggers of Kurdish Conflict. Thus, it is mainly aimed to identify the possible benefits of an ideal decentralization model to be used for the resolution of Kurdish Conflict with reference to the existing problems which exacerbates the conflict due to the lack of legitimacy and effectiveness in the governance. On the basis of conducted analysis, this thesis reveals that decentralization as a conflict resolution mechanism can be used on Kurdish Conflict as an alternative and peaceful model across security-based measurements when an appropriate design is provided. However, institutional design of decentralization and regional dynamics in the Middle East can be considered as possible threats in terms of the success of an ideal decentralization model.

This report documents a workshop held on 9–10 December 2016 at the University of Edinburgh hosted by International IDEA, the Edinburgh Centre for Constitutional Law and the Global Justice Academy. The workshop explored the process and design of sub-state constitutions in fragile and conflict-affected settings, and their role in the broader political settlement and/or peacebuilding process.

The Imperative of Good Local Governance is a true state-of-the-art volume in the field of local governance, decentralization and local democracy summarizing a substantial part of the insights from original research in the last decade. It is also a future-looking volume with explicit policy relevance, paving the way for innovative thinking (and acting) on the next phase of development in the field. In a unique way it brings together authoritative contributions from authors that to a large extent have been defining the field for the last decade or more. From a theoretical perspective it is adjoining top–down and bottom–up rationalities, which is further illuminated through a wide variety of key case studies. The case studies are selected for their relevance for the theoretical perspectives offered, as well as for their paradigmatic power in the current global evolution of decentralized policies and politics. The volume concludes that overall, local development and local politics will not go away – it has a huge potential – but also that the field is full of unfulfilled promises, some of which could be remedied through the perspectives revealed in this volume.