At the end of June, we were invited to attend the Hamburg Sustainability Conference for the first time. The conference brings together governments, international organisations, businesses, researchers and civil society to move sustainable development from commitments towards actual cooperation and action.

It took place against a difficult backdrop. Progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals is falling behind, budgets are being cut, geopolitical tensions are growing, and governments in many parts of the world are turning increasingly inward. According to the UN, only 17% of SDG targets are on track, while the funding gap stands at around $4 trillion. At the same time, the problems discussed in Hamburg, from climate change and debt to conflict, trade and technological disruption, cannot be addressed by any country or organisation alone.

The central theme of the conference was therefore straightforward: The Power of Cooperation: Driving Progress Together. Discussions focused not only on what needs to change, but also on the partnerships and institutions through which change might actually happen.

As part of that, we were invited to present Propel as a Solution Pitch and show our work on turning fragmented knowledge into collective intelligence for SDG action. Our argument: organisations already hold enormous amounts of experience and evidence about what works, what does not, and why. Right now, this critical knowledge remains scattered across institutions, reports, countries and people. Without the ability to connect that knowledge, our collective ability to make good decisions remains limited.

In line with our appeal for more collective intelligence rather than gatekeeping, one of the biggest conversations at the conference was about how the relationships underlying international cooperation need to change.

One of the main outcomes of the conference was the launch of the South-North Commission on Development. The Commission builds on the legacy of the Brandt Commission, established in 1977 to examine economic and social inequalities between industrialised and developing countries. The new Commission brings together representatives from the “Global South” and “Global North”, including people from politics, civil society, international organisations, academia, and business.

Its ambition is to explore what international cooperation should look like in an increasingly multipolar world, contribute to discussions about what comes after the 2030 Agenda, and develop recommendations on issues including trade, climate, debt, conflict, and development finance. Its stated principles include equal participation in setting the agenda and making decisions, broad representation, open debate, and regional consultations across Africa, Asia, Europe and Latin America. On paper, at least, the aim is not simply to bring more countries into an existing conversation. It is to reconsider how the conversation itself is organised.

The decision to change its name from the North-South to the South-North Commission is meant to symbolise challenging the, often still prevalent, assumption that ideas, resources and solutions naturally travel only in the former direction. There is a general understanding that with interconnected challenges around the globe, there is no more room to just put a band-aid on relationships and fall back on the predominant order. Especially in times where the sector is challenged constantly, and a discourse of a zero-sum world order is becoming louder. 

Listening to the launch, we could not help but think about the similarities with the current localisation debate in the humanitarian and development sectors. It is encouraging that the conversation is taking place and that critical voices are being heard more openly. But this is only a first step. What happens next will determine whether there will be a real change or whether it remains largely symbolic.

As we have also seen in conversations surrounding the humanitarian reset, more diverse representation is important. But who is in the room is only one part of the question. Who sets the agenda before the meeting? Who controls the information available? Who translates discussions into recommendations? And who has the power to act on them?

Those questions are not limited to NGOs, donors or humanitarian operations alone anymore. But having listened to similar themes throughout the conference, it becomes clear that perhaps shifting the way we work for the common, global public good is part of a much larger renegotiation of how international cooperation works.

Opening these conversations on global platforms creates space to challenge the current system and state more openly what many have known for years: our ways of working need to change drastically if we are serious about our responsibilities towards the SDGs. Interconnected challenges cannot be addressed through relationships that continue to treat some actors primarily as decision-makers and others as recipients, implementers or sources of information. 

Changing North-South to South-North is a small symbolic move. It will only become meaningful if it is followed by shared authority, shared knowledge and shared accountability. Sustainable transformation depends on the ability to make informed, coordinated decisions across countries, institutions, and programmes.

Otherwise, it risks becoming the same partnership in a different font.