I recently travelled to Minsk and attended a large summit that brought together over 37 countries to discuss progress on the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in Europe and Central Asia. What I witnessed is that countries are increasingly taking ownership of the agenda. But I also saw a number of gaps to be filled and questions to be answered. Here’s a summary of my take-aways:

A majority of countries have decided to mainstream or align the SDGs in their National Development Strategies and plans, and governments are putting together the right mechanisms to coordinate internally, reaching across ministries and reporting to Presidents or Prime Minister’s offices.

Representatives of parliaments and civil society also spoke with clarity on the role they could play in the process. It’s encouraging to see ‘whole of society’ was given notable credence.

Regarding funding, participants spoke of reforming taxation, eliminating unsustainable subsidies, tackling illicit financial flows and using remittances to fund development. I also felt many actors were on board when it came to giving the private sector a prominent role, introducing grand innovations or blending together different types of financing.

Finally, it was most encouraging to see gender front and center in the discussions. Many stressed the economic benefits of closing the gender equality gap, whether through the elimination of violence against women or the need to pay women and men equally.

So, where do we go from here? Here are a few crucial considerations from the summit:

1. SDG coordination mechanisms run the risk of promoting a parallel process to core decision-making fora, such as cabinets or council of ministers, rather than being engines of change from within government institutions. More important yet, it’s crucial we make sure these processes don’t leave a superficial mark, but succeed in unleashing genuine transformation.

2. In many countries, the democratic space is shrinking and institutions are becoming less independent. Governments need to fight to ensure processes are actually inclusive, and institutions like media and civil society organizations are meaningfully represented.

3. Data, though vital, is not an end-in-itself. At the end of the day, governments need to ask what is done with the data collected and how it shaped decisions.

4. In many cases, bureaucracies end up replicating old structures and processes. Siloed, unfunded priorities and mandates in development planning need to become a thing of the past.

5. The devil is in the financial details. The agenda requires a broader set of public-private partnerships, with ministries of finance and economy adopting a central role.

6. Implementing the SDGs will require trade-offs, meaning that conflicting agendas will ultimately drive certain decisions. It’s essential that governments tackle the incentives or disincentives for taking decisions that benefit everyone over the long term.

7. The specific role and expectation of local governments and communities in planning, policy making and budgeting was absent from the conversation. Without fully engaged local governments and communities, the effort will fail. It’s also crucial local governments are given the space to experiment and own the process of implementing the SDGs at the bottom of the chain.