Complex Challenges & Human Goals

Dave & Milton's points are both well-taken.  Here are some follow-on thoughts.
First, the SDGs are available in StratML Part 1, Strategic Plan, format, at https://stratml.us/drybridge/index.htm#UNSDG
Second, the goals and objectives that are implicit in treaties, conventions, and programs can be parsed out and rendered StratML format as well.  It just takes more time and trouble than it should.  AI could be usefully applied to assist but it would be much better if the authors and editors of those documents were publishing them in open, standard, machine-readable format in the first instance.  (Doing so would also help them do a better job of understanding not only what they are trying to accomplish but also what may be required.)  
All organizations, worldwide, whose plans and reports ought to be matters of public record should be expected -- by their own stakeholders -- to apply the good practice set forth for U.S. federal agencies in section10 of the GPRA Modernization Act (GPRAMA).
Third, to be effectively addressed, complexity must be broken down into smaller, manageable parts.  StratML Part 2 does that by breaking performance plans and reports into three layers:  

1) longer-term goals, typically results to be achieved in 3 to 5 years; 2) near-term objectives, results to the realized during the next resource allocation cycle, usually a fiscal or calendar year; 3) performance indicators for each objective, of which there may as many as appropriate, each with its own start and end dates.

Moreover, within organizations, complexity is broken down in the hierarchy of the organzations themselves.  What is an objective for a higher-level becomes a goal for the next layer down and vice versa.  The performance indicators in plans for each layer should be "strategically aligned" (linked to each other) and the <Relationship> elements of StratML Part 2 support such linkages.  Relationships can be named and described.
Note also that there is no reason that anyone aiming to accomplish anything must be part of a formal organization.  Anyone can take it upon themselves to support any objective they choose, thereby self-appointing themselves as a partner in a virtual organization focusing on the objective itself (rather than a bureaucracy surrounding and potential impeding its realization).
Here are a couple more complex discussions of how to tame complexity:  https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/how-deal-complexity-natty-gur/ & https://hbr.org/2020/01/taming-complexity
Fourth, ISO is linking its standards to the SDGs.  For example, the StratML standard (ISO 17469-1) has been identified as supporting Goal 9: Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure - Build resilient infrastructure, promote inclusive and sustainable industrialization and foster innovation.  In reality, however, StratML can be applied to support all of the SDGs as well as any other goal (including those as broad as world peace or as narrow as determining whether an image is "authentic" or as has been altered).
Fifth and finally for now, yes, new and better tools are needed to support more mature, business-quality networking.  However, there is no need for any of us to wait for the tech giants to build them for us.  By applying our own knowledge and expertise we can form virtual partnerships and build the necessary tools ourselves.  I invite you to check out https://connectedcommunity.net/ & https://aboutthem.info/ and join my quest.
Owen Amburhttps://www.linkedin.com/in/owenambur/
 

    On Saturday, November 5, 2022 at 09:47:59 AM EDT, ProjectParadigm-ICT-Program <metadataportals@yahoo.com> wrote:  
 
 I suspect that if we want to define attainable goals in order to establish which problems need solving and what technologies are needed to do so, we are back to the post in which I mentioned that the sustainable development goals of the UN (SDGs) need just that.
Owen Ambur correctly indicated that the SDGs are not adequate input for a conversion into StratML format.
The main problem with converting treaties, conventions, programs and so forth adopted by the UN is that they are negotiated by bureaucrats and diplomats and consequently not in an strategic planning format which defines the problems at hand, scope, relevant parameters, objectives, goals as input for desired outcomes.
The following is indicative of why this happens:

International treaties have mostly failed to produce their intended effects
https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2122854119

The language used in UN documents and for that matter most public government documents on earth does not have any adequate knowledge representation and reasoning formats.
Unfortunately we do not have any NLP AI  to do just that as well.
This is why the current state of the art is actually bits and pieces of technology all over the place serving the industries most in need or best served by using AI and consequently KR&R.
Working on this problem we may be able to inspire some tech giants to come up with just the tools needed.

Milton PonsonGSM: +297 747 8280
PO Box 1154, Oranjestad
Aruba, Dutch Caribbean
Project Paradigm: Bringing the ICT tools for sustainable development to all stakeholders worldwide through collaborative research on applied mathematics, advanced modeling, software and standards development 

    On Saturday, November 5, 2022 at 08:45:20 AM AST, Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org> wrote:  
 
 

On 4 Nov 2022, at 18:30, Owen Ambur <Owen.Ambur@verizon.net> wrote:
Whereas Dave says "the focus is on what is needed to solve different kinds of complex tasks," I'd suggest in slightly different wording that the focus should be on achieving human goals and objectives.

If the goals and objectives are very high level, I don’t see how they will be useful in directing the technical research, e.g. solve world peace and happiness for all, doesn’t provide anything concrete for technical challenges in machine learning and reasoning,
Dave Raggett <dsr@w3.org>