The story behind declining homicides & violent crimes in Philadelphia – Inside Story 102625 – 6abc Philadelphia

Report on Philadelphia’s Public Safety Improvements and Alignment with Sustainable Development Goals

Executive Summary

A recent analysis of public safety in Philadelphia reveals a significant decline in homicides and violent crime throughout 2024 and 2025. This achievement is attributed to strategic, multi-sector partnerships and targeted investment in community-based initiatives. This report examines these developments through the lens of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions), SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals), and SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities).

Collaborative Strategy for Violence Reduction (SDG 16 & SDG 17)

The city’s success in curbing violent crime directly supports the objectives of SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions, which aims to significantly reduce all forms of violence. Key officials, including Adam Geer, the City’s Chief Public Safety Director, and David Brown, Executive Director of the Civic Coalition to Save Lives, have highlighted the critical role of intentional collaboration.

• Public-Private-Civil Society Partnerships: The model demonstrates a successful application of SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals, by fostering effective collaboration between municipal government and civic organizations.
• Resource Allocation: Directing financial resources to community-level programs has proven instrumental in addressing the root causes of violence, building trust, and strengthening local institutions.
• National Model: Philadelphia’s approach is emerging as a replicable national model for achieving SDG 16 targets within an urban context.

Broader Implications for Urban Sustainability and Social Welfare

The reduction in crime has wider implications for the city’s overall health and sustainability, touching upon several interconnected SDGs.

1. Sustainable Cities and Communities (SDG 11): Creating safer neighborhoods is a foundational step toward making cities more inclusive, safe, resilient, and sustainable. Enhanced public safety improves the quality of life and encourages community engagement.
2. Poverty and Hunger (SDG 1 & SDG 2): The report also notes intersecting socio-economic challenges, such as the impending expiration of SNAP benefits. This development poses a direct threat to regional progress on SDG 1 (No Poverty) and SDG 2 (Zero Hunger), highlighting the need for integrated policy solutions that address public safety alongside economic stability.
3. Strong Institutions (SDG 16): Discussions concerning key political races, such as for the Philadelphia District Attorney, underscore the importance of effective governance and strong, accountable institutions in sustaining long-term peace and justice.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

• SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

  This goal is central to the article’s main topic, which is the “steep decline in homicides and violent crime” in Philadelphia. The discussion about public safety, crime reduction, and the upcoming election for the District Attorney directly relates to promoting peaceful societies and building effective, accountable institutions of justice.

• SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals

  The article explicitly attributes the success in crime reduction to “intentional partnerships and resources poured into community-based programs and organizations.” This highlights the collaboration between the city government (Chief Public Safety Director) and civil society (Civic Coalition to Save Lives), which is the core principle of SDG 17.

• SDG 1: No Poverty

  The article mentions the issue of “SNAP benefits expiring by November 1st” and how this will “affect our region.” The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) is a key social protection system aimed at alleviating poverty, making its status directly relevant to SDG 1.

• SDG 2: Zero Hunger

  Connected to the expiration of SNAP benefits, SDG 2 is also relevant. SNAP is a primary mechanism for ensuring food security for low-income individuals and families. The termination of these benefits poses a direct threat to the goal of ending hunger and ensuring access to food.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

1. Target 16.1: Significantly reduce all forms of violence and related death rates everywhere.

   The article’s focus on the “steep decline in homicides and violent crime” in Philadelphia is a direct reflection of progress toward this target at a local level.

2. Target 17.17: Encourage and promote effective public, public-private and civil society partnerships, building on the experience and resourcing strategies of partnerships.

   The success story is attributed to the collaboration between the City of Philadelphia and the Civic Coalition to Save Lives. The article states these “intentional partnerships” have “made the difference on curbing crime,” which directly aligns with the aim of this target.

3. Target 1.3: Implement nationally appropriate social protection systems and measures for all…and achieve substantial coverage of the poor and the vulnerable.

   The mention of “SNAP benefits expiring” points to a potential setback for this target. SNAP is a critical social protection system, and its expiration would reduce coverage for the poor and vulnerable populations in the region.

4. Target 2.1: By 2030, end hunger and ensure access by all people, in particular the poor and people in vulnerable situations…to safe, nutritious and sufficient food all year round.

   The expiration of SNAP benefits directly threatens food access for vulnerable populations, making this target highly relevant to the issues discussed in the article.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

• Indicator 16.1.1: Number of victims of intentional homicide per 100,000 population.

  This indicator is directly implied by the article’s lead story about the “steep decline in homicides.” A change in the number or rate of homicides is the primary way to measure this decline.

• Indicator 17.17.1: Amount of United States dollars committed to (a) public-private partnerships and (b) civil society partnerships.

  The article implies this indicator by mentioning “resources poured into community-based programs and organizations” as a key factor for success. The amount of these resources would be a direct measure of the commitment to the partnership.

• Indicator 1.3.1: Proportion of population covered by social protection floors/systems.

  The concern over “SNAP benefits expiring” implies a potential negative change in this indicator. The number of people losing benefits would directly impact the proportion of the population covered by this crucial social protection system.

4. Summary Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: 6abc.com