Sustainable Development Goals

The Rio +20 conference kicks off tomorrow (20th June) and speculation on the success or otherwise of this event focused on sustainable development is rife. The principle focus of the conference will be:

1. A green economy in the context of sustainable development and poverty and  alleviation and

2. An institutional change for sustainable development

In addition to these themes one of the most hotly debated and contested outcomes will be the setting in motion of a process that  establishes Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).  These goals will replace the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs)  for the 15 years following the expiration of the MDGs in 2015. According to Lidia Brito (2012) Director of UNESCO, SDGs will differ from MDGs in three main ways. First, MDGs centered around seven social goals and just one environmental goal. Long-term social and economic improvement will need closer attention to be paid to the environment. Second, whereas MDGs focused on developing countries, SDGs need buy-in from all nations. Third, MDGs were hastily assembled without thorough analysis.

 But exactly what these goals should look like is unclear.  The original proposal put forward by the governments of Colombia and Guatemala states that the goals should build on Agenda 21(UN 1992) and should include the following themes:

• Food security
• Energy access, including with renewable sources
• Oceans, including fisheries
• Sustainable human settlements (cities)
• Water, integrated management

These sweeping themes though give very little indication of what the SDGs may look like.  On this I turn to  Jeffrey Sachs, advisory to both Kofi Anan and Ban Ki- Moon.  Sachs (2012) has recently discussed what he thinks the goals should look like, and a wise choice would be to pay attention to this analysis. The following will briefly summarise.  Initially, Sachs says that the goals should focus on two considerations:

1.  Global priorities  that need active public participation

2.  Quantitative analysis

Essentially, the vision outlined by Sachs for the   SDGs will be a combination of the tripple bottom line, environment, economy, society  and good governance.

SDG 1 - By 2030 all the worlds people will have access to safe water, sanitation, nutrition, primary health services.  Basic infrastructure including , electricity, roads, and connectivity to the global information network

SDG 2- All nations adopt economic strategies that increasingly build on sustainable best practice technologies, market incentives and individual responsibility.  Low carbon energy systems, sustainable urban areas and stabalisation of the worlds population through voluntary fertility choices

SDG 3- Social inclusion - Every country will promote the well being and capabilities of all their citizens, enabling all citizens to reach their potential.  There is discussion here of improved measurement and base lining as well a reporting on life satisfaction.  Special attention is given to youth and the elderly.  Sachs talks about the inadequacy of traditional measures of economic prosperity such as Gross Domestic Product.  Bhutan is used as an example where it has introduced 'Gross National Happiness'.

SDG 4 - Governance - here Sachs talks about the role of good governance from the global to the local level, and inclusive and democratic system that empowers and avoids marginalization.

Sachs goes on to talk about the lessons that can also be leaned from the millennium development goals emphasizing their strengths and weaknesses:

Table 1: Millennium Development Goals Strengths and Weaknesses

	Strengths	Weakness
1	Easy to state and concise	No intermediate milestones during the 15 year period
2	Not legally binding commitments	Need for more accurate data
3	Could be pursued through practical and specific measures adopted by government, business, and civil societies	Need for a more direct engagement from the private sector
4		Societies worldwide did not adequately invest - possibly 2-3 per cent of global investment for the future

Of course the weakness of the MDGs also present the lessons that need to be learned for the SDGs over the next 15 years or so.  Glaser (2012) strongly argues that sustainable development goals should be firmly based in science.  He suggests that 'measuring progress on SDG's will require agreed sets of indicators for use a tnational regional and international levels' (2012:35). Caution needs to be observed here however becasue as Garnasjordet (2012) observes
 'The selection of indicators is not a technical process, but includes normative value judgments. Assessment of sustainability needs to take place within learning institutions, with extended participation of societal interests, and with feedback between the development of statistical indicators and their use in sustainability policy (2012:334)


  The outcomes at Rio will be the beginning of the debate as to what the SDGs actually need to look like before the MDGs expire in 2015.   The vision that Sach's outlines and the opportunities he identifies need to be affirmed with political will that is capable of incorporating all governance actors that  effect the shape and outcome of the SDG's.

Of course the deliberations that follow, will be beset, as all discussion on SD are with the same contradictions that have made this conept so dymanic and appealing over the past three decades. The evolving, fluctuting definition is a point in fact.  For example UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon believes that

 Too often the discussions on sustainable development get stuck in emphasizing trade-offs between growth, poverty and environment,” Mr. Ban said. “Now we need to ensure that these important discussions – especially regarding a post-2015 agenda – advance economic, social, and environment objectives in a balanced and integrated manner.” (UN: 2013)

The emphais here is on the three pillars definition the need to balance these goals.  However, as thoughts and actions turn to what the SDGs will actually look like we start to see mixed messages. A  recent article in Nature   asserts that the classic model of sustainable development, of three integrated pillars -- economic, social and environmental -- that has served nations and the UN for over a decade, is flawed because it does not reflect reality. "As the global population increases towards nine billion people sustainable development should be seen as an economy serving society within Earth's life support system, not as three pillars," says co-author Dr. Priya Shyamsundar from the South Asian Network for Development and Environmental Economics, Nepal.

  

References

Brito, L., (2012) Analyzing Sustainable Development Goals, Science  335(6087):1396

Borne, G., A Framework for Sustainable Global Development and effective Governance of Risk, Lewisham ,New York, Edwin Mellen Press
Glaser, G. (2012). "Policy: Base sustainable development goals on science." Nature advance online publication.

Garnåsjordet^, P., Aslaksen^, I., Giampietro^, M. Funtowicz S., Ericson^, T., (2012) Sustainable Development Indicators from Statistics to Politics, Environmental Policy and Governance 22(5)322.336
Griggs, D., (2013) Policy: Sustainable Development Goals for Poeple and Planet 495:305-307
Sachs, J., (2012) from Millennium Development Goal to Sustainable Development Goals  379(9832)2206-2211

UN (1992) Agenda 21 http://www.un.org/esa/dsd/agenda21/
UN (2012) http://www.un.org/en/development/desa/news/sustainable/sdgs-working-group.html

The Future we Want: Negotiating Sustainable Development at Rio+20

Having had first hand experience of negotiations within the United Nations  I 'note with interest' (a little negotiation humour there)   that the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development  (Rio+20) outcome document is still under negotiation at this late stage of the game.   The third round of 'informal informal' consultations on the draft outcome document titled the 'Future we want'  took place from 29 May to 2 June 2012 at UN Headquarters in New York.  This additional informal negotiating session was convened because of the lack of consensus on the primary themes of the conference, namely  the green economy and the institutional framework for sustainable development (IFSD)


It is also of interest to note that information technology was perceived as  a hurdle to the negotiating process.  The environmental News Bulletin Service  reported that  excessive 24-hour control from capitals (home states), sapped negotiators initiative and slowed down negotiations. There has been some debate in recent years of the role of information promoting sustainable development so this insight into the negotiating process adds an interesting perspective on this relationship.  Of course the negotiation of sheer complexity of issues that relate to sustainable development is a significant hurdle in its own right.  And returning to the central themes of the conference the Green Economy  and the IFSD received little early consensus, also a significant hurdle.  There is also the issue of defining and effectively articulating the Sustainable Development Goals Other key areas of debate include several issues within the framework for action, such as climate change, oceans and food and agriculture.


As always within the international negotiating architecture the differing North/South perceptions on how sustainable development should be perceived and implemented is present.  In this case China and the G77 have asserted the 'Principle of Common but Differentiated Responsibility'.   The EU has focused on setting specific targets by 2030 including those relating to biodiversity and this in turn has been opposed by the United States.  The Realpolitik of International Relations.  Other issues that seem to be taking a front seat are the possible upgrading of the United Nations Environment Programme, a proposal supported by the EU and objected to by the US and Russian Federation. Of course we are in a world now that is vastly different from the Rio conference of 1992.  A number of global pressures impact on the success of this months conference

• Economic drift
• Financial Shocks
• Turmoil in the Eurozone
• The impact of the US election year 
• Lack of political commitment from world leaders 
• Lack of reference to UNCSD in recent international summits.  Including the G8 summit

There is then general concern that this most recent conference focusing on sustainable development will be only a shadow of the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (The Earth Summit) 20 years previously.  The Rio Principles and Agenda 21 being notable milestones on the history and the future of sustainable development both globally and locally.

However, international conferences such as these extend beyond the concrete tangible outputs, of which i hope there are many, providing hope and many reasons to be cheerful.  For example, it has brought sustainable development into sharper focus, provoking citizens’ groups with a renewed fervor to sway government negotiations.  The International Institute of Sustainable Development  reports that  NGO representatives were seen sitting in on informal contact groups without objections raised from delegates. The activists of “Occupy Rio+20” could also be seen as a sign that the economic downturn has actually promoted sustainable development awareness, and has put people’s well-being, socioeconomic equity and environmental health in a strong public spotlight. 

What ever the outcomes of the conference (June 20-22) it provides a global focus on sustainable development as one of, if not the most important ideas of the 21st Century 

Sustainable Development and Surfing: Volcom Fiji Pro

Sustainablesurf and the Center for Surf Research are once again pushing the frontiers of sustainability in the surfing world.  Both have partnered with this years Volcom Fiji Pro that began yesterday to make this a Deep Blue Surfing event.  Read more at http://sustainablesurf.org/contests/.   


The Center for Surf Research has developed surf credits to support sustainable surf tourism programmes across the globe   http://surfcredits.org/about-us/  


I recently spoke to Derek Sabori Head of Sustainability and Corporate Social Responsibility at Volcom and was impressed with his commitment to the principles of sustainability.  This he displayed not only in his efforts within Volcom but also at a personal level. I think his authorship of a children book that follows the exploits of the earth bug crew says it all. brilliant.   http://earthbugcrew.com/

As I continue looking at and researching sustainability in the surfing world i have become increasingly impressed with the level of commitment that I see towards sustainability at all levels.  More as the work evolves.  


 See Volcoms press release below


VOLCOM FIJI PRO ALIGNS WITH NUMEROUS PARTNERS TO TACKLE SUSTAINABILITY IN ITS INAUGURAL EVENT



Costa Mesa, CA. May 30th, 2012 – The Volcom Fiji Pro is the company’s first Association of Surfing Professionals (ASP) World Title surfing event and will be host to the worlds Top 34 surfers at one of the best breaks in the world – Cloudbreak and/or Restaurants. Not resting on those laurels, and in line with their New Future philosophy, Volcom is rolling out a string of initiatives that will make the Volcom Fiji Pro one of the most sustainable surf events in recent memory.


“This is a really important event for us and we are dedicated to doing it right across the board,” said Ryan Immegart, Volcom’s SVP of Marketing. “Sustainability is a top priority for the company, and the Volcom Fiji Pro is a perfect opportunity for us to take this focus to the next level.”


By partnering with Tavarua Island Resort and select non-profit organizations, Volcom has set a number of objectives it plans to accomplish during the event. They include:


Partnering with SustainableSurf.Org and following the ASP’s newly released green event guidelines to make this the first, official Deep Blue Surfing Event in ASP World Championship Tour history.


Running a carbon neutral event by offsetting the carbon footprint of the surf contest with Carbonfund.org.


Promoting sustainable surf tourism in partnership with San Diego State University’s Center for Surf Research to collaboratively launch Surf Credits, a program where surf travelers can give back socially and environmentally to places they travel.


Raising funds and awareness for the medical/dental focused Loloma Foundation who distributes medicine, clothing, school supplies and other necessities to many agencies throughout the South Pacific.


Delivering clean water to local residents in partnership with Tavarua Island Resort and Give Clean Water. The joint effort will outfit two local villages and their schools with clean drinking water filters.


Details regarding each of the initiatives will be forthcoming and a dedicated page to feature all the Sustainability activity will be featured prominently on the volcomfijipro.com website.


(Source: www.sustainablesurf.org)

Identifying Barriers and Opportunities for a Transition to a Low Carbon Society at the Nexus: Parish Councils

I see so many opportunities for promoting sustainable development and creating sustainable communities at the  parish council level of government. My work so far with parish’s has looked at governance structures and the role the sustainable development might play as well as possible responses to climate change. Relating to this i see a strong role for parish councils in the transition to a low carbon economy.   The UK Governments focus on localism increasingly puts the impetus on local communities to address these issues. It is very clear however, that community engagement with energy systems is poorly understood and there is a need for further  research in this area.

In particular the question that needs to be asked is

 “What are the opportunities and barriers of sustained community engagement with energy issues to facilitate a transition to a low carbon society?”

 In order that this is answered the following objectives should be addressed.  In order to answer this i suggest here that the parish council should be ued as a focal point and a model for best practice, and here’s why

TPCs are the closest level of government to the community as well as being an integral part of the community.  They are embedded in multiple community groups as well as being the platform for the community’s connection to local government and vice versa. There are over 10000 councils in England, that provide employment for over 25,000 staff with an annual expenditure of around £400 million (NALC 2010).  Taking on a social science perspective I  characterise parish councils as a nexus where multiple global and local issues converge.  Using this study group very specific local issues concerning community and energy can be addressed whilst simultaneously providing the breadth of analysis and the transferability of findings on a national basis.  With the above in mind 4 main these need to be addressed

Energy Literacy and Visibility

The role of energy literacy and the visibility of energy use as well as corresponding behavioural change is complex and often counter intuitive.  This is especially the case in areas relating to climate change (Hulme 2009).  For example, it is increasingly recognised that more information or visibility of energy related issues does not necessarily translate into effective behavioural change, either at the community or individual level (Borne 2009d; SEMBE 2008).  Perceptual and discursive relationship between community engagement with energy and subsequent behaviour need to be explored.  This will be contextualised with the tangible assessments of the surrounding physical and legislative (structural) attributes of the specific area.   Furthermore, by exploring the networks of parish councils it will be possible to assess how information is shared and disseminated, not only within a single community but also across a network of communities.  For example, it was identified in previous research that there is often a non viral transference of information systems of best practice that pose considerable barriers to community engagement.   Understanding these issues will provide context specific and transferable models for understanding energy literacy and visibility at multiple community levels (Borne 2010).

Transformative Innovation, Lifestyles and Social Technical Practices

Investigations into current practices that relate to energy use in different arenas of peoples lives such as work, leisure activities and transportation will be assessed both individually and collectively to expose the entrenched or locked in patterns that lead to unsustainable energy practices ultimately hindering the transition to a low carbon society (Jackson and Papathanasopoulou 2008).  This is achieved by exploring discourses within and among TPCs and associated community groups.  Discourses are recognised as being embedded in the broader social and structural practices that they represent (Hajer 1995).

Communities, Ownership and Social Movements

It is increasingly recognised that with relation to sustainable development issues, if initiatives are not owned at the local and community level success rates are low (Dalal-Clayton and Bass 2002).      Focusing on TPCs as a nexus will inevitably and necessarily address the issues of ownership and the nature of community itself.  An underlying principle of the research is to challenge established and geographically bound interpretations of communities, exploring the notion of communities of interest and the relationship this has to associated practice.   The high level of engagement using the parish councils as an indicator, or litmus with projects and initiatives will establish tangible and highly transferable data on ownership, engagement and effective action.

Policy, Legislation and Governance

Using parish councils to understand relationships between community and energy use fundamentally addresses issues of policy, legislation and governance.  This tier of local government is embedded in the wider policy and governance process of local authorities and national government. The effectiveness of initiatives and legislative prescription, such as the ‘Climate Change Act’ and Sustainable Communities Act (hard and soft laws) can be assessed.  Using parish councils as a nexus, the vertical and horizontal integration of policy, legislation and governance more generally can be explored.  The existing mechanisms available that enhance the sustainability of communities can be assessed and also the impact of the Localism Act on this agenda

References

Borne, G. (2010a) A Framework for Sustainable Global Development and Effective Governance of Risk

Borne, G. (2010b) Promoting Sustainable Communities: Education and Training Final Report, Promoting Sustainable Communities 2(1) http://hdl.handle.net/10293/348

Borne, G. (2009a) Promoting Sustainable Communities: Education and Training. Report for Cornwall Council http://hdl.handle.net/10293/305

Borne, G. (2009b) Promoting sustainable Communities in Devon and Cornwall: A Reflexive Review of Practice.  www.lifelonglearningnetworks.org.uk/keydocuments/newsletters

Borne, G. (2009c) Understanding Town and Parish Needs for a Sustainable Cornwall, South West Life Long Learning Network http://uplace.org.uk:8080/dspace/handle/10293/100

Borne, G. (2009d) Achieving Sustainable Lifestyles or encouraging a Counter Reflexivity: Exploring Motivations for Sustainability in a Mediated Risk Society   Local Environment  14(1):93-107

Dalal-Clayton, B. and Bass, S. (2002) Sustainable Development Strategies, a Resource Book, International Institute of Environment and Development

Davoudi, S., Crawford, J. and Mehmood, A. (2009) Planning for Climate Change: Strategies for Mitigation and Adaption for Spatial Planners, London, Earthscan

Department of Energy and Climate Change (2009) UK’s National Strategy for Climate and Energy: Transition to a Low Carbon Society, http://www.decc.gov.uk/en/content/cms/publications/lc_trans_plan/lc_trans_plan.aspx

Foresight Land Use Futures Project (FLUSP) (2010) Land Use Futures: Making the Most of Land in the 21^st Century, The Government Office for Science, London http://www.foresight.gov.uk/Land%20Use/luf_report/8614-BIS-Land_Use_Futures_Exec_Summ-WEB.pdf  accessed 04/03/10

HMGOV (2005) Securing the Future - UK Government sustainable development strategy http://www.sustainable-development.gov.uk/publications/uk-strategy/index.htm, accessed 04/08/06

Hajer, M. (1995) The Politics of Environmental Discourse: Ecological Modernisation and the Policy Process, Oxford, Oxford University Press

Hulme, M. (2009)  Why We Disagree About Climate Change, Understanding Controversy, Inaction and Opportunity, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press

Jackson, T. and Papathanasopoulou, E. (2008) Luxury or ‘Lock-in’? An explanation of unsustainable consumption in the UK: 1968 to 2000, Ecological Economics 68:80-95

National Association of Local Councils (2010)  http://www.nalc.gov.uk/ accessed 10/02/10

Sustainable Energy Management and the Built Environment (2009) Powering our Lives: Sustainable energy Management and the Built Environment, Final Project Report, The

Government Office for Science, London  http://www.foresight.gov.uk/OurWork/ActiveProjects/SustainableEnergy/ProjectHome.asp, accessed, 11/11/09

Commission for  Rural Communities (2009) Securing Effective engagement fro Parish and Town Councils with Unitary Structures and Processes http://www.ruralcommunities.gov.uk/publications/securingeffectiveengagementforparishandtowncouncilswithunitarystructuresandprocesses

HM Government ‘The UK Low Carbon Transition Plan: National Strategy for Climate and Energy

Power to the Parish

Update on the previous post.  Article is now available in  Local Government and the Regions


http://edition.pagesuite-professional.co.uk/launch.aspx?referral=other&pnum=18&refresh=4Dn1Si078Nm0&EID=1140c0e5-576b-4e46-9df0-cb41a40cff98&skip=&p=18


The photos that head this piece are of particular significance to me.  The big one is the center of the village that i grew up in, Ringmore and the smaller one is of Kingsbridge estuary, looking back from the Crabshell pub.  I am not even going to comment on the small picture of myself