Module 1.3 Discussion (Critiquing the UN's SDGs)

3/24/2020

Directions: Use information from the following articles (or other articles you find online - if you do find other bits of information please provide a more full citation in your response or link to the article) to answer the prompt below. Create one original post with your own answer to the prompt with reference to at least one article (cite the article in your response by including the name of the author in parentheses ex. (Hickel)). You will also need to post a response to a classmate's post with a refuting argument (again citing information from an appropriate article).

Suggested Sources:
- Dr. Jason Hickel, Five Reasons to Think Twice About the UN's Sustainable Development Goals
- Dr. Kathleen Smyth, A Historian's Critique of Sustainability (pgs. 921-924)
- Andrew Urevig, How are we doing with the Environment-related Sustainable Development Goals?
- World Economic Forum (WEF), Which countries are achieving the UN Sustainable Development Goals Fastest?
- Kaysia Brown and Krista Rasmussen, The Sustainable Development Goals in 2019: People, Planet, Prosperity in Focus

Prompt: Are the UN's Sustainable Development environmental goals too lofty? Are the world's environmental issues better left to national or local levels of government to try to address?

27 Comments

savannah

1/11/2023 02:50:14 pm

The environmental goals are realistically not to loft to be achieved, the goals are set low enough that they achievable by the goal dates by all of the countries that are part of the UN. However there are many countries that may not meet these goals because they do not feel they are not as important or have other goals they value more. The worlds environmental issues are better left to international levels because otherwise there would be less pressure for all countries to work toward the goal of environmental protection if there was not some form of international group that set standards. Additionally by having an international organization set minimum standards and goals it helps facilitate cooperation and this leads to faster progress. However one advantage that local governments have is they know more specific issues that country faces and can set higher standards because they can enforce it better and know what is actually attainable for that country.

Madison Dryden

1/16/2023 03:10:42 pm

I agree with the idea that the UN's goals are a good baseline for countries in the UN. But, how is it beneficial to have the same goals for two countries whose GDPs and population vary so widely? Why should wealthy countries who over consume and over produce goods be held to the same standards of a country who's people are starving and can barely produce enough to get by? Wouldn't local standards be much more beneficial for this?

niveD

1/17/2023 02:44:20 pm

I would agree with your idea that the UN sets reasonable goals, but they may seem reasonable to the bulk of the countries as it is more do able for them, but what about the countries that struggle already and need to focus on themselves and stabilizing themselves before focusing on how to better their emission out comes. If those countries try to keep up with the emission goals, while they may have other stuff going on, it would just put too much on their plate.

Trevor

1/11/2023 10:45:15 pm

Some may think that the goals may be too hefty because most goals are to be met by 2030 and meeting these goals by 2030 might seem like too much to be done that quick. Although it might seem like this, a lot of countries in the United Nations are already highly developed and can commit to these goals more and get things done by making progress. It is currently, on average, 84.5% on track to achieving the targets by 2030. It does seem that some more poverish countries will be in extreme poverty in 2030 and the lives of 9 million children are at risk if countries fail to meet SDG 3. As a whole, environmental issues are better left to national levels of the government because It is easier for other countries to come together and address countries that aren't on track for meeting their quota by 2030 and more action can be taken than on a local government. Local governments can only affect that specific area of the world and doesn't affect the environment in a more global sense. If more responsibility is left on the countries the more likely they will probably actually actively try to meet their goals by 2030. The problems that are also addressed in more local governments when it comes to the environment aren't always able to applied to all areas around the country or the world and becomes less helpful in some ways.

savannah

1/13/2023 08:42:55 am

I liked you point about how with international governments addressing the environmental issues it allows the more advanced counties to help those that are falling behind in there goals where as with local governments solely being in charge the countries who cant meet these goals would likely not make any progress toward improving the environment.

Jack B

1/12/2023 05:01:06 pm

I do not believe the SDGs that the UN has set for 2030 are too lofty. However, that isn't to say that they don't go without their faults. As seen in the graph from the World Economic Forum's webpage, countries span a vast level of diversity when it comes to completion of their SDGs, all along a particular path. Generally, the richer, developed countries could see meeting these SDGs as a nice challenge to work towards. The moreso mid-like countries see it as a hefty, and perhaps in some cases rather straining, goal to meet all SDGs by 2030. Yet, for the least well-off countries, it's no wonder that so many are arguing that the goals may be too much (Willige). Alas, seeing as the UN is so ecstatic about cooperation and lifting other nations up, perhaps the formidable nature of the SDGs to the less-developed countries is exactly what's needed in order to get better-off nations to assist their less fortunate brethren.

The world's environmental problems are better left to the largest levels of governing, so in this case the national governments. Not only does this mean that the environmental policies put in place will be easier to track since they're assigned to a much larger category of land, but these larger governments are often more stable than local ones, and would have more headspace left over for the sakes of environmental issues. Not only that, but governments tend to squabble amongst themselves. So, to assign the environmental issues to the larger-in-size, lesser-in-number organizations of government means that more work would be done with less conflict.

Bea

1/13/2023 07:45:00 am

It is extremely difficult to establish goals that can be equally achieved by every country in the world. A young nation in Africa is not going to be at the same spot on the development timeline as a Western European nation. The UN's Sustainable Development Goals are too lofty for some but are not ambitious enough for other others, which is inevitable when trying to apply the same goals to everyone. The countries that are closest to achieving the goals are wealthy Western European/Scandinavian nations(ex. Sweden: 84.5%, Denmark: 83.9%, Norway: 82.3%, Finland: 81.0%, Switzerland: 80.9%) while the countries that have made the last progress towards meeting the goals are some of the poorest countries in the world (ex. Central African Republic: 26.1%, Liberia: 30.5%, Congo Dem. Rep.: 31.3%, Niger: 31.4%, Chad: 31.8%). The UN is promoting growth as the solution to poverty, but, according to the Firoz Lalji Institute for Africa, "While global GDP has grown by 271% since 1990, the number of people living on less than $5/day has increased by more than 370 million." It is suggested that the prospect of growth allows our leaders to ignore the challenge of having to distribute existing resources more fairly. So the question is not if the goals are too ambitious, but how one governing body can make goals for every country on Earth. The world's environmental issues are better left to national and local levels of government to try to address.

Ella J

1/20/2023 08:12:52 am

I agree that the standards for LDC’s and MDC’s need to be more individualized based on what the countries can realistically achieve with their available resources. I also think that the goals countries need to be focusing on are different for every country. “Many of the goals demand specific attention to the needs of individual communities” (Urevig).

Beatrix

1/23/2023 07:46:20 am

I agree that the standards need to suit each individual country and their placement on the development scale. It is unfair to celebrate some countries for converting their coal/oil power sources to cleaner energy production methods, but criticize younger/less-developed countries for using the same coal/oil methods that western countries built their societies on.

chett

1/13/2023 11:04:56 am

I don't think the goals of the UN are too lofty. They are most likely set to a point that is achievable and realistic, which is great, but they should be set higher to make it more difficult to reach those goals so more effort is put in. Written about 4 years ago, Andrew Urevig wrote on Ensia that the world is not on track to meet the goals. We need to simply do more and act more seriously. The data that is being tracked needs to be better organized and accessible. According to the United Nations Foundations, while looking at the 5 P's, we can track how we are doing. These reflections aren't the best that they could be. Progress is being made, but not necessarily fast enough to meet the goals by 2030.

I do believe that it's great to look at all the environmental problems as a planet or nation. By setting goals as a nation, is can help motivate other countries to do better and reach the goals together, especially for the ones who are more competitive. I do also believe that local governments should still focus on their own environmental problems.

niveD

1/17/2023 11:50:49 am

I would agree with your point of how a nation itself setting a goal could motivate other countries to work together to reach their own goals. Along with the one about how local governments should focus on their own environmental problems because they would know the most about them and be able to act upon what they know about it

Jack

1/17/2023 02:35:45 pm

I DO think that the goals of the UN ARE too lofty. Not only are they too lofty, but they're also not quite sensible. As Dr. Hickel states in his article, while the climate-focused SDGs are all about limiting emissions and other industrial activity, a good portion of the other SDGs focus entirely around industrial expansion, more goods, more agriculture, more this, more that... you get the point. Not only that, but for developing countries settling the requirements for ALL of the SDGs seems nuts, as clearly shown on the graph in the World Economic Forum's link where a good deal of the poorer countries aren't doing too swell when it comes to stuff such as world peace, human rights, and saving their local wildlife.

Madison Dryden

1/16/2023 02:58:08 pm

Although some may believe the UN's goals for sustainable development are too lofty, the size of the changes are not the issue. The main issue with the UN's SDG's are the contradictions between its ecological and economical goals. In Dr. Jason Hickel's review of the UN's goals he outlines these issues,"The Zero Draft affirms the necessity of achieving “harmony with nature,” establishes a commitment to hold global warming below the 2° Celsius threshold, and calls for “sustainable patterns of production and consumption.”...yet the core of the SDG programme for development and poverty reduction relies precisely on the old model of industrial growth — ever-increasing levels of extraction, production, and consumption. Goal 8 calls for 7% annual GDP growth in the least developed countries and higher levels of economic productivity across the board."(Hickel) And yet the main cause of much of our global warming is industrial growth itself. This imposes a very concerning contradiction between two important UN goals. But how do you decide between the prosperity of millions of people living in third world countries and the reduction of the rise of global warming on earth? Hickel then goes on to further outline that when the UN is presented with these issues of contradiction they give superficial answers such as " reduce food waste, make resource use more efficient, and “encourage companies to adopt sustainable practices.” (Hickel) which are only more distractions from the real issue of over production and over production of goods by the world's wealthy countries, which are generally the countries in the UN. This also highlights the issue of having an overlying council make goals and economic suggestions for smaller less influential countries. Many of the UN's goals would take an amount of money many smaller countries can't afford. How can you tell a nation to “encourage companies to adopt sustainable practices." when you have millions of people who are starving. Although ecological reform is critical, not every country in the world is at an economic point to do so. So I believe the UN should be able to make goals for countries in a similar economic situation, but having overlying goals for everyone is unrealistic and counter-intuitive to collective growth.

Jack B

1/17/2023 10:30:06 am

I agree wholeheartedly. Not only are the counter-intuitive goals of the SDGs concerning, but pushing them onto countries still involved in turmoil with both other countries, their own citizens, and their own governments seems quite tone-deaf. Especially when it comes to SDGs revolving around the environment when a country's so underdeveloped that they'd have to refine their ways of manufacturing, waste disposal, and agriculture through industrialization first merely to sustain their population.

Devin

1/16/2023 07:50:59 pm

The UNs sustainable development environmental goals are not too lofty.They set a goal that is acheviable for many, they wouldn’t set a goal that would not be able to achieve. However, some countries are not as developed as others so it might be harder for them to achieve those goals, so I could see how some people may believe they are too lofty based off of that but overall, I believe that they make pretty achieveable goals. In the top link that was given, it says people however are not excited about the development goals because they know that business wont be functioning in a way we need it and it would cause economic growth to basically a halt when we need it to advance. I think it would be better to leave it to each country themselves to set their goals. Because goals that may be achievable for one country, might not be as achievable for the next, or may be easily achievable, and I think that there should be a goal where it isn’t too easy or too hard so we have to work for a change together.

chett

1/16/2023 09:13:22 pm

yasss devin I agree. It's hard to set a goal for different countries with different development rankings to all achieve. Maybe they should have different goals set based on development, population, etc.

addiosn

1/17/2023 02:29:54 pm

i agree with what you are saying, but sometimes some people and countries might not want to agree with the Un's goals. so if not everyone participates with the goals then the Un's goals migth not be achived by 2030. but if people do agree then the participation precentage should go up and the goal can be premoted and talked about more.

Marley

1/23/2023 07:40:57 am

I agree that the UN has an achievable goal, but hard to have a set goal for each country that has different development levels. They should make different goals for different development levels.

Joseph

1/23/2023 02:09:45 pm

I agree, i think that they should change the goals from country to country depending on how developed they are, population, and based on what the economy looks like.

Jaymeson VV

2/1/2023 08:29:52 am

I agree that the UNs goals are not too lofty, and that the golas should change depedning on econonmy, population, and resources.

addiosn

1/17/2023 01:28:54 pm

The Un's goals are very helpful for a lot of people, but its hard to set goals for other countries and people. for example there "sustainable developmet" for 2030 that will only happen if people are willing to agree with there goals and ideas. i think we can meet the goals It's just going to take time but possiblly not soon enough to meet the 2030 goals that are set. If there is more responsibility left in countries the more chance that we could actually meet the Un's goals by 2030. we could use our local gov to focus on the enviromental problems that are in our area and also focus on the Un's as well. we could use modivation for people and our countries to help do the things we should do to reach the goals by 2030.

Hayli

1/17/2023 02:40:31 pm

I don't think the UNs goals are too hard because it is a pretty simple goal, but this brings up the problem that it could be harder for some countries because they aren't as developed as others. It's hard to set the same goal for all these different countries when different countries are further developed than the others. For us to accomplish this by 2030 might be impossible because of how far behind some countries are. I think we will be able to achieve the UNs goal but just not as soon as they would like.

ella h

1/17/2023 08:27:36 pm

No, I do not think that the UN's environmental goals are too lofty. I think that it is not too lofty because the world came together and came up with an ambitious vision for a safer, healthier, and more prosperous world by 2030 (Brown and Rasmussen). Some people think that it is dangerous because the global agenda is being built around a failing economy (Hickel). Also all of the different countries all agreed to do it so they thought that it was possible. Also what the UN’s goals are for the better for the people and also the environment. The goals that they set are low enough that they will be able to be achieved before their due date, and most of the countries in the UN are highly developed, so meeting the requirements should not be an issue for them. Even if the UN reaches their goals that does not mean that there is more that they can do to keep on improving after 2030, they can keep on going and work towards a better and safer environment. The world's environmental issues are better if left to the national government to try and address. This is because the federal government has a lot of people with different ideas and backgrounds that they can use to have a lot of perspectives.

Marley

1/20/2023 08:53:58 am

The goals that the UN gives are in a standard that is not hard to achieve, especially with the dates provided. Although 2030 is not far away, most of the countries in the UN are developed enough to reach their goals. The effort put in is what actually makes progress. Every country working toward the same goal helps bring the world closer together, and make progress as a whole. Not to mention, all of the countries that are in the UN, have made the decision to be there and help the climate. The world’s environmental issues should be left to local levels of government to address. Trying to make very diverse countries follow the same rules and regulations doesn't quite help every aspect of making our environment better. Using a large level of government to control environment makes progress harder. Having more local, individualized plans and regulations is how countries will actually make a difference.

Joseph

1/30/2023 08:31:47 am

I think that the UN's goals are not too lofty, as a world we have a lot of improvements to make and trying to force so many restrictions can be hard when countries are still developing. The world also has other problems that can be handled. Kaysie Brown and Krista Rasmussen said "There are still vast, systemic inequities that limit prosperity. Economic mobility across generations has stalled in large parts of the world, meaning the opportunities of too many people are still tied to their parents’ social status rather than their own potential. Persons with disabilities are more likely to live in poverty than those without. Progress toward gender equality has stalled overall, while movements like #MeToo and #TimesUp continue to expose the scale and severity of discrimination and violence facing girls and women. In many places, girls and women’s rights are deteriorating and harmful laws deny girls and women justice and dignity. The global gender pay gap will now take over 200 years to close." We should be making things more equal for the people living on this planet before we move onto another problem. The sooner we can figure out these problems as a country the more people will want to work as a country so we could have similar environmental goals. And when the poverty rate decreases more people will have money to help with the environment.

Ella J

1/30/2023 10:28:28 am

I do not think the UN's SDGs are too lofty. I think the goals need to be re-engineered to be more suited to individual countries so they can realistically achieve them. Because countries are at different points in development, some will succeed in economic goals, while others will succeed at gender equality. "many high-income countries perform well in areas such as economic development but still fall short of achieving a good all-round SDG performance," (Willige). Clearly, the goals are not designed so that every country will be able to achieve them on the same timeline, so the low results for many countries and higher results for others just mean that LDC's need more support to accomplish their goals. While the goals are not to lofty, they aren't perfect either. The world is not on track to meet the goals by the set year 2030. So more developed countries should be pushed to achieve more sustainable development while also supporting LDC's who need help reaching goals MDC's have already met.

Jaymeson VV

2/1/2023 08:28:12 am

The UNs goals are not lofty for most countries they are just where they need to be so that the world can make progress overall. For most countries they have the resources to do so and make progress overall, but for other countries they don't have the same maount of resourcesto make progress and that's where the question comes in is the UNs goals to lofty. I believe that for the more developed countries the goals are perfect because if you don't make them then your just being lazy. For the less developed countries then they shoul have differnt goals or help to acheive the goals if the resources aren't depleted enough.
I also beleve that we should keep this problem on the national level because we can keep everybody in chekc and everyhign is easier as a group or with smoemone than by yourself. By keeping it at the national level eveyrbody can help each other if falling behind because some might have more resources thna others. So by helping everybody and doing this together we can acheive more.

World Environmentalism Forum

Welcome to the Forum! Here is where you will be answering your daily warm-up questions. Please do not enter your last name for privacy reasons, and you may use a nickname if you would like (Just make sure Mr. Tredinnick is aware of the nickname you are using). Write out thoughtful responses to the forums on the days they are assigned. If you miss a day please take it upon yourself to complete the Forum you missed. Each Forum has the targeted Learning Objective(s) there so you can see what the focus of the day's class will be.

Module 1.3 Discussion (Critiquing the UN's SDGs)

Leave a Reply.

World Environmentalism Forum

Archives

Categories