The Sustainable Development Goals

Goal 12 is the one to notice. Sustainable consumption and production is where the Rio Principle 8 argument about the consumption of the rich rather than the numbers of the poor finally becomes an operative objective. For module III of this paper, Goal 12 is the strongest instrument-based support for the position that consumption rather than population is the target.

How they differ from the Millennium Goals

Four differences, and stating them is a complete answer to a comparison question.

Universal rather than addressed to developing countries. Paragraph 5 says the Agenda is accepted by all countries and applicable to all, taking into account different national realities, capacities and levels of development and respecting national policies and priorities.

Integrated rather than sectoral. The same paragraph says the Goals are integrated and indivisible and balance the three dimensions of sustainable development. That is Rio Principle 4 restated: environment is not one goal beside the others but a dimension of all of them.

Environment throughout rather than in one goal.

Negotiated by States rather than derived by a secretariat. The Millennium Goals were distilled from a declaration by the United Nations system; the Sustainable Development Goals came out of an open working group of States over three years, following the decision at Rio+20. That is why they are longer and more political, and it is also why they command wider ownership.

India and the Goals

Three points, each specific.

The domestic machinery. NITI Aayog is the national institution charged with coordinating the Goals in India, and it publishes an index scoring States and Union territories against them, which is the first Indian instrument to measure sub-national performance on sustainable development in a single comparable form.

The reporting. India presents a voluntary national review to the High-level Political Forum, which is the body Rio+20 created in place of the Commission on Sustainable Development.

The connection to this paper. Goal 6 answers the water policy question in module II; Goal 15 answers the forest policy question; Goal 11 answers the urbanisation half of module III; and Goal 13 is the climate question.

The criticisms

Seventeen is too many. Rio+20 had specified goals that were limited in number and easy to communicate, and seventeen goals with a hundred and sixty-nine targets is neither.

They are not binding. The Agenda is a General Assembly resolution. There is no obligation, no compliance mechanism and no consequence for missing a target.

Some targets pull against each other. Goal 8's sustained economic growth and Goal 12's sustainable consumption and production are not obviously compatible, and the Agenda does not say which prevails. That is the environment and development conflict of this paper, reappearing inside a single instrument.

Measurement is uneven. Many indicators lack data in the countries where they matter most.

Worked example

MU's 2024 paper: "State the inter-relationship between environmental justice and sustainable developments in the light of sustainable development goals at global level."

The Goals are the instrument the question asks you to use, so use them specifically. Environmental justice is the proposition that environmental burdens and benefits should not fall unequally by class, region or generation. Map it onto the Goals: Goal 10 on reducing inequality within and among countries; Goal 6 and Goal 7, which are about access to water, sanitation and energy for all, and so about who does not have them; Goal 11, which names slums; Goal 13, whose burden falls hardest on those least responsible; and Goal 16 on access to justice, which is the procedural half of environmental justice and the counterpart of Rio Principle 10.

Then the Indian layer: Article 21 and the public interest litigation that made access to justice real, and the cases in which the Court provided for the workers displaced by an environmental order.

That answer uses the framework the question named instead of writing generally about sustainable development.

Quick revision

• Resolution 70/1, September 2015, Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Seventeen Goals, a hundred and sixty-nine targets, to 2030.
• Paragraph 5: accepted by all countries and applicable to all; the Goals are universal, integrated and indivisible and balance the three dimensions.
• Environmental Goals: 6 water and sanitation, 7 energy, 11 cities, 12 consumption and production, 13 climate, 14 oceans, 15 terrestrial ecosystems and forests.
• Goal 12 is the operative form of the argument that consumption rather than population is the target.
• Four differences from the Millennium Goals: universal, integrated, environment throughout, and negotiated by States.
• In India: NITI Aayog coordinates and publishes a States index; India reports to the High-level Political Forum.
• Criticisms: too many, not binding, internally contradictory between Goals 8 and 12, and unevenly measured.

Test yourself

1. How many Goals and targets are there, in what instrument, and for what period?

Seventeen Goals and a hundred and sixty-nine targets, in General Assembly resolution 70/1 of September 2015, entitled Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, to be achieved by 2030.

2. Name the Goals that are directly environmental.

Goal 6 on water and sanitation; Goal 7 on affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy; Goal 11 on inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable cities and human settlements; Goal 12 on sustainable consumption and production patterns; Goal 13 on urgent action to combat climate change; Goal 14 on oceans, seas and marine resources; and Goal 15 on terrestrial ecosystems, forests, desertification, land degradation and biodiversity loss.

3. Give the four differences between these Goals and the Millennium Development Goals.

They are universal and applicable to all countries rather than addressed principally to developing countries; they are integrated and indivisible rather than sectoral; the environment runs through them rather than sitting in one goal; and they were negotiated by States in an open working group over three years rather than distilled by the United Nations system from a declaration.

4. Identify a contradiction inside the Agenda and say why it matters to this paper.

Goal 8 calls for sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth while Goal 12 calls for sustainable consumption and production patterns, and the Agenda does not say which prevails when they conflict. It matters because that is the environment and development conflict this paper is named after, reappearing unresolved inside a single instrument.