Subscribe
Share
Share
Embed
Following the successful first and second series of Unlocking the SDGs – A Blueprint for the Future, Professor Monica Lakhanpaul and Professor Priti Parikh are back with a deep dive into the UN SDGs. Over five episodes, the series considers issues including the role of AI and education in the SDGs and what other countries are doing to achieve the goals. Listen as academics from across UCL’s faculties and beyond bring new perspectives and understanding to this complex global issue.
Monica Lakhanpaul 0:12
Welcome back to the second series of unlocking the SDGs a blueprint for the future. In this podcast, we explore the UN's Sustainable Development Goals or SDGs. And what they mean for society. I'm Professor Monica Lakhanpaul, Professor of integrated community child health in the UCL Great Ormond Street Institute for Child Health.
Professor Priti Parikh 0:35
And I'm Professor Priti Parikh, Professor of infrastructure engineering and international development at the UCL Bartlett School of sustainable construction. The sustainable development goals were adopted in 2015. To provide a set of global targets for the world to achieve by 2030. As we are now on this seven years away from that milestone of 2030. Today, we are considering what progress has been made and what might come next, what are the challenges that affect the implementation of the SDGs? How can governments respond to them? And how can we use that knowledge to ensure that whatever the next phase of the goals look like it is effective.
Monica Lakhanpaul 1:21
this episode was recorded in autumn 2023.
As this is such an interesting topic, and there is a lot for us to discuss, we have decided to tackle it over two episodes. In the last episode, we spoke to Professor Ruth Morgan from UCL security or crime science, and Professor Andrea Rigon from the UCL Bartlett Development Planning Unit. Today, I'm pleased to say that we're joined by Professor Sean Fox, and Dr. Jessica Espey, from the University of Bristol. We'll be looking at the goals from a slightly different perspective and hearing about the pioneering partnership between their university and Bristol City Council, which led to the publication of the UK very first, voluntary local review, and the integration of the SDGs into City's one city plan. Dr. Espey was involved in the conceptualization of the city's goal in her former capacity as a director at the UN, so she will also share her views on how effectively the goals are being localised around the world. Welcome to you both.
Sean Fox 2:35
Thank you for inviting us. I've been enjoying the podcast series, and I'm very delighted to be a part of the conversation.
Jessica Espey 2:41
Yeah, thank you very much. It's a pleasure to be here.
Monica Lakhanpaul 2:43
In previous episodes, we've talked about international responses to the SDGs. But you've been working on a project here in the UK, in Bristol, can you tell us a bit about the Bristol one city initiative? And how you've been involved as part of the University of Bristol? Sean, would you be able to tackle that question for me, please?
Sean Fox 3:03
Sure. And I'll try to summarise as succinctly as possible because there's a few different parts to this. The one city approach is essentially a governance innovation that came about in many ways in response to the challenges that the city was facing, and particularly a long period of austerity where city budgets have been steadily cut, while demands for services. And indeed, many different sorts of challenges have been rising. So you have falling budgets and, and growing challenges. And this isn't unique to Bristol, this is all over all over the UK. So faced with this situation, the idea was to bring together stakeholders from across the city government from from different departments, but also from non governmental stakeholders, such as businesses and community organisations, and then to try to collectively agree on a vision for the city and to stimulate collaboration to achieve that vision. And the vision that was agreed upon is that by 2050, we want to make Bristol fair, healthy and sustainable city where everybody can share in its success. That's the vision for the one city plan. And the key point with this background, I think is to to say that there was a really a proactive group of citizens interested in the global goals in Bristol, and there was a really strong civil society infrastructure in place to support their initiative. In other words, it's important to be clear that it wasn't the local government that started or got the ball rolling on localization. It was it was actually civil society, if you will. And I think that's an important detail in the story of Bristol. Now, I became involved when there was an opportunity to get some university research funding for collaborative initiatives. And that was around 2017 2018. And so the Bristol Green Capital partnership, and I and the city office, which is managing the one city plan, bid for some funds to hire a part time SDG research and engagement associate, the person we hired is Alan McLeod. In the UK. There wasn't a lot of action in terms of developing a voluntary National Review. There wasn't a lot of research going into that. And moreover, we were As an ambitious city, we wanted to try to do something to take the lead on this and follow New York's lead. So we published the very first voluntary local review in 2019. And we looked at all 17 goals, not just goal 11 for cities, but we looked at all 17 goals in the city, we compiled data on over 140 indicators. And then we did that again in 2022, after the pandemic. And in the meantime, based on that experience, we've been helping provide some guidance to other UK local authorities on how they can integrate, monitor the SDGs. And so now, the SDGs were ultimately integrated into that one city plan.
Monica Lakhanpaul 5:33
I mean, this is a great exemplar. And I'm already in all of you. And I know we've got lots to lots more to hear from thinking about relationship building, embedding yourself, within the community, within the people you're working with. I think it's coming through very strongly that to build trust relationships, you have to be physically there, amongst everybody that you're working with. Another key point of what you're bringing forward is really the role of civil society. And the fact that this was bottom up, it came from civil society. And that's why this is so strong.
Professor Priti Parikh 6:02
And I'm really excited by the ambition, really, from Bristol City Council, it's good to see kind of serious efforts to embed SDGs into monitoring evaluation. The core business of Bristol is a large and diverse city, and it's comparatively wealthy in global terms. We've talked before about how relevant the goals are in different contexts. But given this diversity, how have you approached measuring Bristol's achievements towards the goals? Has that been a helpful framework? Or are there areas where they don't really apply?
Sean Fox 6:36
Yeah, I mean, I can offer sort of a brief reflection from Bristol. And then Jessica has a broader, I think, global view on this. So in short, when we started looking at producing our voluntary local review, and therefore going through all the goals, the targets and indicators, it very quickly became clear that they were conceptualised in relation to nation states, not local governments, not companies, NGOs, community organisations, these targets and indicators were really designed for national statistical offices, basically, so many of the targets and indicators work directly relevant at the city or regional scale. So we basically tried to capture the spirit of every target from a local perspective. And we tried to select data that was available that was relevant to that target, even if it didn't map really neatly onto the target or its associated indicators. So we basically, we improvised.
Jessica Espey 7:27
Yeah, thanks, Sean, for that great overview that you've provided on the situation and experience of the City of Bristol. Just to be clear, I myself haven't really worked much in the city of Bristol beyond being at the university now. But I wanted to draw on some previous experience. So in my former capacity, I was a director of a UN agency Research Network. And one of the projects that we ran, and we actually were a little bit I did if I think the word could be a little bit arrogant or cocky about it is even before the SDGs were agreed in 2014, we started working with a number of cities around the world, including three US cities, Baltimore, and Maryland, San Jose and California and New York, to start looking at the relevance of the SDG agenda sub nationally and how it can be localised. And just some general observations from that which very much tie in with what Shawn's been saying, which is that across the cities, we found that the value of the Sustainable Development Goal framework was not so much in the specific targets and measures, because as Sean said, they needed to be tailored to you that highly tailored to each individual context. And you need to find very specific local contextual data in almost all of the cities in which I worked three in the US to in Latin America and number in Sub Saharan Africa. It was having this global policy agreement and framework to set a common language of sustainable development, to really explain what the concept of sustainable development is and how it could apply in your local context. So that you could think about it with relevance to your neighbourhood and think about how you empower people in your locality to take action on it. And it's not just some kind of complex and amorphous concept that we're helpless to change, if you will, is something that's actually highly relevant to your local environment. And people found that the agenda incredibly helpful to start that conversation about what sustainable development is and how it applies in your neighbourhood.
Professor Priti Parikh 9:13
Thank you for identifying the fact that whilst the SDGs is a global agenda, there will be local needs and priorities and we need to really localise and contextualise the SDGs and this reminds me of a piece of work that I'm leading with the South African government, where I'm working with colleagues like Monica and others from various departments and faculties at UCL where we are helping the South African government to localise and then prioritise SDG targets for monitoring and evaluation in Durban, because one of the issues they brought up was that the 169 targets which one that we should localise and prioritise. Right, and that will vary context to context. So I think it's really been helpful to hear your have insights into frameworks and means in which we can bring together local actors to join forces on SDGs.
Monica Lakhanpaul 10:08
So what we've really just heard about is some of the highlights of local implementation and some of the key ingredients that we really need to move things forward. Whether that be Bristol, Baltimore, or even with the work that we've been doing together pretty you and me. But what it made me think about is, is this approach to local level implementation of a global policy agenda, something new. And why have some urbanists and international actors claimed that the SDG agenda was a major victory for cities. Jessica, could you address that for me?
Jessica Espey 10:42
Yeah, that's an interesting question. I think the idea of cities and localities taking a global agenda, and you know, applying it within this specific context is not new, the difference with the SDGs. And the reason why many urbanists have said it was a real victory for cities is that included an explicit commitment to take action on sustainable development in cities, by national government leaders, recognising that there frontiers of the sustainable development challenge responsible for between 65 and 75% of global greenhouse gas emissions? I think the other thing we don't often talk about is things like the fact that urban land expansion is one of the primary drivers of habitat and biodiversity loss. So you cities have a crucial role in influencing the shape of our sustainable development future. But they're also sites of opportunity, having seen two thirds of the population are going to live in cities, and they produce more than 80% of global GDP. So these are the places that will make or break sustainable development. And they really have to be involved. And there was a recognition by governments of that centrality of the fact that these places and there and the people governing them were really fundamental to the success of this agenda. It was also a recognition by national governments of the importance of empowering local government actors, creating national urban policies that would recognise the resource needs and the challenges of cities and take measures to start to address that, which in many ways really represented a bit of a fundamental power shift for many countries in the world being forced to recognise they have to decentralise some of their sustainable development planning, and actually start a meaningful dialogue with local government actors on the kinds of resources and capacities, as well as the kinds of policy and legislative framework they need in order to lead on sustainable development. I think finally, the other thing that was really quite transformative, for those of us who were working in the UN, and we're very involved in the negotiation is it was quite a conceptual shift. You know, under the Millennium Development Goals, which were the predecessor to the SDGs, the focus was very much on outcomes. It was about eradicating poverty, ending hunger, and so on, and so forth. And this was really the idea that we need to move away from this outcome based kind of measurement towards thinking about opportunities and processes and policies and the ways in which we try to affect these changes. So not just looking at the end, but the, you know, the sort of means we use to achieve those ends. And it was in particular recognising the fact that in order to achieve many of these objectives, we have to work at a spatial scale, we need to look at integrated systems in cities, we need to look at how poverty and inequality and housing and sanitation and access to transport all interconnects and how effectively if you don't design integrated policy, you can't really tackle these issues. And to do that we need to use different sort of scales. So working at the city level was identified as a particularly powerful way to think about integrated policy and planning. So I think those were the three key reasons why it was really hailed and continues to be hailed as kind of quite a breakthrough in international circles and recognising the importance of local government and in cities and urban spaces for achieving sustainable development.
Professor Priti Parikh 13:57
Another interesting point, which is coming out of our discussion today is global goals and local needs and priorities, the need to really embed them and the contexts, and many countries have difficulties in addressing the goals at global level due to geopolitical distractions, national decision making and worldwide financial constraints. Do you think working towards the goals is more effective if approached locally? And I'm going to start with a question.
Sean Fox 14:26
Yes and no? So yes, in the sense that I think things like climate change and sustainable development are often miss framed as global challenges. And I think it's almost more helpful to think of them as a million local challenges. So we do have climate change, and we do have poverty, we have all of these things. But the fundamental problems are local. You know, it's about transport, transforming infrastructure. in Lagos. It's about decarbonizing Berlin's energy grid. It's about upgrading insulation in residential buildings in the UK. about encouraging more compact development in Los Angeles, right? So there isn't a, there isn't sort of a single challenge. It's actually a really diverse collection of challenges that we have in lots of diverse places around around the world. And these are things that can only really be dealt with by local actors at the local level through local planning and political processes. So in that sense, yes, I think that we've got to think locally when addressing global challenges, recognising that global challenges are actually aggregates of millions of local challenges. So that's one way of thinking about it. One of the really interesting things about the SDGs, unlike the Millennium Development Goals, was that a whole lot of different non state actors have embraced them, and really tried to engage with them seriously in a way that we didn't see in the previous generation. So what Jess was talking about in terms of doing things differently, and thinking about processes, I think, in many ways, one of the successes of the SDGs is that it has penetrated a much wider network of actors and stakeholders out there. So that's, so that's good. So yes, local is very important. But at the same time, we do have to recognise that there are these different scales of action that are required to address the global goals. So national governments will need to change legislation, they will need to incentivize certain types of behaviour and investments. transnational companies do need to do extensive work on their supply chains, we probably need some new international treaties. So that's a scale that just can't be addressed at the local. So we do need to empower local actors. I fully agree with that. But we also have to recognise what's not in their power, and what changes they can't bring about on their own. I think that we there is often a danger of reifying community as a scale of action, and essentially placing more responsibility on communities, then I think it's fair or reasonable, given the multi scalar nature of the challenges that we face.
Professor Priti Parikh 16:43
Thank you for reminding us that this is a multi scalar challenge. And I like your point about hundreds of local challenges. But we also need that collective thinking and action. And it is heartening to hear from you that the SDGs have attracted a lot of action from non state actors, because that is really reassuring. Jessica would love to hear more from you on this.
Jessica Espey 17:09
I mean, I think I wholeheartedly agree with everything that Sean said, I think you need local and national level action, and not least of all, because they have very different remits, and contributions. At the national level, you know, we need national governments to think about things like peace, security and stability. I mean, you can't pursue local development if you're subject to conflict or other forms of stability. And that obviously sits more squarely oftentimes within the national governments purview. And you need to think about things like market incentives, the right policy frameworks, its national governments who often control the vast majority of cases, you know, the revenue that's going to be available for these kinds of sustainable development, planning and policies. But also, a really important point is that, you know, for many cities around the world, they don't have access to resources, aside from that, which is given out essentially by the coffers have their capital, and so they can't work independently of, of the national government without the right policy frameworks and without being given, you know, enabled permitted to access markets and so on. So I think it has to be done concurrently.
Professor Priti Parikh 18:13
While UCL academics and researchers are playing a leading role in responding to the challenges set out by the goals, our students are also helping to achieve the SDGs.
Monica Lakhanpaul 18:30
We speak to some of our students to get their thoughts on the SDGs and how they're being addressed around the world.
Professor Priti Parikh 18:35
Today, we are asking the question, which of the SDGs is the most important for humanity to address?
Laura Dewhurst 18:41
I'm Laura Dewhurst and I'm studying for a master's in science communication in New South Wales Department of Science and Technology Studies. The most important Sustainable Development Goal for humanity to address is climate action, because the world depends on it. This needs to be done through routes that address inequalities. We need social transformation, not so called techno fixes.
Nuzulia Fajriningrum 18:42
I'm Nuzulia Farjriningrum and I'm studying at UCL Bartlett School of Environment, Energy and Resources. The most important SDG for humanity to address is SDG Seven. Ensuring access to affordable, reliable, sustainable energy for all. By providing and sustaining energy, we ensure people can do essential activities to improve their lives.
Monica Lakhanpaul 19:26
Now coming to one of my favourite topics, as everybody knows who's heard this podcast before, one of the things that came up in previous conversations has been the importance of participatory research or co creation with the communities so that development initiatives are more aligned to local priorities. And we've alluded to that when we started this podcast. Now, you both highlighted the importance of civil society. And, Sean, you've talked about that in the context of Bristol, but I was just wondering, co creation in the true sense and participatory research such in the true sense. Is this an approach you've taken in Bristol, as a city with a history of strong communities and grassroots initiatives as having the goals as a structure being beneficial?
Sean Fox 20:11
Yes. So the end of your question, just to be very clear was do the SDGs provide a useful structure? And I would say in the context of Bristol, no, it's the other way around. So it was really the grassroots that drove the engagement with the STDs rather than the SDGs, providing the framework for that kind of activity. So it was already happening. And I think that that's true in lots of places around the world, I think that the SDGs are not a necessary framework for CO creating collective local visions and plans for solving challenges. You know, we've mapped the SDGs onto the local priorities that were developed through these participatory and consultative processes. In Bristol, we've used the monitoring framework framework of the SDGs. And I think in some ways, that's the thing that is easiest for lots of different actors to adopt as a monitoring framework, because what everybody lacks is a unified monitoring framework for sustainable development and the SDGs kind of provided that although biassed towards nation states in terms of their formulation, and I think that that tension between recognising the importance of communities, local engagement, local actors, and the need for some kind of global collective action, I think that really, that demands that we think differently, maybe about how we organise global collective action. And maybe we need to look beyond models to set goals and targets and think more about different ways of doing things about different ways of working. You know, I think that that was part of the impetus for the SDGs. And they took us part of the way there. But I think there's more on that journey to go in terms of changing the way that we do global collective action to address these these big challenges facing humanity and the planet.
Monica Lakhanpaul 21:52
Okay, you've got me thinking now for really, how can we do things differently, and do things differently, particularly for global collective action? So building on that, Jessica, just wondered what your take on this is?
Jessica Espey 22:02
Yeah, going back to the way Sean phrased it around, has the framework been useful as a structure for sort of engaging communities and so on, I think it's been highly different in different contexts. In Baltimore, as I said before, where there was a real void, essentially, in kind of effective community engagement, because of the breakdown of trust between the sort of institutions of local government, particularly the police force, and many local residents in the city, this was kind of seen as a chance to have a refresh or reset, there was an emergency government there was going to be a new mayor coming in. And this was seen as a kind of way to frame a discourse and to kickstart those processes of sort of civic engagement with a completely new approach, essentially. So it was certainly helpful to start a dialogue. I don't know if I could say went necessarily beyond that. But in somewhere like San Jose in California, no. And much like the case of Bristol, there was already a very sophisticated sustainability planning structure in the city, there was already a whole host of very active civil society organisations who were working on this in partnership with their local councillors, and so on. What the framework did was get political attention. It got the existing community action, the existing community planning the existing frameworks on the mayors agenda, and on the agenda of the city council members in the voting Council, Simon says a slightly different composition to many other cities. But essentially, it managed to get sustainable development on the city council sheet as an item that was fundamental to debate to discuss and to allocate resources to, and it gave profile to all of the existing community level initiatives that are already happening, and then enabled a dialogue with other regions. So scientists day started, liaising and working with Los Angeles, for example. And on you know, all the cities on the western seaboard in the area of California. And so I think it's it's been very useful in different ways for different purposes. But its primary objectives has been kind of as a political tool for fostering attention, and elevating many community led community level concerns and programmes and initiatives to a level where they can get more resourcing more attention and more kind of political spotlight.
Monica Lakhanpaul 24:13
So what you're really highlighting as well is that we should reuse things in the proper way, use the framework in the proper way at the right time for the proper purpose. But not that, suddenly, something's happened that hasn't been happening. It's not like suddenly civil societies suddenly do start doing something because they never did it before. Of course, civil society, we're always doing something. It's just that we now have a tool that helps us to really put the spotlight on what is going on. And we should use it in that way to facilitate action in some sorts of positive change in a positive way. So in the last episode, Ruth and Andrea actually did stress the importance of inclusivity and actually looking at future generations and implementing both into policies in the light of the current geopolitical tensions and crises. We're seeing to seeing the SDGs help mediate and align nation states and other actors around common development priorities.
Jessica Espey 25:07
Yeah, I think that the SDGs do have an important role. I mean, there is, of course, huge geopolitical instability, with Ukraine with what's happening in Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories, and so on. And it's very easy for political discourse to be consumed by that I think what the SDGs do is that they have provided a kind of consistent anchor for many of the most pressing environmental and sustainable development challenges of our time. And there is now a whole infrastructure associated with the SDGs as annual reporting, there's a dedicated forum in the for the international community with heads of state and government to report on their performance on different sustainable development challenges. And so they help bring us back out of the kind of day to day complexity and tragedy that is a current geopolitics and make sure that we don't lose attention to these long term sustainable development issues, which are particularly crucial for future generations, very often political actors who are so concerned with short term priorities, can lose sight of these issues. But the Sustainable Development Goals give us a framework to say actually, for the next generation, these conflicts and tensions might not be present, what will be present consistently, is that, you know, sea levels are still rising. And, you know, plastic is still pouring into the oceans. And so we need to also prioritise these long term challenges too. And the SDGs give us a framework through which to do that and to hold the international community to account and to show that we are being responsive to the needs of future generations.
Monica Lakhanpaul 26:39
Well, I think what it does tell us though, is that with multiple crises going on, there could be a danger that we forget that education is important, sanitation is important. Poverty is important, because we're just trying to deal with the prices in front of us. And we keep going forwards and moving back and forward to moving back. So as he really spoken about very eloquently, is this real need for the framework or the SDGs, to keep us held to account really in some sort of way, and for governments not to forget all these other important issues that will support our future generation.
Professor Priti Parikh 27:21
Before it's considered the question of what's missing from the goals, in the last episode, we asked Ruth and Andrea, what other areas of the goals should be included in what will inevitably follow the SDGs? So we would like to pose the same question to you. So Sean, starting with you, if he had the power to create an 18th goal? What would it look like?
Sean Fox 27:45
I think it was, I think it was Anthony and Rochelle and one of the early episodes that made the made the case that there are too many goals and targets. And I tend to agree, I think that more goals and targets makes it politically easier for people across sectors and in different places to feel like they're part of the global agenda. So in that sense, it makes it easier to be inclusive. The flip side is I think it has had the effect of accidentally reproducing the silos that the SDGs were trying to break down. Because people can essentially cherry pick goals and targets and indicators for themselves, maybe what we need something really different. Maybe we need a set of values and principles. So what if we had something like a declaration of sustainable development, and there are some precedents for this, and I would point to the UK passed the social value act in 2013. And this requires public sector organisations and their suppliers to look beyond the financial cost of a contract, and consider how the services that they commission and to cure can improve the economic, social and environmental well being of the area. It's not overly prescriptive, but it pushes decision making in the right direction, it forces the procurement process, in a very dull sounding process, but critical. It forces those kinds of decisions in the right direction. And what if we had something like that for sustainable global sustainable developments in some kind of charter that organisations could sign up to, with a set of principles for decision makers who are all basically facing the same challenge of allocating resources, scarce resources, and you could commit to those you could publicly commit to those and you could be held accountable for the decisions that you make, the investments you make, the policies that you implement, the things that you consume, etc. So I, I would almost push back against goals entire targets entirely and try to bring it back to an even more fundamental issue about embodying the values of sustainable development and having a set of principles to follow to make the right choices as often as possible.
Professor Priti Parikh 29:39
Wonderful. I really feel inspired by your point and principles and values for future generations. And what is the legacy that we are going to leave behind for those future generations? So that's taking me right back to Brundtland Commission and the definition of what sustainable development is, and also to remind everyone, we do have 17 goals and A lot of targets 169 targets. Jessica, I'm going to turn to you for the same question and drawing on your past experience and also your global experience of negotiating the SDGs. If you were creating an 18th goal, what would it be? And given that you were part of fierce negotiations, were there any themes or topics that were left out last time.
Jessica Espey 30:23
So I spent a big chunk of my professional career in this negotiation forum. And whilst I came to the table, certainly in 2012, and I was supporting the high level panel of Eminent Persons who were coming up with the first proposal for what the SDGs could look like, I was strongly in the camp of saying it needs to be tight, it needs to be concise, maybe it should be values oriented, and so on. By the time we got to 2015, I could not have been more positive about the 17 goals we got. It was a triumph of international cooperation, that we managed to agree on just 17 goals that we managed to whittle down from what was at one point I have, I still have it on my computer, I have a list of 47 goals that were being deliberated by the Open Working Group co chairs, who were the negotiators facilitating the process. And you know, the fact that we managed to get down, we managed to agree on things like removing a whole goal that was proposed around cultural heritage, and around cultural ideas of sort of supporting, you know, history and all the rest moved underneath a different target. I mean, that was a huge debate. And eventually there was compromised and trying to move it partially under Goal 11 recognising that many sites of cultural heritage are within cities and urban environments, but of course, it's still quite exclusionary. So that immediately showed you that there were a lot of topics that have huge value, that could have been a goal easily. But you know, we had to make some hard and fast decisions, and we need to focus minds. So I think the SDGs were a massive achievement. And I certainly wouldn't suggest we need any more in terms of whether you could convert this to a set of values, as Sean suggests, I would actually argue against that, for two reasons. One is that, you know, even today, there is a very stern and tense debate around the human rights agenda because of arguments about cultural hegemony, how are you going to decide what values count? How are you going to express that in ways that are universally accepted, and how you're going to make sure that that's interpreted and implemented in ways that everyone agrees with. And that's partly why so many of the goals and targets that we've had within the UN since the 2000s have been outcome focused, because it has been about letting countries decide their own trajectory, their own approach, recognising their own cultural systems, or in value systems and beliefs, as long as we ultimately all end up, you know, at the same positive place. So I think there's that that one counter argument, I think the other counter argument would be that there are some very specific things we need to achieve as a planet. You know, if you look at planetary systems, if you look at biodiversity, hydrological systems, and so on, we are destroying waterways, we are destroying the quality of our atmospheric systems, and so on and so forth. And those are really quite quantitive things we can measure we can capture we can track over time. And so why wouldn't we be ambitious enough as to say, we need to see demonstrable change in the quality of the systems and reductions in the destruction we've made upon these, these systems, we can count that we can track it modern science is sufficiently sophisticated for us to be able to do that. So why wouldn't we try and set ourselves the task of trying to reduce some of these, these aspects. And if you leave it to a values based approach to pursuing sustainable development, we can't guarantee that we will all have the same level of ambition, we can't guarantee that will necessarily pull in the same direction. Now, I recognise that in some ways that sort of condescending and not appreciating the fact that countries the world over all, ultimately, you know, have and future generations won't see the sustainability of our systems. And hopefully, we all share common values and beliefs about what that should look like. But I there is a lot of room for divergence of opinion. So why would we not try and set some very clear, crisp targets that we think are feasible, that we can monitor over time. So however many years on, I continue to be a strong supporter of the Sustainable Development Goals, and I will continue to do so until they reach their deadline.
Monica Lakhanpaul 34:26
And I always find it very interesting when our guests don't agree with each other. It's always great to have a debate and make us think and reflect on different perspectives. So as we draw this two part episode to a close, and maybe you feel you've answered this already, but maybe we'll just let you have another go really? Do you think we can truly achieve the goals by 2030? Or should new goals I know we've talked about whether we need new goals or not new goals, etc. But do you think we can achieve the goals by 2030? Or should new goals be Rated to act as its successor, a Sean?
Sean Fox 35:03
Well, I think the evidence is pretty clear that we will achieve the 2030 goals. The recent reports that have been published suggest that we're what we're well off track. I don't think that's an argument for abandoning the goals, I think we must stay the course, to 2030 We must continue to pressure organisations, governments, etc, to to, to try to achieve the goals. And I think we should try to find ways of working with different stakeholders to achieve the goals. So I think we still there's more work to be done on how we effectively engage stakeholders across sectors and across geographies, to do this effectively. So we want to achieve them. But we can't stop trying. But the first first part of my answer, but then I would come back and say, I think that's evidence that maybe this isn't the right approach, if we can't shift the dial that much. And in fact, in some cases, we seem to be backsliding a bit, then maybe this approach isn't the best approach to global collective action, maybe we do need to rethink it. And maybe it's just says that the values based approach isn't the way to go. But I do think we should allow ourselves to think outside the box. And we should start doing that now. So that when we do get to 2030, and we've done our best to achieve the sustainable development goals, and we have failed, we have some fresh thinking. And I think engaging young people in particular is probably really important. And trying to get some out of the box thinking about how we could do this better.
Monica Lakhanpaul 36:23
And 2030 is really not that far away, is it? You know, it's coming very fast towards us. So Jessica, I'll give you the last word on this.
Jessica Espey 36:31
Thank you. I agree with Sean, we absolutely need to keep the foot on the pedal and focus attention and minds towards the 2030 deadline. You know, they were always very ambitious as the predecessor framework was, as well. And you know, many of those targets we didn't achieve. But nonetheless, they were a mobilising framework. They have catalysed investment, attention, new actors corporate engagement. So they have definitely had value. And I think they will continue to do so until 2030. And we just need to continue the pressure. I think without looking forward, you know, we're in a very different political context now to where we were in 2015, with a very different constellation of world leaders. And I think if we were to open Pandora's box and try and renegotiate today, those SDGs I think we would not get them. I think we were very fortuitous at the time that there was such a strong focus on kind of reinvigorating multilateralism, a very internationalist perspective amongst a cohort of world leaders, some very strong personalities. You know, like Ellen Johnson Sirleaf of Liberia, President, Joko Widodoyou of Indonesia, who really played very, very instrumental roles in pushing forward the agenda, who we don't have now, however, I do think that we do, we should think about there being some ambitious successor framework, we should think about ways to continue attention and momentum. My area of interest is, I think, thinking more about the regional approach, as you discussed in previous podcasts, I thinking outside the box, and I don't know if this would work, but we've seen increasing energy and attention to cooperation at regional scales. You know, we've seen real empowerment of at Clark, the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean, much stronger role being played by many African regional entities, the African Union, but also groups like ECOWAS, and I think it's going to be increasingly interesting to think about whether the targets and objectives need to be defined more regionally. And whether it needs to be more of a regional development effort that, you know, course could have some level of global aggregation, but that's not really whether specificity sets. So I'm certainly very interested in how this conversation evolves.
Professor Priti Parikh 38:32
Absolutely. And I look forward to reading those articles when you publish them. I think a healthy debate is always good, because it feels like yes, we need to keep the foot on the pedal. We've got very little time until 2030. But equally, we also need to fresh thinking innovation, we need to better engage the youth in the challenge. That face it says thank you both for joining us today. Where can listeners find you online on Twitter social media? Sean, let's start with you.
Sean Fox 39:04
You can find me on Twitter or ex I guess it is now at at Dr. Sean Fox. If you want to learn more about the SDG work in Bristol you can go to Bristol sdgs.org
Jessica Espey 39:15
Hi, yes, I'm on Twitter or X and you can find me @ Jessica Espey so yes, I'd love to welcome comments and reflections following today's discussion.
Monica Lakhanpaul 39:25
You've been listening to unlocking the SDGs this episode was presented by me Professor Monica Lakhanpaul
Professor Priti Parikh 39:32
and Professor Priti Parikh
Monica Lakhanpaul 39:35
and produced by the UCL SDGs initiative, and edited by Front Ear. Our guest today for Professor Sean Fox and Dr. Jessica Espey.
Professor Priti Parikh 39:45
If you'd like to hear more podcasts from UCL, subscribe to UCL minds wherever you download your podcasts or visit www.ucl.ac.uk/sdg join us next time on unlocking the SDGs.
Transcribed by https://otter.ai