Planetary Integrity

Abstract

Integrity lead authors louis j. kotze ´and rakhyun e. kim contributing authors peter burdon, louise du toit, lisa-maria glass, prakash kashwan, diana liverman, francesco s. montesano, salla rantala, carole-anne se ´nit, se ´bastien treyer and paola villavicencio calzadilla The priorities of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development revolve around 'people', 'planet' and 'prosperity'. Yet, the precise relationship between these three concerns remains vaguely defined in the 2030 Agenda, as does the place of the 'planet' in this plan of action. Implicit in the 17 Sustainable Development Goals is that we can ensure global prosperity and equality only within a stable ecological context. Commentators acknowledge that how countries pursue ecological objectives will directly affect their 'ability to address the majority of the Sustainable Development Goals' (Vasseur et al. 2017: 732). The Sustainable Development Goals must therefore, in principle, seek to secure the basis of human well-being, while maintaining the biophysical capacity of our planet. Although it remains debatable what this implies in practice, it is reasonable to assume that the integrity of the earth's life-support systems, or planetary integrity in short, must be maintained for long-term sustainability. Then the following questions arise: To what extent have the Sustainable Development Goals advanced planetary integrity, and where can we see positive changes towards planetary integrity in governance efforts that can be attributed to the global goals?This is the central question in this chapter. We first offer a brief account of the concept of planetary integrity as a global public good that is maintained by keeping the earth system within its ecological limits (Westra, Bosselmann and Gwiazdon 2018). By drawing on an extensive literature survey, we then reflect on a theoretical debate about the actual and potential role of the Sustainable Development Goals in advancing planetary integrity; a debate that, while ranging between optimism and scepticism, is predominantly sceptical about such potential. Next we provide four examples situated at the international, regional, local and transnational levels of governance within which the Sustainable Development Goals aim to steer (see, for a similar approach, Biermann and Kim 2020a). At the international level we consider key environmental institutions, namely, the United Nations Environment Assembly and the international regimes on climate change 140

Quality of Government, Democracy, and Well-Being as Determinants in Achieving the Sustainable Development Goals

“…The findings of this research allow us to affirm that subjective well-being and the perception of quality of life turn out to be of high relevance for the achievement of the 2030 Agenda; thus, the more satisfied with their lives the population of a country are, the higher the level of compliance with SDGs it is expected that this country will have. If it is assumed that the 2030 Agenda as well as the protection of planetary integrity should not be a means to an end but rather an end in itself [10], then it is necessary to consider how the perception of a better quality of life can affect the achievement of the SDGs and not only see how the quality of life improves by advancing the accomplishment of the goals of the 2030 Agenda. Likewise, there are positive effects of the welfare regime on the fulfilment of the SDGs, showing that a country with social safety networks to compensate for social risks also ensures equal opportunities and promotes more significant progress towards the goals of the 2030 Agenda.…”

“…However, Kotzé y Rakhyun [10] warn that achieving the 2030 Agenda requires limiting economic growth and making progress in eliminating development disparities between rich and poor countries to not affect planetary integrity and justice. Therefore, although economic growth has been considered an essential factor for achieving the SDGs, there is growing agreement among experts on the need to abandon gross domestic product (GDP) as the leading indicator of national prosperity.…”

Towards planetary nexus governance in the Anthropocene: An earth system law perspective

“…First, we suggest that how exactly a trilemma between water, energy, and food should be addressed would likely depend on whether or not a solution aligns with, and contributes to, advancing an ultimate sustainability Grundnorm (a norm that underlies all other norms), such as safeguarding the integrity of Earth's life‐support system, or planetary integrity (Kim et al, 2020; Kotzé, Kim, Burdon, et al, 2022b). What this essentially entails is ‘the return of Kantian ethics via a grundnorm that uses planetary boundaries for the Earth system to ground international law’ (Schmidt, 2019, p. 726).…”