The Imperatives of Sustainable Development

The sustainable development goals proposed by the United Nations in 2015 presented a new graphic depicting the s17 goals in a table‐like format. This overlaps with the original Venn diagram of sustainable development developed after 1987. The two graphics are used independently, often raising the question of how they are linked. The aim of this paper is to investigate how the Sustainable Development Goals graphic can be simplified as a concept and framework using the Venn diagram of sustainable development. We employ expert elicitation using a networking analysis framework to provide answers. The resulting diagrams provide an important step towards combining the two graphics into one.

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mapping Sustainable Development Goals: A network analysis framework

Dalampira

Nastis

2019

“…Similarly, Turkey is in the “medium” group in the overall level, yet grouped as “very high” regarding education and “high” regarding child and maternal health (Kizilaslan, Gürler, & Kizilaslan, ). Certainly, none of the development indexes of the world's major institutions neither ours would ever achieve to summarize all the dimensions of development with a single index, therefore, there remains much valuable information along the subindex categories (Holden, Linnerud, & Banister, ). This, particularly makes our index valuable as such we expect that the disparity of these subindexes could trigger a better understanding of the evolution of the development process as well as country specific contingencies.…”

Section: Country Comparisonsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sustainable development from millennium 2015 to Sustainable Development Goals 2030

Halisçelik¹,

Soytas

2019

In modern economies, the advancement of well‐being of the citizens should be in an inclusive and sustainable way. In this respect, the sustainable welfare targets should exclusively include three main pillars: economic growth, social inclusion, and environmental protection. These pillars consist of qualitative and nonmonetary, as well as monetary and quantitative indicators to monitor. Although sustainable development today is well‐appreciated in most governments' agenda, yet it is generally not a trivial task to measure its progress especially due to multidimensional nature of some targets. In this article, sustainable development is measured by using a wide range of indicators within multidimensional perspective of Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) 2015. Indicators cover wide spectrum of areas such as poverty reduction, health, education, gender equality, and environment. An index creation method is developed for measuring the level and the performance of countries' progress through achieving MDGs. The index score levels and the rankings of countries are compared with similar indexes developed by United Nations. Finally, countries are classified according to their achievements relative to other countries (which is measured by the index) versus their self‐achievement performances (in terms of improvement of the index over years) in a big matrix. Results demonstrate the importance of measuring country performances in both dimensions. Understanding the progress in MDGs can help settle on binding targets for achieving the country specific goals in economic and noneconomic areas and on the mechanisms to implement the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) of the 2030, which set amid on the success of MDGs.

“…A sustainable production involves a conservation of natural environment with no degradation and must be economically viable and socially justifiable. Nevertheless, the relation between the three dimensions of sustainability is most likely to conflict with each other rather than to be harmonious (see Holden et al, ; Brandi, ). The conflicting nature of economic and environmental dimensions of sustainability is highlighted in a “weak” sustainability (see, for instance, Hediger, & ; Neumayer, ; Hediger, ).…”

Section: Conceptual Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effects of India and China on the sustainability of palm oil production in Indonesia: Towards a better understanding of the dynamics of regional sustainability governance

Kadarusman¹,

Pramudya²

2019

There is a growing awareness and interest among scholars of the important role China and India can play in governing globalisation of economy. Recent literature has tended to emphasise the divergent development outcomes of producer and supplier countries engaged in value chains led by China and India. The different market preferences and legitimacy of private‐driven governance of China and India from developed economies such as the European Union and the United States bring about unsustainable development of countries supplying for China and India. Taking empirical evidence from Indonesian palm oil industry, this paper argues, on the contrary, that Indonesian palm oil producers keep commitments to progress towards sustainable production despite the rising importance of India, China, and other Global South economies as buyers and consumers along with the European Union. The Government of Indonesia also takes initiatives to facilitate the palm oil producers to reach a socially optimum sustainability over time. Buyers of China and India tend to require less restrictive sustainability standards of palm oil production than the European Union, but this is a matter of a temporal dimension of their domestic public interest and government policy priority on sustainability governance. The implication for research on sustainability governance in the Global South‐driven regional value chain is that attention should be paid to the lead of producers and their nation‐state in driving the value chains towards sustainable production and supply.