| Title | Quantitative and dynamic scenario analysis of SDGs outcomes upon global sustainability 1990-2050 |
|---|---|
| ID_Doc | 76488 |
| Authors | Phillips, J |
| Title | Quantitative and dynamic scenario analysis of SDGs outcomes upon global sustainability 1990-2050 |
| Year | 2024 |
| Published | Anthropocene Review, 11, 1 |
| Abstract | The UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are the keystone policy framework for countries to achieve sustainable development. However, in fulfilling the SDGs, there is no definitive evaluation of the potential long-term outcomes upon the level, nature, and dynamics of global sustainability. This is crucial to understand, as otherwise, governments and societies may implement policies which achieve the SDGs, but are detrimental to the long-term global co-evolutionary environment-human relationship and system. Therefore, this paper determines and evaluates the potential global sustainability outcomes of the implementation of the SDGs for the specified period of 1990-2050. This is achieved by the application of the Sustainability Dynamics Framework to the results of the Earth3 model. The Earth3 model evaluated the degree of success of implementing the SDGs in respect to four development scenarios: (1) Same (business-as-usual); (2) Faster; (3) Harder and (4) Smarter. The results from the SDF application indicate that Scenario 4 (Smarter) had the best potential outcomes of the scenarios evaluated, approaching a borderline weak-strong sustainability state by the end of the specified period. The other scenarios had relatively stagnant levels of very weak sustainability. Based upon the results obtained, the broader context and implications are discussed, primarily in respect to the role and impact of the SDGs. The paper concludes by stating that humanity as a species needs to fundamentally transform its relationship with the environment, or risk being lost not only as a species, but also to the planet as well. |
Similar Articles
| ID | Score | Article |
|---|---|---|
74502
|
Randers, J; Rockström, J; Stoknes, PE; Goluke, U; Collste, D; Cornell, SE; Donges, J Achieving the 17 Sustainable Development Goals within 9 planetary boundaries(2019) | |
| 76146
|
Allen, C; Metternicht, G; Wiedmann, T; Pedercini, M Modelling national transformations to achieve the SDGs within planetary boundaries in small island developing states(2021) | |
| 73620
|
Chapariha, M Systems Dynamics Model of SDGs: A Case Study of Iran(2021)Challenges In Sustainability, 10, 1 | |
| 74800
|
Moallemi, EA; Eker, S; Gao, L; Hadjikakou, M; Liu, Q; Kwakkel, J; Reed, PM; Obersteiner, M; Guo, ZX; Bryan, BA Early systems change necessary for catalyzing long- term sustainability in a post-2030 agenda(2022)One Earth, 5, 7 | |
| 70722
|
Boar, A; Pinyana, EP; Oliveras-Villanueva, M Alternatives to solve SDG trade-offs and to enforce SDG synergies: a systematic literature review(2022)Management Of Environmental Quality, 33, 2 | |
| 79416
|
Spangenberg, JH Hot Air or Comprehensive Progress? A Critical Assessment of the SDGs(2017)Sustainable Development, 25.0, 4 | |
| 73078
|
Qu, WS; Shi, WZ; Zhang, JZ; Liu, T T21 China 2050: A Tool for National Sustainable Development Planning(2020)Geography And Sustainability, 1, 1 | |
| 66119
|
Spaiser, V; Ranganathan, S; Swain, RB; Sumpter, DJT The sustainable development oxymoron: quantifying and modelling the incompatibility of sustainable development goals(2017)International Journal Of Sustainable Development And World Ecology, 24.0, 6 |