“None of the 17 [sustainable development] goals [SDGs] to end poverty and protect the environment is on track, and only 15% of the 140 targets for which data are available look likely to be met”(1) pronounced last year an article in the prestigious journal Nature. Yet, a few weeks ago, in the same journal, Fuso Nerini and colleagues (2) argued that this is just because “there is insufficient finance” … to achieve the SDGs. Thus, they say, “SDGs should remain at the centre of global policy agendas” and we should just reshape the road map with “a new economic for the common good”. As there’s no rush, let us also extend the deadline for the SDGs from 2030 to 2050.
Like others on the neoliberal bandwagon, Fuso Nerini and coauthors are oblivious to the urgency for a real change and also cannot see the often self-contradictory nature of the SDGs (3). We may have already missed the train to prevent an unstoppable change in climate, but we might still be able to slow down the process and substantially restore ecosystem balance (4). This is the time when we must act and not procrastinate (again, and again, and again).
The economic system of the ‘new’ SDGs road map is precisely the same anthropocentric free market economy, that perpetuates the myth of infinite growth and creates inequality (5). It is the root cause of the global environmental crisis (6), not its solution. All the ‘new’ road map will do is to give more time to the richest to become even richer by further exploiting the poorest (5) and by creating more addiction to the useless materialism, that does not makes us happy (7).
There is an increasing movement pushing towards a degrowth of the economy of the wealthiest hyper-consumerist nations, as the only realistic means to reduce the unsustainable footprint of humanity (8). Ecologists and physicists have no doubts on the finite boundaries of our planet: growth does not go on forever (9). ‘Progress’ (10) is an athlete on steroids made of fossil fuels. The “magnificent and progressive fate of the human race” (11) is the blink of an evolutionary eye. We seem to have escaped the ecological limits that constrain all other species, but we have not: we made the planet on which we live sick (4), and relieving symptoms, even if we could, will not cure the disease. Neoliberal change is cosmetic: dental hygiene for a terminal patient. Yes, it is a positive narrative that, we are told, we need to encourage action (12). However, that action is failing and the cure is delayed: malignant cancer progresses, while we smile with perfect teeth.
The world ecosystem is out of balance because of the unsustainable weight of the human population (13, 14) and the consumerism of the richest (15). It is a truism that human impacts cannot be reduced with an anthropocentric ‘human-first’ world view. Yet, that’s the heart of the SDGs: ‘ecological transition’ becomes an oxymoron. Put the ecosystem at the centre, instead, and start from there to plan the directions of our economy and society (16, 17). Is it utopia? Without a shift in world-view, all we will achieve in 2050 is another failure, but one we will have no more time to fix.
Notes
1. E. Masood, Nature. 621, 247–248 (2023).
2. F. Fuso Nerini et al., Nature. 630, 555–558 (2024).
3. J. Hickel, Sustainable Development. 27, 873–884 (2019).
4. C. Fletcher et al., PNAS Nexus. 3, pgae106 (2024).
5. D. Hardoon, An Economy for the 99%: It’s time to build a human economy that benefits everyone, not just the privileged few (Oxfam, 2017).
6. T. Jackson, P. A. Victor, Science. 366, 950–951 (2019).
7. T. Jackson, (2009).
8. J. Hickel et al., Nature. 612, 400–403 (2022).
9. J. R. Burger et al., PLOS Biology. 10, e1001345 (2012).
10. M. Jenkins, “Surviving Progress”: Taking Overdevelopment To Task. NPR (2012), (available at https://www.npr.org/2012/04/05/149920506/surviving-progress-taking-overdevelopment-to-task).
11. G. Leopardi, La Ginestra (n.a., Italy, 1836).
12. C. Folke et al., Ambio. 50, 834–869 (2021).
13. L. Greenspoon et al., Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 120, e2204892120 (2023).
14. A. D. Barnosky, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 105, 11543–11548 (2008).
15. Y. Malhi, Is the planet full, 142–163 (2014).
16. S. Wynes, K. A. Nicholas, Environmental Research Letters. 12, 074024 (2017).
17. H. Washington, B. Taylor, H. Kopnina, P. Cryer, J. J. Piccolo, The Ecological Citizen. 1, 35–41 (2017).
|
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Andrea Cardini is a biologist in the Department of Chemical and Geological Sciences, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Modena, Italy, and the Centre for Forensic Anatomy and Biological Sciences, University of Western Australia, Crawley, Australia.
|
