1HlG51J

ultimate idea is systems design – to change the system tomake it inherently more resilient, resource efficient,equitable, etc. Lessons learnt from the emerging newscience could be applied to SDG implementation in thefuture.The system underlying the SDGs is highly complex and,therefore, is not well geared to planning approaches. Thecomplexity of Earth Systems dynamics has beenpopularized for policy makers in the form of “planetaryboundaries” where scientists have quantified safe levelsbelow expected thresholds beyond which irreversibledamage might be unavoidable. 99,100 There are obviouslimits to what humanity can do to control or engineer theearth-system. There are also limits to re-designing the manmadesubsystems. While there are significant possibilitiesto change physical infrastructures and institutions, thereare biological limits to shaping human behaviour andultimately society. Yet, adaptive decoupling strategies canbe developed for man-made subsystems, provided enoughinformation is available about the system. However, as willbe illustrated later in this chapter, to date scientists do nothave a comprehensive “map” of the system underlying theSDGs, nor do they understand its dynamics well.Resilience, metrics to measure risk, and approaches tominimize risks, do not feature highly in the SDGs. Yet, a riskmanagement approach could be considered for SDGimplementation at various levels. Chapter 4 illustrates howdisaster risk reduction can be analysed as a cross-cuttingissue across a range of SDGs. It should also be noted thatpolitical country groupings at the UN, such as the SmallIsland Developing States and the Least DevelopedCountries, are characterized and even identified by theirlow levels of resilience to natural and man-made shocks. Asvarious actions to achieve the SDGs will be discussed in thecoming years, a better understanding of the complexdynamics of the SDGs as a system will be important.2.1.9. From a political to a scientific integrated view ofthe SDG network of inter-linked goals andtargetsIn view of the above, it is important to take an integratedperspective of the SDGs and it appears very important forSDG implementation to have a good understanding of theSDGs as a system.The proposal of the intergovernmental Open WorkingGroup (OWG) on SDGs is a political document, but onegrounded in an extended reflection by Member States onthe technical specificities of the 17 goal areas and theirrelated targets. In the end, how integrated a perspectivedoes the proposal provide? The OWG explicitly highlightedcross-linkages between goals - some of the 169 targetsexplicitly refer not only to the goal under which they arelisted, but also to other areas. In fact, SDG17 on “means ofimplementation” (finance, trade, technology transfer andcapacity building) has a special role in this regard. There aretargets under almost all the other goals that link to at leastone of these means under SDG17. However, other goals areless closely inter-linked. Some goals, however, havemultiple linkages to others through the targets. Forinstance, SDG15 on terrestrial ecosystems is closelyconnected to, among others, SDG2 on food security, SDG6on water and sanitation, as well as SDG8 on economicgrowth and employment, including through forest, landand other ecosystem-related targets. Besides SDG17, thegoals with most connections to other goals are SDG12 onSCP and SDG10 on inequality. Most strongly indicated arethe linkages between poverty and inequality, as well asbetween gender and education. On the other hand, SDG7on energy appears to have few links with other goals basedon the language of targets, even though energy is a “masterresource” required to sustain any kind of life and for anykind of transformation or production.It is interesting to compare this perspective with a scientificview as reflected in the aforementioned ICSU/ISSCreport 101 . There, scientists highlighted the complex natureof the SDG system, identifying many more inter-linkagesamong the 17 goals and 169 targets. In the view ofscientists, the network of SDG goals and targets is a muchdenser network than suggested by an analysis of thelanguage in the OWG outcome itself. Actions on almost anygoal/target have multiple synergies and trade-offs withother goal/targets. Hence, in the view of scientists, it isclearly insufficient to pursue SDG implementation on agoal-by-goal basis, a view that would likely be widelyshared by policy makers who helped craft the SDG proposalas well as those charged with implementation.Figure 2-1 shows a scientific view – a network of goals asimplied by the ISCU/ISSC report. Links between two goalsindicate the number of links through SDG targets assuggested by the scientific literature. As the number oftargets under each goal varies greatly, links between twogoals are weighted by the total number of targets underthe two goals. When SDG17 on “means of implementation”(which is linked to all other goals) is excluded from the44