Rethinking Diakonia and Transforming Our World

This article analyzes how ecumenical diakonia contributes to a critical view of the power dimension of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). At the same time, it presents both the opportunities and the challenges the SDGs provide in rethinking diakonia and diaconal praxis. The commitment of the global community to the SDGs signifies a new context for diaconal praxis at local and international levels. In this article, power relations and the priority of the marginalized are presented as key concerns for rethinking diakonia in the current context. A model for diaconal reflection, based on perspectives from development studies and theology, is suggested as a tool for an interdisciplinary rethinking of diakonia aiming at renewed praxis in the context of the SDGs.     

Post 2015: a new era of accountability?

The Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) were criticised for failing to address the issue of governance, and the associated notions of responsibility and accountability. The Sustainable Development Goals, we argue, need to recognise the structural constraints facing poor countries – the power imbalances in the global economic system that limit their ability to promote the prosperity and well-being of their people, as was clearly brought out by the Commission on Global Governance for Health, of which we were both members [Ottersen, O. P., J. Dasgupta, C. Blouin, Paulo Buss, Virasakdi Chongsuvivatwong, Julio Frenk, Sakiko Fukuda-Parr, et al. 2014. “The Political Origins of Health Inequality: Prospects for Change.” Lancet 383: 630–667]. This article is divided into three parts. We begin by making the case for a global justice perspective which emphasises the responsibility – and hence also accountability – of international organisations and rule-making bodies. We next demonstrate the limitations of accountability mechanisms of the type adopted in the MDGs. We conclude by arguing for a new approach to accountability that may be better suited to the post-2015 era.     

Sea for the landlocked: a sustainable development goal?

Outside Europe landlocked states are poor: 16 are extremely poor and another 16 very poor. The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) recognise their lack of sea-access as a major cause of their reduced chances of escaping poverty and reaching the stated goals. This paper proposes including corridors to the sea and other forms of sea-access among the SDGs. It also discusses objections to doing so that appeal to the rejection of global egalitarian arguments, to the possibility of compensating those countries for their disadvantage rather than removing it, and to the territorial rights of the coastal countries. The paper concludes that none of these objections to the corridors, and a fortiori to the less ambitious remedies of the Almaty and Vienna Programmes, withstands scrutiny.     

Sustainable development goals and nationally determined contributions: the poor fit between agent-dependent and agent-independent policy instruments

Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), which serve as the primary feature of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, and Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), which serve as a vital instrumental of the UNFCCC’s Paris Agreement, have clear synergies. Both are focused, in part, on responding to challenges presented to human well-being. There are good practical reasons to integrate development efforts with a comprehensive response to climate change. However, at least in their current form, these two policy instruments are ill-suited to this task. Where SDGs are focused on supporting considerations of human flourishing to which policy needs to respond, NDCs, in their current form, are dependent on the determinations of the nations that generate them. I conclude that the best means of integrating these two policy initiatives require moving past the subjective foundations of NDCs.     

Agriculture,knowledge and the ‘colonial matrix of power’: approaching sustainabilities from the Global South

The proposed list of 17 UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) sets out to reframe development according to a more holistic perspective. Yet, drawing on the example of the need for sustainable, resilient and biodiverse agriculture, it is argued here that the SDGs remain essentially grounded within one cultural understanding of how to address poverty. At least with regard to agriculture, the SDGs thus remain mono-cultural, one-dimensional, overly technocratic, and are far from universal as they fail to acknowledge the stipulated alternative pluriverse, frequently understood in the Global South. The problem outlined is neither a technical nor political one: being essentially related to knowledge production it calls for the pluralization of approaches to both global ethics and sustainability.     

Humanitarian intervention and the internal legitimacy problem1

This article argues for the need to set priorities to Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). It proposes to assign primary focus on goals that, along with being ends in themselves, operate also as means for achieving other objectives – and are therefore of instrumental value also. Education is briefly analyzed as an example of one such goal. In addition, this article addresses population growth, an issue that is not explicitly mentioned in the SDGs but that is arguably relevant for sustainable development. Here too, it is suggested that education can play an important role.     

The Sustainable Development Goals: a comment

The agreement on Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) is a tremendous achievement. The goals represent an advance on the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), by aiming to eliminate poverty, by including an equality goal and by bringing sustainability into the agenda. Nonetheless, three outstanding issues remain. First, national ownership is likely to be a problem. The centrally agreed goals need to be interpreted nationally to allow for national priorities and circumstances and to secure national commitment to them. Secondly, the goals are silent on the underlying economic structures needed to realize some of the goals, particularly of reducing inequality. Existing economic structures and policies are likely to result in a move away from achievement of this goal. Thirdly, most important, there is not true integration of the sustainability and economic goals. The goal of promoting economic growth needs to be seriously qualified for middle and high income countries, if the sustainability objectives – particularly on carbon emissions – are to be realized. This requires either that economic growth should only be promoted if sustainability can be assured, or that growth is redefined as ‘green growth’ so that promoting economic growth and achieving sustainability become consistent.     

Sustainable Development Goals: kinds,connections and expectations

We point out the need to clarify some of the ideas related to the connection between development and sustainability in the Report of the Open Working Group of the General Assembly on Sustainable Development. In particular, the meaning of ‘sustainable’ is not clear when applied to specific areas of human activity. A more detailed explanation of the kind of equality sought for in the proposal is also needed. Because of potential conflicts between goals, we miss some considerations on the impact of population increase both on development and on sustainability. A distinction is made here between two kinds of goals included in the Report. Some of the proposed 17 goals can then be seen as ends in themselves, whereas others seem to be means for the first set. The two sets thereby established should be seen in theory and dealt with in practice in a differentiated manner.     

Safeguarding the earth system as a priority for sustainable development and global ethics: the need for an earth system SDG

While the list of 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) proposed by the United Nations’ Open Working Group (OWG) comprises a catalog of highly important post-2015 development priorities, one of the key issue that has not received the attention it deserves is the need to safeguard the Earth's life-support system. Over the course of the past decades, we have concentrated much more on socioeconomic development rather than on environmental sustainability while putting a number of the Earth's systems at risk, and with it poverty eradication and sustainable development. There is thus a need to put the spotlight on global environmental change and to take account of the insights from the latest Earth system science and its implications for the future of global development and global ethics. The ongoing debate on the post-2015 SDGs offers an important occasion for this endeavor. Going beyond the current proposal of the Open Working Group and building on the planetary boundaries or guard rails framework, the SDGs should contain the goal to safeguard Earth's life-support system.     

Higher education and the post-2015 agenda: a contribution from the human development approach

Sustainable Development Goals will guide the global development agenda for the coming years. Under this premise, this article explores the role which higher education (HE) has been assigned in contributing to sustainable human development, and concludes that the vision of HE offered is too narrow and unable to capture the essence and full meaning of sustainable human development. Moving away from problematic indicators and thresholds that understand HE as a producer of human capital, the article proposes placing the concept of human development at the centre of HE. Particularly, the article argues that its main elements (its normative approach, the idea of capability, functioning and agency) can provide a valuable and sound footing for a more transformative institution.     

On the structure of global development goals

The design of global development goals has been beset by deep flaws, inconsistencies, and manifest unfairness to some developing countries. Momentum has now peaked for the creation of Sustainable Development Goals to replace the Millennium Development Goals. This comment addresses three challenges that arise in setting development goals, and recommends feasible development goals that can meaningfully guide development cooperation, and focus the attention of policy makers on the worst-off.     

SDG 3: a Missed Opportunity to Transform Understandings and Monitoring of Health,Well-Being and Development?

The Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) initiative provided a window of opportunity to transform understandings of health and well-being to monitor progress in these areas across the globe between 2015 and 2030. SDG 3 on health and well-being is used to illustrate how this opportunity was missed. Despite widespread global consultations with stakeholders and a global climate of more holistic approaches to health and well-being, SDG3, along with many of the other SDGs, remains stuck in traditional twentieth century discourse about measures of progress. The reasons for this inertia and possible initiatives which might act as a catalyst for change are explored.     

The Sustainable Development Goals: a plan for building a better world?

Despite some clear positives, the draft text of the Sustainable Development Goals does not fulfill its self-proclaimed purpose of inspiring and guiding a concerted international effort to eradicate severe poverty everywhere in all of its forms. We offer some critical comments on the proposed agreement and suggest 10 ways to embolden the goals and amplify their appeal and moral power. While it may well be true that the world's poor are better off today than their predecessors were decades or centuries ago, to judge whether this is moral progress, we must bring into view what was possible then and what is possible now. We may well find that there have never been so many people avoidably subjected to life-threatening deprivations as there are today, and if this is the case, we should insist that our governments end this oppression immediately through appropriate institutional reforms to be prominently outlined in their post-2015 agenda.     

Negotiating the moral order: paradoxes of ethics consultation

Ethics consultation at the bedside has been hailed as a better way than courts and ethics committees to empower patients and make explicit the value components of treatment decisions. But close examination of the practice of ethics consultation reveals that it in fact risks subverting those ends by interpolating a third (expert) party into the doctor-patient encounter. In addition, the practice of bioethics through consultation does the broader cultural work of fashioning a shared moral order in the face of manifestly plural individual commitments. In doing so, however, bioethics furthers medicine's position as a privileged domain of public moral discourse in contemporary American society.     

Goals and Everyday Problem Solving: Examining the Link between Age-Related Goals and Problem-Solving Strategy Use

ABSTRACT

Qualitative interviews on family and financial problems from 332 adolescents, young, middle-aged, and older adults, demonstrated that developmentally relevant goals predicted problem-solving strategy use over and above problem domain. Four focal goals concerned autonomy, generativity, maintaining good relationships with others, and changing another person. We examined both self- and other-focused problem-solving strategies. Autonomy goals were associated with self-focused instrumental problem solving and generative goals were related to other-focused instrumental problem solving in family and financial problems. Goals of changing another person were related to other-focused instrumental problem solving in the family domain only. The match between goals and strategies, an indicator of problem-solving adaptiveness, showed that young individuals displayed the greatest match between autonomy goals and self-focused problem solving, whereas older adults showed a greater match between generative goals and other-focused problem solving. Findings speak to the importance of considering goals in investigations of age-related differences in everyday problem solving.     

Reconsidering illness-related goals: Is discrepancy resolved by confronting emotions?

The aim of this study was to examine prospectively whether patients with an illness imposing self-management demands (29 asthma patients and 23 diabetic patients) would adjust their evaluations of discrepant illness-related goals. Goals were considered discrepant when patients rated them as important but less attainable, or as less important but attainable. We hypothesized that discrepancy would be resolved by adjusting attainability evaluations and that shifts in these evaluations would be more present in important but less attainable goals. We also hypothesized that shifts in evaluations of discrepant goals would be promoted by engaging in confronting emotions associated with the goal as a first step in coming to terms with discrepant goals. Results confirmed the first, but not the second hypothesis as confronting emotions proved to increase discrepancy evaluations of illness-related goals. These findings are discussed with an emphasis on confronting emotions as a strategy for coming to terms with the experience of discrepancy.     

Underlying motivation in the approach and avoidance goals of depressed and non-depressed individuals

Neurobiological theories predict decreased approach motivation and increased avoidance motivation in depression, but the results of previous studies have been equivocal. This study addressed a key limitation of previous research by assessing participants' underlying motivation for adopting their goals. Depressed (N=26) and non-depressed (N=33) participants listed approach and avoidance goals and wrote down their underlying reasons for adopting those goals. The groups did not differ on either the number of goals or underlying reasons but when underlying reasons were coded for approach or avoidance motivation depressed participants, compared to controls, showed less approach motivation and more avoidance motivation in relation to their approach goals. There were no effects related to avoidance goals. The results suggest that while the goals of depressed persons appear to be similar to those who are not depressed there are important differences at the level of underlying motivation.     

宗教与全球发展:一种对话路径

宗教与全球发展成为当代社会的一个重要议题,一个标志在于联合国千禧年发展目标的提出及世界宗教和精神领袖千禧年和平高峰会议。其中,由前世界银行行长及当时的坎特伯雷大主教联合发起的世界信仰发展对话,即为推动类似目标的一个重要机构。发展的目的在于人。贫困不仅包括物质的层面,也包括精神的层面。全球经济的发展需要一种伦理和价值的支撑。文化应该作为一种创新机制,参与并影响全球发展的过程。在中国,宗教是建设社会主义和谐社会的重要因素。中共十七大明确指出,要发挥宗教在社会经济发展中的重要作用。十七届六中全会则明确提出文化体制改革的目标。随着中国改革开放的进一步深入,中国对世界的影响日益加强,文化和精神的维度在社会发展和国家建设方面将扮演更重要的作用。中国模式也将对世界论坛的讨论产生一定影响。