No abstract

Given the interconnectedness of climate change and sustainable development, policymakers and scholars have started to investigate how climate actions can contribute to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), and vice versa. To date, research has mainly focused on the national and international levels, while little is known about the interlinkages between climate actions and the SDGs at the transnational level. Not only nation states, but also non-state actors undertake ambitious actions designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and to promote sustainable development. Using content analysis and network analysis techniques, we examine the interlinkages between the climate actions of 72 transnational initiatives and the 169 targets of the 17 SDGs. We find that actions of 71 initiatives contribute to achieving 16 SDGs, thus generating valuable co-benefits. Besides SDG 13 on climate action and SDG 17 on partnerships for the goals, transnational climate actions frequently address SDGs 9 on industry, innovation and infrastructure, SDG 7 on affordable and clean energy, and SDG 12 on responsible consumption and production. While SDG 3 on good health and well-being and SDG 4 on quality education are barely addressed, SDG 5 on gender equality is not at all covered by transnational climate actions. Additionally, the network reveals that SDG 9 is highly synergistic with many other frequently addressed SDGs and functions as an important connector between them. Finally, our results indicate that transnational initiatives fill a governance gap left by states with regards to SDG 12. Climate initiatives of non-state actors can thus complement state-led actions to implement the Paris Agreement and the SDGs jointly.

Integrity lead authors louis j. kotze ´and rakhyun e. kim contributing authors peter burdon, louise du toit, lisa-maria glass, prakash kashwan, diana liverman, francesco s. montesano, salla rantala, carole-anne se ´nit, se ´bastien treyer and paola villavicencio calzadilla The priorities of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development revolve around 'people', 'planet' and 'prosperity'. Yet, the precise relationship between these three concerns remains vaguely defined in the 2030 Agenda, as does the place of the 'planet' in this plan of action. Implicit in the 17 Sustainable Development Goals is that we can ensure global prosperity and equality only within a stable ecological context. Commentators acknowledge that how countries pursue ecological objectives will directly affect their 'ability to address the majority of the Sustainable Development Goals' (Vasseur et al. 2017: 732). The Sustainable Development Goals must therefore, in principle, seek to secure the basis of human well-being, while maintaining the biophysical capacity of our planet. Although it remains debatable what this implies in practice, it is reasonable to assume that the integrity of the earth's life-support systems, or planetary integrity in short, must be maintained for long-term sustainability. Then the following questions arise: To what extent have the Sustainable Development Goals advanced planetary integrity, and where can we see positive changes towards planetary integrity in governance efforts that can be attributed to the global goals?This is the central question in this chapter. We first offer a brief account of the concept of planetary integrity as a global public good that is maintained by keeping the earth system within its ecological limits (Westra, Bosselmann and Gwiazdon 2018). By drawing on an extensive literature survey, we then reflect on a theoretical debate about the actual and potential role of the Sustainable Development Goals in advancing planetary integrity; a debate that, while ranging between optimism and scepticism, is predominantly sceptical about such potential. Next we provide four examples situated at the international, regional, local and transnational levels of governance within which the Sustainable Development Goals aim to steer (see, for a similar approach, Biermann and Kim 2020a). At the international level we consider key environmental institutions, namely, the United Nations Environment Assembly and the international regimes on climate change 140