Responsibility and the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals

Abstract

This article asks what key concerns emerge from the way responsibility is framed in United Nations summit documents on the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) adopted in 2015. Our conceptual framework serves to make the study of SDG responsibility more systematic by distinguishing three main senses of responsibility: cause, obligation, and accountability. The framework structures our analysis of two SDG summit documents, Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the Addis Ababa Action Agenda. The article shows, first, that the causal sense of responsibility is hidden between the lines in paragraphs on poverty, debt and environmental issues. As a consequence, root causes of problems might not be appropriately addressed. Second, SDG summit documents deal predominantly with responsibility in the sense of obligation. We raise concerns with repeated consideration for national circumstances and with vague obligations for non-governmental actors. Third, with regard to accountability, we stress that quantitative indicators have unintended steering effects both before and beyond the review phase. The focus on indicators risks shadowing broader obligations, such as international human rights. In all its three senses, responsibility in key SDG documents remains statecentric with great room for state sovereignty, self-regulation and respect for national circumstances. Our framework is useful also in showing that the three senses of responsibility build on each other and that engagement with responsibility provides fruitful ground for further research.

Structuring Ethical Interpretations of the Sustainable Development Goals—Concepts, Implications and Progress

“…They present responsibility within a typology of cause, obligation, and accountability [36]: "In the first sense, responsibility means a claim that someone or something caused an outcome without necessarily implying that the individual, thing or organization causing it will have to answer in any way for the outcome" [36]. The article provides a useful explanation of responsibility, even if it is not clear if its definition originates from the authors or to whom they refer.…”

“…Considering the SDGs in terms of cause and obligation means investigating "the role of historical legacies for present obligations." Responsibility in the sense of obligation implies undertaking specific tasks in a forward-looking meaning and relates structurally to "the collective action of institutions, which have greater capacities for addressing structural conditions than do individuals" [36]. Accountability refers to explaining former decisions and behavior on all scales individually and collectively.…”

“…The article provides a useful explanation of responsibility, even if it is not clear if its definition originates from the authors or to whom they refer. The "contribution principle" [36] is applied to structural processes, where it creates responsible obligations for those producing injustice, and maybe even more so if this is on a global scale. Considering the SDGs in terms of cause and obligation means investigating "the role of historical legacies for present obligations."…”

“…Accountability refers to explaining former decisions and behavior on all scales individually and collectively. "In the case of accountability, researchers should continue examining the development of SDG review processes nationally and internationally with an eye to what agents are held accountable, for what and to whom" [36].…”

Sustainable Development Action – the Nordic Way

“…Non-government stakeholders were also included in the official government delegation to the UN negotiations (Bexell & Jönsson, 2016). These individuals represented the private sector, civil society, and academia.…”