The contradiction of the sustainable development goals: Growth versus ecology on a finite planet

Abstract

There are two sides to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), which appear at risk of contradiction. One calls for humanity to achieve “harmony with nature” and to protect the planet from degradation, with specific targets laid out in Goals 6, 12, 13, 14, and 15. The other calls for continued global economic growth equivalent to 3% per year, as outlined in Goal 8, as a method for achieving human development objectives. The SDGs assume that efficiency improvements will suffice to reconcile the tension between growth and ecological sustainability. This paper draws on empirical data to test whether this assumption is valid, paying particular attention to two key ecological indicators: resource use and CO2 emissions. The results show that global growth of 3% per year renders it empirically infeasible to achieve (a) any reductions in aggregate global resource use and (b) reductions in CO2 emissions rapid enough to stay within the carbon budget for 2°C. In other words, Goal 8 violates the sustainability objectives of the SDGs. The paper proposes specific changes to SDG targets in order to resolve this issue, such as removing the requirement of aggregate global growth and introducing quantified objectives for resource use per capita with substantial reductions in high‐income nations. Scaling down resource use is also the most feasible way to achieve the climate target, as it reduces energy demand. The paper presents alternative pathways for realizing human development objectives that rely on reducing inequality—both within nations and between them—rather than aggregate growth.

Environmental justice and the SDGs: from synergies to gaps and contradictions

“…Even remaining at the present level, and assuming zero economic growth in the world industrial economy, large amounts of fossil fuels will continue to be burned. As Hickel (2019) shows, SDG8 contradicts the sustainability objectives of the SDGs, because even growth at 3% makes it impossible to reduce resource use and reduce carbon emissions enough to stay within the 2 °C warming limits.…”

Are the Sustainable Development Goals self‐consistent and mutually achievable?

“…Vladimirova and Le Blanc () discussed the linkages between education (SDG 4) and other Goals. Related more recent work includes the papers by Hickel (), which comments on the apparent trade‐off between Goal 8 on economic growth and the sustainability and environmental protection implicit in many of the other Goals, and the discussion by Diaz‐Sarachaga, Jato‐Espino, and Castro‐Fresno () of the relevance and use of the SDG Index and SDG Indicators to measure actual progress towards the SDGs themselves and evaluation of the overall success of the 2030 Agenda.…”

Evaluation of the Sustainability of the Valle De Bravo Reservoir, Mexico, as a Water-Supply Source

“…This growth of 8.2% yearly exceeds the 7% proposed in the UN Objective 8.1 for Sustainable Development for developing countries, confirming the incompatibility between objectives 8, 7 and 15 and, in this particular case, 11 (e.g. Hickel [51]).…”

“…The main problem in the basin and the reservoir is the conflict that exists in the very definition of sustainable development: economic growth and sustainability [51], reflected in the scheduled use and the actual use of the reservoir.…”