Environmental and economical ethics collide: Business as usual after COVID-19 or shifting towards a planetary health perspective?

The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) were adopted by the United Nations (UN) in 2015 to “end poverty and set the world on a path of peace prosperity and opportunity for all on a healthy planet” by 2030. This ambitious framework includes 17 goals (e.g., no poverty, zero hunger, good health, quality education, etc.) with 169 targets and 231 unique indicators. The SDGs have been widely adopted to guide policy makers in development efforts around the world, but they also have been criticized as too unwieldy and all-encompassing. The Economist (March 26, 2015) concluded that the “SDGs are unfeasibly expensive” and “are so sprawling and misconceived that the entire enterprise is being set up to fail.” Nevertheless, the SDGs are now an integral part of the global development movement and are often cited by advocates of specific interventions. The Sustainable Development Report 2020 (SDR2020) was prepared by teams of independent experts at the Sustainable Development Solutions Network and the Bertelsmann Stiftung. It is separate from the The Sustainable Development Goals Report 2020 published by the UN. The project is directed by Jeffry Sachs, who was an advisor to UN Secretaries-General Kofi Annan and Ban-Ki Moon in the creation of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and SDGs. As in previous years, the SDR2020 presents and aggregates data from all UN member states to describe each country's progress towards achieving the SDGs and indicates areas requiring faster progress. Estimates of indicators rely on the most up-to-date data from variety of official and nonofficial sources. In order to summarize levels and trends in country performance, the report calculates indices for each SDG with a scale from 0 to 100 (worst to best). A country's overall SDG Index score and its scores on individual SDGs can be interpreted as a percentage of optimal performance. The overall SDG index score ranges from a high of 84.7 in Sweden to a low of 38.5 in Central African Republic. The report's central chapter summarizes global and regional trends in index scores, and appendix tables present two-page summaries of levels and trends for SDG indicators for each country. Besides struggling with a range of methodological issues, the authors faced the difficult task of succinctly summarizing a very large set of data (115 SDGs indicators for 193 countries). Unfortunately, there are few general findings, because the degree of progress towards achieving the SDGs depends on (i) country/region, (ii) the specific SDG, and (iii) level or trend. On average, progress since 2015 has been fastest in low- and middle-income countries especially in East and South Asia. Africa scores low but showed significant improvements in a number of SDGs. OECD countries, which have on average the highest scores, made only limited progress. The report provides a valuable but rather brief summary of these regional differences. A second objective of SDR2020 is to review policy efforts to implement the SDGs. This assessment is based on information gathered in new expert and public opinion surveys to gauge political leadership in support of the SDGs at the country level. Results confirm that the SDGs framework is increasingly used at many national and international statistical institutes and other data providers. The adoption of the SDG framework by policy makers is growing but more limited. The report's clear exposition in graphs and tables and the many country and regional statistics will no doubt be appreciated by policy makers and researchers in national and international organizations. However, the value of the findings is somewhat limited by the lack of current data for many indicators. As the authors discovered, most estimates are not up to date and a substantial proportion of the data points available now even have a year of reference that predates the adoption of the SDGs. This diminishes the value of publishing country-level estimates on an annual basis, as indicators for many countries change little from one year to the next. The report was in preparation when the Covid-19 epidemic struck. A brief discussion of this huge new human and economic crisis is included, and the authors identify which SDGs will likely be most heavily affected. The epidemic will cause massive disruption of progress on the SDGs for years to come, but it was too early to assess this damage at the time of the publication of the report (July 2020).

Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on health system & Sustainable Development Goal 3.

Corona virus pandemic has exerted an unprecedented burden on health care systems, governments and health workers across the world. It has hampered health care delivery globally with far reaching effects in African countries that are already struggling with weak health systems (WHO, 2020) and limited resources (The World Economic Forum, 2020). The first case of the novel coronavirus was reported in Wuhan city Hubei Province of China (WHO, 2020). Since then, the virus has spread across the globe with Kenya confirming 186,000 cases by July 2021 (Worldometer, 2021). Transmission pathways of Corona virus include person-to-person such as coughing, sneezing, aerosol inhalation as well as contact transmission with nasal or mucus membrane from humans or contaminated surfaces (Peng et al, 2020). Health care workers are at the frontline of COVID-19 response and yet are at a high risk infection. This has been linked to inadequate personal protective equipment (PPEs), exposure to infected patients, poor infection control and work overload (Viswanath & Monga, 2020); Mhango et al, 2020; Bai Y et al, 2020). It has been reported that healthcare workers and patients admitted to health facilities for other medical reasons are particularly vulnerable to infection from super spreading cases. This was witnessed in Wuhan, China where Corona virus infection occurred among a group of healthcare workers and hospitalized patients originating from a patient who was admitted in a surgical ward (Wang et al, 2020). Control and management of highly infectious patients within health facilities requires adequate resources which limited in resource scarce settings. Initial report from China revealed that inadequate PPEs as the major risk factor for COVID among healthcare workers (Ran L et al, 2020). In addition, long working hours with minimal rest and overstretched health system due to rising number has been shown to contribute to risk of COVID19 transmission among healthcare workers (Wang J, Zhou M, Liu F, 2020). Emerging research recognize that risk of COVID-19 infection among healthcare workers is compounded by contaminated working environment owing to insufficient infection control and lack of protocols (Viswanath & Monga, 2020; Bai Y et al, 2020). Work environment is key as a transmission route of various infections. It was reported that more than half of all infections among healthcare workers in United States of American occurred in a healthcare facility (Ref). A study conducted among healthcare workers in a health facility in Wuhan, China demonstrated that use of appropriate PPEs coupled with observance to standard recommendations were effective against COVID-19 infection (Min Liu et al., 2020). Africa region continue to be at high risk for COVID19 pandemic, with relatively low capacity to manage the health emergency. While many countries in Africa are stepping up their preparedness for COVID-19 (Gilbert et al, 2020), assessments by WHO point to substantial limitations in response capacity (WHO, 2020). Risks of infection to healthcare workers requires adequate resources within the facilities, which are limited in many Africa settings. Nevertheless, WHO report indicate that global stock of PPEs is insufficient to meet the rising demand (WHO, 2020). A similar situation is experienced in Kenya and more so exacerbated by reduced supply hence, increase prices for essential PPEs. In addition, healthcare workers require training and supervision in donning and doffing of PPEs to ensure effective protection. Adequate knowledge and skills in use of PPEs may increase risk of infection where healthcare workers may not yet be familiar with their use. In the wake of Corona virus pandemic, WHO developed an algorithm for triage of patients and referral for resource scarce settings. Effective patient triage is necessary to respond to majority of the corona cases who can be treated as outpatients. This ensures prudent allocation of scarce resources and protect healthcare workers (WHO, 2020). In Kenya, lack of national triage guidelines is a limiting factor for effective response to corona virus infection. This was a cross sectional study design conducted among health care workers in selected health facilities in Meru County to evaluate their response to Corona virus pandemic. The study involved primary healthcare workers and specialists practicing in health facilities in Igembe South, Meru County. Slovin’s formula was used to determine the required sample size as indicated: n=N1+N(e) Where: n is the desired minimum sample size N is the population size of health workers in the Igembe South sub-County (320 health workers) E is the precision error allowed (10%) Hence: n=3201+320(0.1) ≈ 77 health. Cluster sampling approach applied and simple random sampling was used to select six out of 10 Health Facilities in Igembe South Sub-County. The first step was to develop a sampling frame of all health facilities owned by the Meru County Government in Igembe Sub-County. This was obtained from the website of e-Health -Kenya updated as at June2013. Health facilities were then grouped into public, private and faith based institutions. From each category, a list of facilities with average monthly Staff reporting of between 2 of 50 and above were obtained from the six selected health facilities. Number of participants per facility was distributed proportionately based on the average monthly staff reporting. A list of eligible participants was drawn from the monthly staff returns register and shared with research assistant. Eventually, 87 healthcare workers were recruited into the study after the principal investigator highlighted the nature of the study and its benefits in responding to corona virus pandemic. Data entry and analysis was done using SPSS;25. Descriptive statistics was used to explain study variables. The Results from 87 health care workers mean age 34± 9 (SD) were enrolled in the study. Most (32; 36.8%) of the participants were nurses. Other professional disciplines included nutritionists, records officers, supporting staff, social workers among others. Slightly half (49; 56.3%) of the participants were females. Most (48;55.2%) of the participants revealed that they had worked in that particular health facility for a period of 1 – 3 years with a small proportion (6; 6.9%) indicating that they had worked in that health facility for 7 – 9 years. Almost half (43; 49.4%) of the participants had practiced their professional discipline for more than 5 years. CONCLUSION: The Health care workers (HCWs) within Meru County face an unprecedented occupational risk of morbidity and mortality owing to SARS-COV-2 pandemic. Generally, there is increased uptake of IPC measures due to improved awareness levels about the risks of SARS-COV-2 infections among HCWs. Occupational exposure to asymptomatic SARS-COV-2 infected patients, partial adherence to infection prevention and control (IPC) protocols as required by the ministry of health, and preexisting medical conditions put HCWs at risk for nosocomial Covid-19 infection. Hence, there is need for development of sustainable approaches to familiarize health care personnel with technical updates on COVID-19 and provide appropriate tools to assess, triage, test, and treat patients, and to share IPC information with patients and the public.

IntroductionUnder the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), United Nations (UN) Member States reported progress on the targets toward their general citizenry. This focus repeatedly excluded marginalized ethnic and linguistic minorities, including people of refugee backgrounds and other vulnerable non-nationals that resided within a States’ borders. The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) aim to be truly transformative by being made operational in all countries, and applied to all, nationals and non-nationals alike. Global migration and its diffuse impact has intensified due to escalating conflicts and the growing violence in war-torn Syria, as well as in many countries in Africa and in Central America. This massive migration and the thousands of refugees crossing borders in search for safety led to the creation of two-tiered, ad hoc, refugee health care systems that have added to the sidelining of non-nationals in MDG-reporting frameworks.ConclusionWe have identified four ways to promote the protection of vulnerable non-nationals’ health and well being in States’ application of the post-2015 SDG framework: In setting their own post-2015 indicators the UN Member States should explicitly identify vulnerable migrants, refugees, displaced persons and other marginalized groups in the content of such indicators. Our second recommendation is that statisticians from different agencies, including the World Health Organization’s Gender, Equity and Human Rights programme should be actively involved in the formulation of SDG indicators at both the global and country level. In addition, communities, civil society and health justice advocates should also vigorously engage in country’s formulation of post-2015 indicators. Finally, we advocate that the inclusion of non-nationals be anchored in the international human right to health, which in turn requires appropriate financing allocations as well as robust monitoring and evaluation processes that can hold technocratic decision-makers accountable for progress.

Exploring the impact of global competitiveness pillars on sustainable development

Along with globalization processes and adjustments – social and environmental problems that are challenging global sustainability in the labor market and society, it’s essential to ask whether the demand for education is also changing? Having regard to the fact that in 2015 United Nations (UN) member states adopted the 17th Sustainable Development Goal (SDGs) to address global challenges and emphasized the importance of quality education in Sustainable Development Goal 4 and The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries have long recognized the need to develop skilled people through education. As they strive to find new sources of growth to underpin a solid and sustainable future, it is crucial to understand the best ways to advance social innovation, which is key to solving these increasing demands in the entrepreneurial process. It can manifest itself in various elements of pedagogical work. The study conducted content analysis to find out how social innovations and entrepreneurial skills show in the experience of four academic representatives of educational sciences to analyze various perspectives and opportunities of social innovation implementation by promoting entrepreneurial skills. To reach the aim of the research, three following questions were asked: How has the meaning of social innovation in the educational sciences changed since 2015, when UN member states adopted the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and 17 Sustainable Development goals (SDGs)? What entrepreneurial skills help implement social innovation in the educational sciences? What are the most critical factors for the sustainable social innovations implemented in the educational sciences? The study results reveal diverse and ordinary comprehensions depending on professional academic experience, which has been listed and analyzed through the theories of social innovation.

The slow pace within which the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) targets were achieved necessitated that 193 United Nations (UN) member states develop the Agenda 2030 popularly known as the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Whilst many developed countries find it easy to implement the SDGs, underdeveloped and developing countries such as South Africa will inherently find it difficult to implement the SDGs. The ambitious United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) have been criticized for being universal, broadly framed, inconsistent and difficult to quantify, implement and monitor. The burden of implementation will be worse when it comes to local governments or municipalities which are faced with service delivery challenges on daily basis. Many proponents of SDGs believe that the success of the implementation of the SDGs lies in successful localization at the municipal level. It is for this reason that this study explored the localization of the SDGs in South African Municipalities. It looked at the theoretical framework of the SDGs. It used qualitative research design and employed semi-structured interviews to gather information from senior managers in local government across South Africa. The study found that some municipalities do have Institutional Frameworks, processes and plans to localize the SDGs however the level of implementation is still very low and needs to be intensified hence an implementation model is recommended by this study.

The United Nations (UN)'s 2030 Agenda for 17 Global Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) is a critical framework for advancing environmental sustainability and human development. Official Development Assistance (ODA) serves as a key source of financing for the SDGs, particularly in developing countries. This study investigates the impact of ODA on various aspects of SDG performance, emphasizing the need for a holistic approach that accounts for the diverse needs, uneven progress, and spatial interdependencies among UN member states between 2000 and 2021. Our findings show that ODA statistically significantly supports basic goals such as SDG 1 (no poverty) and SDG 2 (zero hunger), but has limited, or in some cases negative, effects on other goals, including SDG 8 (decent work), SDG 9 (industry and innovation), SDG 15 (life on land), and SDG 16 (peace and institutions). The results also reveal substantial heterogeneity across country groups, underscoring the need for ODA to broaden its focus to underfunded areas and adopt more context-specific strategies that recognize spatial dynamics, manage trade-offs, and prioritize SDG pathways aligned with country-specific capacities and priorities.

The United Nations (UN) Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) are a comprehensive call to action for a better world adopted by the UN member states in 2015. Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) is a framework for incorporating the urgency and practicality of the SDGs into curricula of all kinds. We infused a junior-level undergraduate cell and molecular biology course with assignments aligned with SDGs including “good health and well-being,” “gender equality,” and “responsible consumption and production” and evaluated written assignments for emergent themes. We also compared survey data from students in the SDG course and those in a traditional course and found that students in the SDG course reported an increase in their understanding of the role of their discipline in solving global problems and how current events related to their discipline. Students in the SDG course also reported improved understanding of a variety of social and environmental issues related to the SDGs. We conclude that incorporating SDGs into a cell and molecular biology course, a course usually focused primarily on cellular mechanisms and pathways, is feasible and supports the desired course outcome that students be able to interpret evidence and reflect on how scientific advancements can influence SDGs.

United Nations member-states, including the Philippines, committed to the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) to "conduct regular and inclusive reviews of progress at the national and sub-national levels, which are country-led and country-driven". The Voluntary National Review (VNR) aims to facilitate the sharing of experiences, including successes, challenges, and lessons learned, to accelerate the implementation of the 2030 Agenda. The VNR also seeks to strengthen policies and institutions of governments and to mobilize multi-stakeholder support and partnerships for the implementation of the SDGs. In particular, this VNR report examines where the country stands in several SDGs, analyzing baseline data and recent historical data on SDG indicators, as well as other supporting indicators and identifying challenges and constraints. With the theme, "Empowering people and ensuring inclusiveness and equality", the following set of goals were reviewed in depth in this report: SDG 4 (quality education), SDG 8 (decent work and economic growth), SDG 10 (reduced inequalities), SDG 13 (climate action), SDG 16 (peace, justice and strong institutions), and SDG 17 (partnerships).

Agenda 2030, also known as the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), is a set of global goals adopted by all United Nations Member States in 2015 through the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. The SDGs provide a framework to tackle one of the world's most critical challenges: climate change. The 17 interconnected goals address a broad spectrum of social, economic, and environmental issues. The Government of India has embraced “Agenda 2030,” encompassing 17 SDGs alongside various indicators and targets within the sustainable framework. These indicators were instrumental in assessing the current status of the state concerning SDG attainment. Our primary contribution to this research lies in adopting the prescribed methodology to examine the current status of the SDG India Index 3.0. We focused on evaluating major objectives across Indian states, rating them based on their performance. This study proposes a novel approach utilizing the sum‐weighted information (SWI) multicriteria decision analysis/making (MCDA/M) framework to assess the progress of Indian states toward achieving the SDGs based on information measures. By integrating quantitative and qualitative indicators, this method offers a comprehensive evaluation of various aspects. The SWI MCDA/M framework enables policymakers and stakeholders to identify key strengths and weaknesses, prioritize areas for improvement, and formulate targeted strategies to accelerate progress toward the SDGs at the state level in India. Through empirical analysis and case studies, this research contributes to enhancing the effectiveness of SDG implementation efforts, fostering development practices, and promoting inclusive growth across Indian states. The findings indicate that Kerala achieved the first rank, with a 4.516 bits information score and Bihar ranks lowest among states in meeting the standards outlined in “Agenda 2030,” with a 5.530 bits information score.

The purpose of this study is to explore the role of Islamic social finance towards realising financial inclusion in achieving nine of the seventeen goals of sustainable development goals (SDGs) which are SDG1, SDG2, SDG3, SDG4, SDG5, SDG8, SDG9, SDG10, and SDG17 in the 2030 agenda for SDGs, as propagated by United Nations Member States in 2015. Then, a critical analysis is made to explain the possible contribution of Islamic social finance in achieving financial inclusion which is aligned with SDGs that brings balanced to the physical, emotional, mental, and spiritual of the community in supporting overall economic growth which finally combats the economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. Further research and empirical studies can be conducted to explore the relationship between Islamic social finance, financial inclusion, and SDGs which in tandem with Maqᾱṣid al-Sharῑ῾ah to equip ourselves in unpredictable economic hiccups during COVID-19. The results may also motivate the financial industries to promote Islamic social finance products and corporate social responsibilities as well as enhance the development of Islamic social finance towards achieving financial inclusion in fulfilling SDGs which soon will provide significant social impacts as the results will enable new initiatives by industries and policy makers to develop Islamic social finance in attaining financial inclusion to achieve SDGs which is seen as being parallel with Maqᾱṣid al-Sharῑ῾ah especially in resolving economic issues of COVID-19.

PurposeThe 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) offer the best strategy to create a better future for people and our planet by 2030. The SDGs was adopted by all United Nations Member States in 2015 as a call for action by all countries poor, rich and middle-income to promote prosperity while protecting the environment. Tourism and hospitality is one of the fastest growing segments of the service industry in the Middle East. Aviation and the hotel industry represent the majority of the hospitality industry, and due to that, this paper aims to showcase their effort in following and adapting to UN SDGs to build sustainable communities and cities. The chosen companies for the analysis are Emirates Airline, Jumeirah Group and Rotana Group.Design/methodology/approachThis case study is based on secondary qualitative data retrieved from websites.FindingsThe findings indicate commitment to acknowledge and lead by example by following the UN SDGs at all three companies. The research reflected on the ability of the three companies to thrive in achieving SDGs. Further, the paper reveals why the construction of sustainable cities and communities is important. It explains how the wider hospitality industry could adapt and make an effort by working together with the hotel and aviation sectors in building smart cities and completely sustainable communities.Practical implicationsThe paper recommends a focus on strengthening Goal 8 – decent work and economic growth and Goal 11 – sustainable cities and communities to achieve common UN SDGs for all.Originality/valueThe chosen hospitality brands (Emirates Airline, Jumeirah Group and Rotana Group) represent examples of companies that are acknowledging and working on their engagement to become leaders in achieving UN SDGs. The process needs to be ongoing in what should be a final goal – building completely sustainable, self-sufficient cities and communities worldwide.

Refereed Article - Matthew Rimmer, 'The Medical Right to Repair: Intellectual Property, the Maker Movement, and COVID-19" (2023) 15 (20) Sustainability Article No. 14839. AbstractThis article considers the strengths and limitations of the use of 3D printing and additive manufacturing for the production of personal protective equipment (PPE) during the COVID-19 public health crisis. It explores the role of the Maker Movement in addressing the shortfall in medical equipment during the public health pandemic. Taking a comparative approach, this article evaluates the responses of both the commercial and amateur sides of the 3D printing community to the COVID-19 public health crisis. In the EU, the Fab Lab Network sought to overcome a breakdown in supply chains. In the US, Dale Dougherty of Make Magazine promoted Plan C, in which volunteers have worked together to produce PPE. In Australia, 3D printing has been used to augment supplies of PPE. In this context, a key issue across jurisdictions has been the tension between intellectual property rights and the right to repair—particularly when 3D printing has been applied to deal with shortages in PPE. Senator Ron Wyden put forward the Critical Medical Infrastructure Right-to-Repair Act of 2020 (US) to try to resolve these tensions. Open licensing has proven to be a helpful mechanism to enable open collaboration and sharing of 3D printing designs for the purposes of health care. Nonetheless, it is argued that there should be stronger recognition of the right to repair—particularly in the context of health-care and medical devices. The COVID-19 crisis has highlighted that there needs to be a broader array of intellectual property flexibilities to deal with public health emergencies—including in respect of the right to repair. As such, this article supports a broad vision of a TRIPS Waiver which includes the right to repair. The recognition of a right to repair will help promote the realization of the Sustainable Development Goals and a COVID-19 recovery. The topic of the medical right to repair has larger implications for sustainability and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly in respect of responsible production and consumption (SDG 12), as well as good health and well-being (SDG 3), innovation (SDG 9), and partnerships for the goals (SDG 17). Keywords: intellectual property; 3D printing; the Maker Movement; the right to repair; COVID-19; sustainability; sustainable development goals; pandemics

This article considers the strengths and limitations of the use of 3D printing and additive manufacturing for the production of personal protective equipment (PPE) during the COVID-19 public health crisis. It explores the role of the Maker Movement in addressing the shortfall in medical equipment during the public health pandemic. Taking a comparative approach, this article evaluates the responses of both the commercial and amateur sides of the 3D printing community to the COVID-19 public health crisis. In the EU, the Fab Lab Network sought to overcome a breakdown in supply chains. In the US, Dale Dougherty of Make Magazine promoted Plan C, in which volunteers have worked together to produce PPE. In Australia, 3D printing has been used to augment supplies of PPE. In this context, a key issue across jurisdictions has been the tension between intellectual property rights and the right to repair—particularly when 3D printing has been applied to deal with shortages in PPE. Senator Ron Wyden put forward the Critical Medical Infrastructure Right-to-Repair Act of 2020 (US) to try to resolve these tensions. Open licensing has proven to be a helpful mechanism to enable open collaboration and sharing of 3D printing designs for the purposes of health care. Nonetheless, it is argued that there should be stronger recognition of the right to repair—particularly in the context of health-care and medical devices. The COVID-19 crisis has highlighted that there needs to be a broader array of intellectual property flexibilities to deal with public health emergencies—including in respect of the right to repair. As such, this article supports a broad vision of a TRIPS Waiver which includes the right to repair. The recognition of a right to repair will help promote the realization of the Sustainable Development Goals and a COVID-19 recovery. The topic of the medical right to repair has larger implications for sustainability and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly in respect of responsible production and consumption (SDG 12), as well as good health and well-being (SDG 3), innovation (SDG 9), and partnerships for the goals (SDG 17).